Totoro
05-16 01:12 PM
Wikipedia understands situation better than some of the lawmakers.
That is why we need to educate lawmakers, instead of letting hate groups like FAIR influence them with lies.
http://www.splcenter.org/news/item.jsp?aid=295
That is why we need to educate lawmakers, instead of letting hate groups like FAIR influence them with lies.
http://www.splcenter.org/news/item.jsp?aid=295
intheyan
06-26 03:04 PM
Thanks Sheela.
I got a relief. So since I ma on EAD and on I-485 status is it ok to take a break for 3 months and then start the next job. So this break will not affect my status right.
I got a relief. So since I ma on EAD and on I-485 status is it ok to take a break for 3 months and then start the next job. So this break will not affect my status right.
onemorecame
08-06 12:07 PM
You stand a better chance of getting it through your kids if they are citizens than getting it through EB3. There are a few options to get green card faster. Canada is not one of them.
1. Get a Ph.D, get a job in a univ and apply in EB-1.
2. Get a MBA and get a management job and apply in EB-1.
3. Become a religious worker in some temple and apply in the religious worker category.
2) Get a MBA and get a management job and apply in EB-1.
Please describe which kind/feild of management job we need? is any management job in any IT company is fine orwe need within a some specific feild to qualify for EB1?
1. Get a Ph.D, get a job in a univ and apply in EB-1.
2. Get a MBA and get a management job and apply in EB-1.
3. Become a religious worker in some temple and apply in the religious worker category.
2) Get a MBA and get a management job and apply in EB-1.
Please describe which kind/feild of management job we need? is any management job in any IT company is fine orwe need within a some specific feild to qualify for EB1?
walking_dude
12-10 02:42 PM
Logiclife's post may be a little strong in words. But it wasn't done with any ill-will toward anyone. Please remember it was borne out of frustrations borne out of some volunteers playing hokey at important IV events after RSVPing to attend and volunteer.
Naturally the organizer felt frustrated at the unexpectedly low-level participation at a very important event, for which significant personal sacrifice was done.
A word of advice to everyone - Do NOT volunteer to anything unless you are 100% sure you'll be doing it. Don't volunteer 'spur of the moment' to backtrack later. It's a rude and unprofessional conduct. We are all highly-skilled professionals here, right?
Take your time ( I mean weeks, a month or two, not 10-12 months of years !), become convinced about the IV cause. If you believe in it volunteer with full heart and conviction. And once you do, keep your words and promises. Don't make empty promises that aren't kept. It creates a very bad impression about you as a person. Not everyone will publish it here, but you'll be marked off as 'all talk, no action' from that point onwards.
If you expect others to respect you, please respect others first. Be professional and considerate in your conduct. If you cannot volunteer it's fine. Please don't make others lose their interest. For if they do and abandon the cause, you'll be a loser too !
Naturally the organizer felt frustrated at the unexpectedly low-level participation at a very important event, for which significant personal sacrifice was done.
A word of advice to everyone - Do NOT volunteer to anything unless you are 100% sure you'll be doing it. Don't volunteer 'spur of the moment' to backtrack later. It's a rude and unprofessional conduct. We are all highly-skilled professionals here, right?
Take your time ( I mean weeks, a month or two, not 10-12 months of years !), become convinced about the IV cause. If you believe in it volunteer with full heart and conviction. And once you do, keep your words and promises. Don't make empty promises that aren't kept. It creates a very bad impression about you as a person. Not everyone will publish it here, but you'll be marked off as 'all talk, no action' from that point onwards.
If you expect others to respect you, please respect others first. Be professional and considerate in your conduct. If you cannot volunteer it's fine. Please don't make others lose their interest. For if they do and abandon the cause, you'll be a loser too !
more...
mpadapa
02-12 11:47 AM
My spouse and 6 of my friends send in their letters last week.
