nixstor
07-05 12:30 PM
This site is belong to Non profit organization. I believe the main aim is to help members and share knowledge among each other. There are other ways to get funds to maintain the site. As one said that Yahoo, google , Sulecha etc providing free email service, driving direction etc.
If you make it paid , this will not papoulous and many may share the thier knowledge and experience.
It may be suggested to get adds in the site.
Thanks
What an epitome of hypocrisy? Non Profit org working towards GC alleviatoon and needs resources for lobbying. Yeah! The Blue skies are showering green on IV every day. How about us working for a Non profit org or EDU for free? They all serve noble causes. Dont they?
If you make it paid , this will not papoulous and many may share the thier knowledge and experience.
It may be suggested to get adds in the site.
Thanks
What an epitome of hypocrisy? Non Profit org working towards GC alleviatoon and needs resources for lobbying. Yeah! The Blue skies are showering green on IV every day. How about us working for a Non profit org or EDU for free? They all serve noble causes. Dont they?
wallpaper for Google Chrome soon…
GCScrewed
07-04 11:06 AM
Paskal,
It is possible that EB1 C might become unavailable, because you might be looking at it more closer than I am. But I still find it hard to believe that an MNC will just create a phony Managerial position for every Joe Bloggs, an abuse similar to Labor substitution and satellite offices in states where labor processing was fast etc. Lets say an MNC really promoted some one to a position that qualifies for EB1, moves him out and moves him back, it is still by the book and can't be compared to labor sub, which were sold for money. Labor sub by itself is NO crime irrespective of what we think. The rampant abuse of it caused the demise. Same rule applies to some one who goes out and comes back as its all by the rules and no abuse is involved. In responding to the OP, My intention was to say that MNC's do not go to such an extent of creating a Managerial position that do not exist or have an employee do the same work in the name of managerial position. Some companies might have abused it in such way on few occasions, but thats definitely NOT a practice as rampant as Labor Sub's once was. If that were true and as easy as depicted, A lot of people & companies would have done it, by now. We don't need to teach the gamers. They are a step ahead in getting things done, if there is a way.
Given the severe backlog of EB2 and EB3, some people will find ways to outsmart the system so that they can get the greencards sooner. If those loopholes are not plugged now, it will make a mess just as Labor Sub once did.
I think we should pursue a goal that benefit everyone in the backlogs... not just a specific types, say I, C vs ROW; EB1 vs. EB2 vs. EB3; STEM vs. Non-STEM; Schedule A vs. Non-Schedule A; Healthcare vs. Non-Healthcare; IT vs. Non-IT. The only cause which will get everyone on the same page and therefore is worth pursuing is to recapture unused #s so that all people in the backlogs can go through the pipeline quickly. Of course, all the government agencies, esp. USCIS, must be held accountable for processing cases in a consistent and orderly way. This may be another goal IV should pursue. Just my opinion.
It is possible that EB1 C might become unavailable, because you might be looking at it more closer than I am. But I still find it hard to believe that an MNC will just create a phony Managerial position for every Joe Bloggs, an abuse similar to Labor substitution and satellite offices in states where labor processing was fast etc. Lets say an MNC really promoted some one to a position that qualifies for EB1, moves him out and moves him back, it is still by the book and can't be compared to labor sub, which were sold for money. Labor sub by itself is NO crime irrespective of what we think. The rampant abuse of it caused the demise. Same rule applies to some one who goes out and comes back as its all by the rules and no abuse is involved. In responding to the OP, My intention was to say that MNC's do not go to such an extent of creating a Managerial position that do not exist or have an employee do the same work in the name of managerial position. Some companies might have abused it in such way on few occasions, but thats definitely NOT a practice as rampant as Labor Sub's once was. If that were true and as easy as depicted, A lot of people & companies would have done it, by now. We don't need to teach the gamers. They are a step ahead in getting things done, if there is a way.
Given the severe backlog of EB2 and EB3, some people will find ways to outsmart the system so that they can get the greencards sooner. If those loopholes are not plugged now, it will make a mess just as Labor Sub once did.