Few more to come, need to follow up
Few more to come, need to follow up
belmontboy
05-29 03:57 PM
European carriers are not that friendly to indian flyers. if you have a choice, try to avoid them.
more...
bidhanc
06-05 10:31 AM
Is anyone out there willing to share the docs and procedures they followed for AP
e-filing?
e-filing?
dvb123
01-11 11:00 PM
http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:YQ8A5L4qUTMJ:www.shsu.edu/~kmd007/documents/WinFSHD2Userskmd007ArticlesDouglas-NationalOriginsSystem-1.pdf+supreme+court+national+origins+quota+1924&hl=en&gl=us&sig=AHIEtbT24Qc157BZXxEE8b4o6Fcrv-YXTw
Consequences of the
National Origins Act
The goal of the National Origins Act was to control
both the quantity and quality of U.S. immigrants in an
effort to prevent further erosion of the ethnic composi-
tion of U.S. society. The law accomplished this goal
using three mechanisms: capping the overall number of
immigrants allowed into the United States in a given
month and year; favoring immigrants from certain
countries; and screening out otherwise qualified immi-
grants as unsuitable to the United States during the visa
screening process. The sorting mechanism heavily
favored northern and western European countries. The
temporary formula of 2% of the foreign-born of each
nationality in the 1890 census gave 85% of the quotas
to northern and western European nations. The national
origins system fully implemented in 1929 continued
the trend of both overall restriction and nation bias.
Indeed, the act virtually halted all immigration from
southern and eastern Europe. Thus, European immigra-
tion dropped from more than 800,000 in 1921 to less
than 150,000 by the end of the decade.
In addition to controlling the volume of immigra-
tion from Europe, the National Origins Act also
allowed a mechanism for selection of immigrants as
well. In its creation of consular offices abroad, the act
provided a frontline screening mechanism for select-
ing out those deemed unsuitable for the United States.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/42/usc_sec_42_00001981----000-.html
� 1981. Equal rights under the law
How Current is This? (a) Statement of equal rights
All persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall have the same right in every State and Territory to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, give evidence, and to the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of persons and property as is enjoyed by white citizens, and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, penalties, taxes, licenses, and exactions of every kind, and to no other.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/42/usc_sup_01_42_10_21_20_IX.html
TITLE 42 > CHAPTER 21 > SUBCHAPTER IX > � 2000h–2Prev | Next � 2000h–2. Intervention by Attorney General; denial of equal protection on account of race, color, religion, sex or national origin
How Current is This? Whenever an action has been commenced in any court of the United States seeking relief from the denial of equal protection of the laws under the fourteenth amendment to the Constitution on account of race, color, religion, sex or national origin, the Attorney General for or in the name of the United States may intervene in such action upon timely application if the Attorney General certifies that the case is of general public importance.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/42/usc_sup_01_42_10_21_20_I.html
PART THREE
ORGANISATIONS TO CONTACT - IV CORE PLs endorse this so that a few members will help me. OTHER MEMBERS CAN FORM GROUPS AND CONTACT THESE OFFICES.
American Immigration Council
1331 G Street, NW, Suite 200
Washington, DC 20005-3141
Tel.: 202-507-7500
Fax: 202-742-5619
Carl Shusterman
Law Offices of Carl Shusterman
600 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 1550, Los Angeles, CA 90017
Tel (213) 623-4592 Fax (213) 623-3720
National Origin, Immigration and Language Rights Program
The Legal Aid Society - Employment Law Center
600 Harrison Street, Suite 120
San Francisco, CA 94107
Telephone (415) 864-8848
Fax: (415) 864-8199
TTY/TDD Line: (415) 593-0091
Email: info@las-elc.org
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
125 Broad Street, 18th Floor
New York, NY 10004 USA
Phone: (212) 344-3005
URL: http://www.aclu.org/
Center for Equal Opportunity (CEO)
14 Pidegon Hill Drive, Suite 500
0 Sterling, VA> 20165 USA
Phone: (703) 421-5443
Fax: (703) 421-6401
E-Mail: comment@ceousa.org
URL: http://www.ceousa.org/
Primary Contact: Linda Chavez, President
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
1801 L Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20507
Phone: (202) 663-4900
URL: http://www.eeoc.gov/
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)
4805 Mt. Hope Drive
Baltimore, MD 21215
Phone: (410) 521-4939
URL: http://www.naacp.org/
E-Mail: members@naacp.org
PART TWO
LEGAL RESEARCH - EVERYBODY CAN CONTRIBUTE ABOUT COURT CASES, PRECEDENTS ETC AND I WILL TRY TO CONSOLIDATE ALL THE REPLIES HERE
Different Supreme Court Decisions
http://public.findlaw.com/civil-rights/race-discrimination/race-discrimination-history.html
Gratz v. Bollinger
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gratz_v._Bollinger
In 1978, the Supreme Court ruled in Bakke v. Regents that public universities (and other government institutions) could not set specific numerical targets based on race for admissions or employment.[1
Bakke vs Regents
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bakke_v._Regents
Supreme Court Opinions
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment14/20.html
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment14/30.html
Articles
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/judicial/2009-04-20-supreme-court_N.htm
http://www.enotes.com/everyday-law-encyclopedia/racial-discrimination#constitutional-protection-against-racial
PART ONE
This is an old topic but I thought I would post some interesting info that I found. Give me green before someone drowns me in red.
Equal Protection Clause - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_protection)
The Supreme Court has defined these levels of scrutiny in the following way:
Strict scrutiny (if the law categorizes on the basis of race or national origin or infringes a fundamental right): the law is unconstitutional unless it is "narrowly tailored" to serve a "compelling" government interest. In addition, there cannot be a "less restrictive" alternative available to achieve that compelling interest.
In Bakke, the Court held that racial quotas are unconstitutional, but that educational institutions could legally use race as one of many factors to consider in their admissions process. In Grutter and Gratz, the Court upheld both Bakke as a precedent and the admissions policy of the University of Michigan law school. In dicta, however, Justice O'Connor, writing for the Court, said she expected that in 25 years, racial preferences would no longer be necessary. In Gratz, the Court invalidated Michigan's undergraduate admissions policy, on the grounds that unlike the law school's policy, which treated race not as one of many factors in an admissions process that looked to the individual applicant, the undergraduate policy used a point system that was excessively mechanistic.
In these affirmative action cases, the Supreme Court has employed, or has said it employed, strict scrutiny, since the affirmative action policies challenged by the plaintiffs categorized by race. The policy in Grutter, and a Harvard College admissions policy praised by Justice Powell's opinion in Bakke, passed muster because the Court deemed that they were narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling interest in diversity. On the other side, it is argued that the purpose of the Equal Protection Clause is to prevent the socio-political subordination of some groups by others, not to prevent classification; since this is so, non-invidious classifications, such as those used by affirmative action programs, should not be subjected to heightened scrutiny.[30]
One law firm I found dealing with Federal Litigation. There maybe many.
http://www.vblaw.com/PracticeAreas/Federal-Litigation-Appeals.asp
Should we not look at this option when Mexico's ambassador to the United States said Friday he expects immigration reform is unlikely to pass in that country in 2010 because of unemployment and midterm elections?
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2010/01/08/world/AP-LT-Mexico-US-Migration.html
Antis are ahead of us in taking lawsuits to supreme court
http://www.infoworld.com/d/adventures-in-it/tech-workers-take-h-1b-case-supreme-court-024
OPINION JULY 1, 2009 The Supreme Court Says No To Quotas
Residents in a burning building want competent firefighters. They don't care about the race of those whose job it is to save them.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124640586803076705.html
VERY INTERSTING ARTICLES ABOUT THIS PER COUNTRY QUOTAS
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,846255,00.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Act_of_1924
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Origins_Formula
The 1921 Emergency Quota Act restricted immigration to 3% of foreign-born persons of each nationality resident in the United States in 1910.
The Immigration Act of 1924 provided that for three years immigration will be restricted to 2% based on the census of 1890, and that after June 30, 1927, total immigration from all countries will be limited to 150,000 based upon national origins of white inhabitants as shown by the census of 1920.
http://americanhistory.suite101.com/article.cfm/limiting_the_huddled_masses
http://homepage3.nifty.com/ubiquitous/Japanese-Americans_E/Page05.htm
Consequences of the
National Origins Act
The goal of the National Origins Act was to control
both the quantity and quality of U.S. immigrants in an
effort to prevent further erosion of the ethnic composi-
tion of U.S. society. The law accomplished this goal
using three mechanisms: capping the overall number of
immigrants allowed into the United States in a given
month and year; favoring immigrants from certain
countries; and screening out otherwise qualified immi-
grants as unsuitable to the United States during the visa
screening process. The sorting mechanism heavily
favored northern and western European countries. The
temporary formula of 2% of the foreign-born of each
nationality in the 1890 census gave 85% of the quotas
to northern and western European nations. The national
origins system fully implemented in 1929 continued
the trend of both overall restriction and nation bias.