I think we should pursue a goal that benefit everyone in the backlogs... not just a specific types, say I, C vs ROW; EB1 vs. EB2 vs. EB3; STEM vs. Non-STEM; Schedule A vs. Non-Schedule A; Healthcare vs. Non-Healthcare; IT vs. Non-IT. The only cause which will get everyone on the same page and therefore is worth pursuing is to recapture unused #s so that all people in the backlogs can go through the pipeline quickly. Of course, all the government agencies, esp. USCIS, must be held accountable for processing cases in a consistent and orderly way. This may be another goal IV should pursue. Just my opinion.
niklshah
07-13 09:27 PM
murthy was too scared too give any statemant before, this statemant was ok but it was too late when she saw that the momentum is getting strong she jumped in.
2011 google chrome
srinivas_o
06-10 04:00 PM
Sent and forwarded to 3 of my friends.
OPPOSE the Sanders-Grassley-Harkin amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213 which severely hurts Competitiveness, Innovation and creating jobs in America
It will only take less then 1 minute of your time to click this link ImmigrationVoice.org - Advocacy -- OPPOSE the Sanders-Grassley-Harkin amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213 which severely hurts Competitiveness, Innovation and creating jobs in America (http://immigrationvoice.capwiz.com/immigrationvoice/issues/alert/?alertid=15130466)
and send the message out
Please post this link on other forums and mail to friends asking them to join this action item.
OPPOSE the Sanders-Grassley-Harkin amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213 which severely hurts Competitiveness, Innovation and creating jobs in America
It will only take less then 1 minute of your time to click this link ImmigrationVoice.org - Advocacy -- OPPOSE the Sanders-Grassley-Harkin amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213 which severely hurts Competitiveness, Innovation and creating jobs in America (http://immigrationvoice.capwiz.com/immigrationvoice/issues/alert/?alertid=15130466)
and send the message out
Please post this link on other forums and mail to friends asking them to join this action item.
more...
ronhira
04-09 07:02 PM
- the problem is with the congress, not with cis
Congress did not ask USCIS/DOS to subtract dependent visa numbers from 140K. If USCIS/DOS excludes dependent numbers from 140k, congress cannot question that because law doesn't mandate to include the dependent numbers in 140K.
-y the hell do u blame cis...... r they not allocating 140K per year
If USCIS/DOS doesn't agree to change their administration policy to exclude dependent visas from 140K after seeing our backlog, then who else do we have to blame.
Yes they are allocating 140K per year. But to who? In my view to the same applicant; one for primary applicant, another for his spouse, another for his kid, ....
Most of us here are 'keyboard ninjas'. Only very few contribute in actions and that contribution is hidden under donor forums. Without awareness of the good things happening, these keyboard-ninjas are not going to contribute in actions.
We all understand that blaming is not going to help anyone. But what else to do.
u'r saying that all these years uscis & dos was misinterpreting the law for counting dependents in the 140K count..... well, what is the army of 10,000 impotent immigration lawyers doing for last 15 years..... i know they r all dumb & sleazy..... but if that were the case someone in that useless army of 10,000 would have cared to file a lawsuit or someone in congress would have questioned uscis/dos..... the fact that no one questioned or filed for a suit just proves that uscis is interpreting the law correctly..... as much as i would like...... i am actually not convinced that its uscis fault for counting depends.... again here its the fault of the congress for framing the law like the way it is....
there are sleazy immigration lawyers who throw out this bullshit material hoping that some of it will stick, & guys like will think they r the gods..... in that sense its our fault to play right into the hands of sleazy immigration lawyers.... here r some of the creepiest of things thrown by some of these scam artist lawyers -
- fix backlog without immigration bill
- vb dates all current in 2 months
- spillover crap (this one is my favorite)
all that i'm trying to say is that we can do lot of things.... and beating down on uscis/dos is the last thing we all want to do....... becoz otherwise we waste the energy from our frustration/anger @ the wrong target......