Indeed, the act virtually halted all immigration from
southern and eastern Europe. Thus, European immigra-
tion dropped from more than 800,000 in 1921 to less
than 150,000 by the end of the decade.
In addition to controlling the volume of immigra-
tion from Europe, the National Origins Act also
allowed a mechanism for selection of immigrants as
well. In its creation of consular offices abroad, the act
provided a frontline screening mechanism for select-
ing out those deemed unsuitable for the United States.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/42/usc_sec_42_00001981----000-.html
� 1981. Equal rights under the law
How Current is This? (a) Statement of equal rights
All persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall have the same right in every State and Territory to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, give evidence, and to the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of persons and property as is enjoyed by white citizens, and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, penalties, taxes, licenses, and exactions of every kind, and to no other.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/42/usc_sup_01_42_10_21_20_IX.html
TITLE 42 > CHAPTER 21 > SUBCHAPTER IX > � 2000h–2Prev | Next � 2000h–2. Intervention by Attorney General; denial of equal protection on account of race, color, religion, sex or national origin
How Current is This? Whenever an action has been commenced in any court of the United States seeking relief from the denial of equal protection of the laws under the fourteenth amendment to the Constitution on account of race, color, religion, sex or national origin, the Attorney General for or in the name of the United States may intervene in such action upon timely application if the Attorney General certifies that the case is of general public importance.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/42/usc_sup_01_42_10_21_20_I.html
PART THREE
ORGANISATIONS TO CONTACT - IV CORE PLs endorse this so that a few members will help me. OTHER MEMBERS CAN FORM GROUPS AND CONTACT THESE OFFICES.
American Immigration Council
1331 G Street, NW, Suite 200
Washington, DC 20005-3141
Tel.: 202-507-7500
Fax: 202-742-5619
Carl Shusterman
Law Offices of Carl Shusterman
600 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 1550, Los Angeles, CA 90017
Tel (213) 623-4592 Fax (213) 623-3720
National Origin, Immigration and Language Rights Program
The Legal Aid Society - Employment Law Center
600 Harrison Street, Suite 120
San Francisco, CA 94107
Telephone (415) 864-8848
Fax: (415) 864-8199
TTY/TDD Line: (415) 593-0091
Email: info@las-elc.org
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
125 Broad Street, 18th Floor
New York, NY 10004 USA
Phone: (212) 344-3005
URL: http://www.aclu.org/
Center for Equal Opportunity (CEO)
14 Pidegon Hill Drive, Suite 500
0 Sterling, VA> 20165 USA
Phone: (703) 421-5443
Fax: (703) 421-6401
E-Mail: comment@ceousa.org
URL: http://www.ceousa.org/
Primary Contact: Linda Chavez, President
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
1801 L Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20507
Phone: (202) 663-4900
URL: http://www.eeoc.gov/
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)
4805 Mt. Hope Drive
Baltimore, MD 21215
Phone: (410) 521-4939
URL: http://www.naacp.org/
E-Mail: members@naacp.org
PART TWO
LEGAL RESEARCH - EVERYBODY CAN CONTRIBUTE ABOUT COURT CASES, PRECEDENTS ETC AND I WILL TRY TO CONSOLIDATE ALL THE REPLIES HERE
Different Supreme Court Decisions
http://public.findlaw.com/civil-rights/race-discrimination/race-discrimination-history.html
Gratz v. Bollinger
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gratz_v._Bollinger
In 1978, the Supreme Court ruled in Bakke v. Regents that public universities (and other government institutions) could not set specific numerical targets based on race for admissions or employment.[1
Bakke vs Regents
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bakke_v._Regents
Supreme Court Opinions
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment14/20.html
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment14/30.html
Articles
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/judicial/2009-04-20-supreme-court_N.htm
http://www.enotes.com/everyday-law-encyclopedia/racial-discrimination#constitutional-protection-against-racial
PART ONE
This is an old topic but I thought I would post some interesting info that I found. Give me green before someone drowns me in red.
Equal Protection Clause - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_protection)
The Supreme Court has defined these levels of scrutiny in the following way:
Strict scrutiny (if the law categorizes on the basis of race or national origin or infringes a fundamental right): the law is unconstitutional unless it is "narrowly tailored" to serve a "compelling" government interest. In addition, there cannot be a "less restrictive" alternative available to achieve that compelling interest.