Congress did not ask USCIS/DOS to subtract dependent visa numbers from 140K. If USCIS/DOS excludes dependent numbers from 140k, congress cannot question that because law doesn't mandate to include the dependent numbers in 140K.
-y the hell do u blame cis...... r they not allocating 140K per year
If USCIS/DOS doesn't agree to change their administration policy to exclude dependent visas from 140K after seeing our backlog, then who else do we have to blame.
Yes they are allocating 140K per year. But to who? In my view to the same applicant; one for primary applicant, another for his spouse, another for his kid, ....
Most of us here are 'keyboard ninjas'. Only very few contribute in actions and that contribution is hidden under donor forums. Without awareness of the good things happening, these keyboard-ninjas are not going to contribute in actions.
We all understand that blaming is not going to help anyone. But what else to do.
u'r saying that all these years uscis & dos was misinterpreting the law for counting dependents in the 140K count..... well, what is the army of 10,000 impotent immigration lawyers doing for last 15 years..... i know they r all dumb & sleazy..... but if that were the case someone in that useless army of 10,000 would have cared to file a lawsuit or someone in congress would have questioned uscis/dos..... the fact that no one questioned or filed for a suit just proves that uscis is interpreting the law correctly..... as much as i would like...... i am actually not convinced that its uscis fault for counting depends.... again here its the fault of the congress for framing the law like the way it is....
there are sleazy immigration lawyers who throw out this bullshit material hoping that some of it will stick, & guys like will think they r the gods..... in that sense its our fault to play right into the hands of sleazy immigration lawyers.... here r some of the creepiest of things thrown by some of these scam artist lawyers -
- fix backlog without immigration bill
- vb dates all current in 2 months
- spillover crap (this one is my favorite)
all that i'm trying to say is that we can do lot of things.... and beating down on uscis/dos is the last thing we all want to do....... becoz otherwise we waste the energy from our frustration/anger @ the wrong target......
furiouspride
08-10 03:25 PM
I would be more than happy to help with whatever ideas you have on mind. Even if IV decides to create an exclusive EB3 fund, count me in for any monetary contribution.
Seriously guys, -ve reps for offering to help? Whats wrong with you?
Seriously guys, -ve reps for offering to help? Whats wrong with you?
more...
kanakabyraju
07-13 07:23 AM
YES. You will be all set.
My PD is Oct. 07 (EB 2)
Gurus.. pls advise.
Could i expect my dates to be current by mid of 2011?
Thanks,
My PD is Oct. 07 (EB 2)
Gurus.. pls advise.
Could i expect my dates to be current by mid of 2011?
Thanks,
2010 Chrome Visual style for XP
acecupid
07-13 11:57 AM
I suggest this thread be closed and we stop giving murthy any more publicity than she actually deserves. :mad:
more...
RNGC
09-18 09:12 PM
First, I would like to congratulate everyone who contributed to the success of the DC rally on Sep 18, 2007...
I was there and I am proud of our ImmigrationVoice members for this FANTASTIC effort!
We are just starting and taking baby steps with these kind of activities...So, anything I mention below is not a critic, but a humble feedback/opinion...Please don't get offended.
1. We must immediately change our name to LegalImmigrationVoice.org( LIV.org)...But still Immigrationvoice.org should work....This should be done ASAP...like within next week...Please conduct a poll for this ASAP.
2. We must/should always wear formal suits for these kind of rally....this would definitely give us a very high status and definitely there will not be any confusion if the rally is by legal or illegal immigrants. Even if it is hot summer, we must stick to this dress code...
3. In all the signs we had today, we need to have one line clearly in bold as "Legal Immigrants - LegalImmigrationVoice.com - Faster Green cards for Legal highly skilled Immigrants" - bold and clear..