In Bakke, the Court held that racial quotas are unconstitutional, but that educational institutions could legally use race as one of many factors to consider in their admissions process. In Grutter and Gratz, the Court upheld both Bakke as a precedent and the admissions policy of the University of Michigan law school. In dicta, however, Justice O'Connor, writing for the Court, said she expected that in 25 years, racial preferences would no longer be necessary. In Gratz, the Court invalidated Michigan's undergraduate admissions policy, on the grounds that unlike the law school's policy, which treated race not as one of many factors in an admissions process that looked to the individual applicant, the undergraduate policy used a point system that was excessively mechanistic.
In these affirmative action cases, the Supreme Court has employed, or has said it employed, strict scrutiny, since the affirmative action policies challenged by the plaintiffs categorized by race. The policy in Grutter, and a Harvard College admissions policy praised by Justice Powell's opinion in Bakke, passed muster because the Court deemed that they were narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling interest in diversity. On the other side, it is argued that the purpose of the Equal Protection Clause is to prevent the socio-political subordination of some groups by others, not to prevent classification; since this is so, non-invidious classifications, such as those used by affirmative action programs, should not be subjected to heightened scrutiny.[30]
One law firm I found dealing with Federal Litigation. There maybe many.
http://www.vblaw.com/PracticeAreas/Federal-Litigation-Appeals.asp
Should we not look at this option when Mexico's ambassador to the United States said Friday he expects immigration reform is unlikely to pass in that country in 2010 because of unemployment and midterm elections?
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2010/01/08/world/AP-LT-Mexico-US-Migration.html
Antis are ahead of us in taking lawsuits to supreme court
http://www.infoworld.com/d/adventures-in-it/tech-workers-take-h-1b-case-supreme-court-024
OPINION JULY 1, 2009 The Supreme Court Says No To Quotas
Residents in a burning building want competent firefighters. They don't care about the race of those whose job it is to save them.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124640586803076705.html
VERY INTERSTING ARTICLES ABOUT THIS PER COUNTRY QUOTAS
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,846255,00.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Act_of_1924
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Origins_Formula
The 1921 Emergency Quota Act restricted immigration to 3% of foreign-born persons of each nationality resident in the United States in 1910.
The Immigration Act of 1924 provided that for three years immigration will be restricted to 2% based on the census of 1890, and that after June 30, 1927, total immigration from all countries will be limited to 150,000 based upon national origins of white inhabitants as shown by the census of 1920.
http://americanhistory.suite101.com/article.cfm/limiting_the_huddled_masses
http://homepage3.nifty.com/ubiquitous/Japanese-Americans_E/Page05.htm
more...
TheMaverick
06-24 12:48 PM
Got transferred to the Judiciary sub-committee and talked to someone who said that she'll pass the message along. Didn't mention that she was getting a lot of calls.
So people please call if you haven't yet.
So people please call if you haven't yet.
santb1975
02-18 12:20 PM
it got too cold so we had to go home. We got around 19 letters signed yesterday after our So.Cal meetup
more...
pappu
11-08 12:43 PM
Its good that we have a democratic majority in congress. we also now have work cutout for us to contact new lawmakers. getting more members and members willing to work for local chapters is important at this time. we need to work with renewed vigour now and finish our task. pls help with increasing membership and join your state level chapter threads. I see only very few members have posted their interest. we need interest from each member in order to succeed. I am sure we will succeed. The good times are ahead of us but we need to take advantage of it.
truthinspector
07-18 12:23 PM
Paskal,
Thanks for an encouraging eyeopener. Now that people are using their freedom of speech and figments of imagintion vividly, let me use mine too, with a bit of humor.
Unfortunately only EB(I) will be able to associate with this, so apologies in advance to others.
It's 2018. Two indians, namely Ajay and Vijay meet in a grocery store aisle. Ajay inadvertently drops a carton of tea and Vijay try's to help pick it up. They exchange nicieties, shake hand and WHOA... Ajay noticed that Vijay's got a big EB2 tatto on his forearm...Without a moments delay, Ajay folds his sleeve and shows his own EB2 forearm tatto to Vijay. Ajay and Vijay become friends forever....
On the same evening.....Seeta and Geeta are shopping for tamarind in a nearby aisle....for some reason (I cant be more vivid than this) they notice eachothers tatto's; one has EB3 and one has EB2..........CATFIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Morale of the story : Lets stop the drama and get busy helping ourselves..if you want the above scenes not to translate to reality....
Can't we all just enjoy lessons taught to us by Bollywood......If you have hard time coming to terms with the above scenes , please close your eyes and go back 30 yrs into
indian cinema....
you must know something i don't.
aman kapoor is the president and founder of iv- of course you can argue he now has his GC but that fact is he is still the heart and soul of iv and runs the organization on a day to day basis. he is EB3.
Thanks for an encouraging eyeopener. Now that people are using their freedom of speech and figments of imagintion vividly, let me use mine too, with a bit of humor.
Unfortunately only EB(I) will be able to associate with this, so apologies in advance to others.
It's 2018. Two indians, namely Ajay and Vijay meet in a grocery store aisle. Ajay inadvertently drops a carton of tea and Vijay try's to help pick it up. They exchange nicieties, shake hand and WHOA... Ajay noticed that Vijay's got a big EB2 tatto on his forearm...Without a moments delay, Ajay folds his sleeve and shows his own EB2 forearm tatto to Vijay. Ajay and Vijay become friends forever....
On the same evening.....Seeta and Geeta are shopping for tamarind in a nearby aisle....for some reason (I cant be more vivid than this) they notice eachothers tatto's; one has EB3 and one has EB2..........CATFIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Morale of the story : Lets stop the drama and get busy helping ourselves..if you want the above scenes not to translate to reality....
Can't we all just enjoy lessons taught to us by Bollywood......If you have hard time coming to terms with the above scenes , please close your eyes and go back 30 yrs into
indian cinema....
you must know something i don't.
aman kapoor is the president and founder of iv- of course you can argue he now has his GC but that fact is he is still the heart and soul of iv and runs the organization on a day to day basis. he is EB3.
more...
logiclife
05-31 01:11 PM
I still don't understand what you are saying.
Are you saying the future greencard applicants will have to compete with lot more new H1b s?? Wouldn't this bill help alleviate the retrogression problem and those with approved LC, I-140 etc??
No. What I am saying is that this is a good amendment that can help us. But if its introduced and voted upon, it will fail to pass in the Senate because this amendment has a H1B exemption and H1B quota increases are very very unpopular and controvertial since last few years.
Therefore the achilles heel (Weak portion that will cause failure) of this good amendment is the H1B quota trick attached at the end. The amendment may pass the senate with a majority vote if it doesnt have H1B quota exemptions in it.
Are you saying the future greencard applicants will have to compete with lot more new H1b s?? Wouldn't this bill help alleviate the retrogression problem and those with approved LC, I-140 etc??
No. What I am saying is that this is a good amendment that can help us. But if its introduced and voted upon, it will fail to pass in the Senate because this amendment has a H1B exemption and H1B quota increases are very very unpopular and controvertial since last few years.
Therefore the achilles heel (Weak portion that will cause failure) of this good amendment is the H1B quota trick attached at the end. The amendment may pass the senate with a majority vote if it doesnt have H1B quota exemptions in it.
Hermione
09-26 09:07 AM
Let us not also forget that current estimates are that there are 1.1 million applications pending at all stages of the green card process. Notwithstanding the new additions each year.
Not looking quite so quick still, I remain unconvinced that things will speed up.
Is this an estimate for EB or for all green card applications? Because I absolutely do not believe this is the number. There is just no about H1Bs issued to produce this number.
Not looking quite so quick still, I remain unconvinced that things will speed up.
Is this an estimate for EB or for all green card applications? Because I absolutely do not believe this is the number. There is just no about H1Bs issued to produce this number.
more...
rsdang
06-04 10:39 AM
Can't agree more :mad:
With Fragomen for 7 years now - right from initial H1B through work visas for - UK, Austria, Germany, Uk, China and GC in USA...
I have nothing but great things to say about them... Yeah there were some small hickups - its only human - Nothing big though.
I am sticking by them.
With Fragomen for 7 years now - right from initial H1B through work visas for - UK, Austria, Germany, Uk, China and GC in USA...
I have nothing but great things to say about them... Yeah there were some small hickups - its only human - Nothing big though.
I am sticking by them.
needhelp!