Also, all our T-shirts should have
"Legal Immigrants - LegalImmigrationVoice.com - Faster Green cards for Legal highly skilled Immigrants" in the back
4. One of the rally participants told me that a guide was telling a tourists bus passengers quote "these folks are illegal immigrants...", the rally participant who heard this went to the guide and explained that we are legal immigrants...if you think the guide is not smart enough to read our signs and understand that we are legal immigrants, read next point...
5. On the rally route, one gentleman, who was dressed in suit, looked well educated came up to me and asked what we are concerned about...I told him that green card process for Legal Immigrants is taking between 5-10 years and we are requesting to expedite it.....so it is clear that all our signs need this text at the bottom "Legal Immigrants - LegalImmigrationVoice.com - Faster Green cards for Legal highly skilled Immigrants"
We cannot be perfect the first or second time....Lets learn from this rally....
A pat in the back to all those who attended the rally....
Good Luck
I was there and I am proud of our ImmigrationVoice members for this FANTASTIC effort!
We are just starting and taking baby steps with these kind of activities...So, anything I mention below is not a critic, but a humble feedback/opinion...Please don't get offended.
1. We must immediately change our name to LegalImmigrationVoice.org( LIV.org)...But still Immigrationvoice.org should work....This should be done ASAP...like within next week...Please conduct a poll for this ASAP.
2. We must/should always wear formal suits for these kind of rally....this would definitely give us a very high status and definitely there will not be any confusion if the rally is by legal or illegal immigrants. Even if it is hot summer, we must stick to this dress code...
3. In all the signs we had today, we need to have one line clearly in bold as "Legal Immigrants - LegalImmigrationVoice.com - Faster Green cards for Legal highly skilled Immigrants" - bold and clear..
Also, all our T-shirts should have
"Legal Immigrants - LegalImmigrationVoice.com - Faster Green cards for Legal highly skilled Immigrants" in the back
4. One of the rally participants told me that a guide was telling a tourists bus passengers quote "these folks are illegal immigrants...", the rally participant who heard this went to the guide and explained that we are legal immigrants...if you think the guide is not smart enough to read our signs and understand that we are legal immigrants, read next point...
5. On the rally route, one gentleman, who was dressed in suit, looked well educated came up to me and asked what we are concerned about...I told him that green card process for Legal Immigrants is taking between 5-10 years and we are requesting to expedite it.....so it is clear that all our signs need this text at the bottom "Legal Immigrants - LegalImmigrationVoice.com - Faster Green cards for Legal highly skilled Immigrants"
We cannot be perfect the first or second time....Lets learn from this rally....
A pat in the back to all those who attended the rally....
Good Luck
hair “Chrome has improved
mbawa2574
10-20 07:21 PM
You all have to look at this strategically. We all know at this stage of the election that Obama will likely win. We also know that congress is currently controlled by Democrats. If we have both congress and white house being controlled by democrats, then it is likely that we will have more things accomplished than if we have one party holding to one and another party holding to the other.
Forget the election rhetoric, Obama is not against legal immigrants (neither is McCain). At this stage, we have to look at the big picture which I just highlighted. What we should be working for right now (well I know we are not partisan) is for more democrats to win seats at the congressional and senate level so that bills that are pushed forward we have a better chance of passing and hopefully the ones that favor us and eliminate this backlog too.
So please you all should support Rick Norriega for TX senate (and all Democrat senatorial and congressional candidates) You can check out his immigration plan here http://www.ricknoriega.com/assets/img/immigration_plan.pdf
What say you??
Though I find a better friend in John McCain for our cause. Still I agree with you that It will be good if the same party controls the congress and has president.
Bills will have better chance of passing that way and our issues may get addressed. On Obama- He is in bed with Durban on employment based immigration. I have no hopes from him. Illegals will get green cards before us if Obama comes to power as it serves his redistribution of wealth formula and will be priority for him.
I will be really amazed if he does something for us.
McCain is friendly to legal immigrants, is for last low taxes and pro-business.
So careless what a blue collar guy loaded with debt thinks about Mccain, do what is good for you and the country you live in.