02-18 12:54 PM
CA - 1473
TX - 475
LA - 154
Tristate - 123
FL - 101
KY - 55, MN - 39, MD/DC/VA - 37, MO - 34, PA - 24, IL - 20, MI - 19, GA - 16, RI - 14, MA - 9, WA - 7, NC - 6, OH - 4, WI - 3, NH - 2, CO - 2, KS - 2, OR - 1, NV - 1, NM - 1, NE - 1, MS - 1, AZ - 1
TX - 475
LA - 154
Tristate - 123
FL - 101
KY - 55, MN - 39, MD/DC/VA - 37, MO - 34, PA - 24, IL - 20, MI - 19, GA - 16, RI - 14, MA - 9, WA - 7, NC - 6, OH - 4, WI - 3, NH - 2, CO - 2, KS - 2, OR - 1, NV - 1, NM - 1, NE - 1, MS - 1, AZ - 1
more...
gc1024
07-17 10:00 PM
Most people showing their cool wisdom still not getting the point. A BEC person with Feb 2005 PD may not be able to file for another 2 years while a PD 2007 person will be enjoying EAD during that time. In my dictionary this is injustice. And that's why i was kinda happy when they updated the July bulletin, now I'm not really happy even if my company has already filed my 485/EAD on july 2. I'm still wishing (and i'll be honest) USCIS come up with a reason/regulation/rule that will delay EAD for everyone until BEC people are able to file 485 OR in Oct they retrogress only till March 2005.
P.S. if you are superstitious, you want to know this: most of my relatives/freinds call me "Black Tongue" because usually when i say something unpleasent it happens. e.g. i told my wife last month that i don't believe everyone is able to file 485, something will go wrong and everyone will be disappointed. (when everyone expects something it does not happen- contrarian theory)
Wow! I know someone just like you. She has been cribbing, crying and cursing because I have a 2005 PD and she has a 2004 PD and we are filing 485 together. The sad part is she is able to file 485 and her jealously is because we are doing it together. She says she should be much ahead of me by now :) :D
P.S. if you are superstitious, you want to know this: most of my relatives/freinds call me "Black Tongue" because usually when i say something unpleasent it happens. e.g. i told my wife last month that i don't believe everyone is able to file 485, something will go wrong and everyone will be disappointed. (when everyone expects something it does not happen- contrarian theory)
Wow! I know someone just like you. She has been cribbing, crying and cursing because I have a 2005 PD and she has a 2004 PD and we are filing 485 together. The sad part is she is able to file 485 and her jealously is because we are doing it together. She says she should be much ahead of me by now :) :D
sjpg
07-18 11:02 AM
I was in a similar boat as you when i filed my I485. I was forced to file 140 premium by itself as they stopped accepting starting july 2 07. So we shipped 140 on 29th june 07.On 5th july 07 my attorney shipped 485 with a FedEx acknowledgement of 140 doc acceptance and entire photo copy set of 140 documents
suriajay12
04-10 08:20 PM
http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2009/04/10/where-should-white-house-start-with-immigration-reform/
alex99
07-20 10:33 AM
Hi Gurus,
Right now I am working for Company A and VISA with company A is valid till September 30 2007. Company B applied for Regular H1-B transfer (Receipt Date May 12) and it is still under process. I will be joining Company B on 1st October 2007.
Now due to some emergency I am traveling to India on 11August, 2007 and will come back on 11 Th September 2007. Also I can�t go for VISA stamping in India for Company B as I have not got my H1 Approval yet.
Given the above scenario, will I have any problem at the port of entry as my H1b transfer from company B has not been approved yet?
What all documents I have to carry to reenter safely?
Thanks in advance,
Ashok
Right now I am working for Company A and VISA with company A is valid till September 30 2007. Company B applied for Regular H1-B transfer (Receipt Date May 12) and it is still under process. I will be joining Company B on 1st October 2007.
Now due to some emergency I am traveling to India on 11August, 2007 and will come back on 11 Th September 2007. Also I can�t go for VISA stamping in India for Company B as I have not got my H1 Approval yet.
Given the above scenario, will I have any problem at the port of entry as my H1b transfer from company B has not been approved yet?
What all documents I have to carry to reenter safely?
Thanks in advance,
Ashok
amitjoey
05-31 04:43 PM
I am confused. it is very contradicting.
No comments:
Post a Comment