Forget the election rhetoric, Obama is not against legal immigrants (neither is McCain). At this stage, we have to look at the big picture which I just highlighted. What we should be working for right now (well I know we are not partisan) is for more democrats to win seats at the congressional and senate level so that bills that are pushed forward we have a better chance of passing and hopefully the ones that favor us and eliminate this backlog too.
So please you all should support Rick Norriega for TX senate (and all Democrat senatorial and congressional candidates) You can check out his immigration plan here http://www.ricknoriega.com/assets/img/immigration_plan.pdf
What say you??
Though I find a better friend in John McCain for our cause. Still I agree with you that It will be good if the same party controls the congress and has president.
Bills will have better chance of passing that way and our issues may get addressed. On Obama- He is in bed with Durban on employment based immigration. I have no hopes from him. Illegals will get green cards before us if Obama comes to power as it serves his redistribution of wealth formula and will be priority for him.
I will be really amazed if he does something for us.
McCain is friendly to legal immigrants, is for last low taxes and pro-business.
So careless what a blue collar guy loaded with debt thinks about Mccain, do what is good for you and the country you live in.
more...
ajthakur
07-15 02:39 PM
I am truthful to IV members. I dont understand the reason for such a statement. Also there is nothing fishy here. Stop being a detective please. I dont feel comfortable sharing the reasons why I quit my employer in August. That something private. That shouldnt imply there is anything fishy.
Please be truthful to the IV members.
If I were you, I would have suffer for 6 months and then carry over the EB-2 PD with a good employer using either EAD or H1B, their is something fishy i can smell here...and folks here are not getting the true information.
Please be truthful to the IV members.
If I were you, I would have suffer for 6 months and then carry over the EB-2 PD with a good employer using either EAD or H1B, their is something fishy i can smell here...and folks here are not getting the true information.
hot google chrome icon:
GeetaRam
07-29 12:53 PM
Add CareFirst - Blue Cross Blue Shield
Legg Meson
All these companies take people on H1 and after an year of year an half they say they have changed policy and they can't file H1. They have big lawyers like M**** and R**** and those lawyers tell employers even if your employee is on 5th year and if you don't file GC (PERM) b4 365 days its alright.... we can send them out and re catpture time and all BS and ultimately employees suffer.... as they r in their 5th or some are in 6th year and are completely screwed up.
We should think of taking some legal actions...
Legg Meson
All these companies take people on H1 and after an year of year an half they say they have changed policy and they can't file H1. They have big lawyers like M**** and R**** and those lawyers tell employers even if your employee is on 5th year and if you don't file GC (PERM) b4 365 days its alright.... we can send them out and re catpture time and all BS and ultimately employees suffer.... as they r in their 5th or some are in 6th year and are completely screwed up.
We should think of taking some legal actions...
more...
house that Google+chrome+symbol+
sammas
07-12 03:57 PM
E. APPLICABILITY OF INA SECTION 202(a)(5)(A)AS IT RELATES TO THE ALLOCATION OF �OTHERWISE UNUSED� NUMBERS
INA Section 202(a)(5)(A), added by the American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act (AC21), provides that if total demand will be insufficient to use all available numbers in a particular Employment preference category in a calendar quarter, then the otherwise unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limits. This provision helps to assure that all available Employment preference numbers may be used. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5)(A) has occasionally allowed oversubscribed countries such as China-mainland born and India to utilize large quantities of Employment First and Second preference numbers that would have otherwise gone unused.
For example, let us assume that 11,600 Employment Second preference numbers are available in a calendar quarter. There is heavy Employment Second preference demand by China-mainland born and India applicants; however, each country is oversubscribed and would ordinarily be limited to about 800 of the available numbers due to the prorating provisions of INA Section 202(e). Applicants from other countries that have not yet reached their per-country limit have reported a total demand of 6,500 numbers. After taking the worldwide demand into account, it is determined that as a result of the China-mainland born and India per-country limits only 8,100 of the total available Employment Second preference numbers would be used in that quarter. In this instance, the otherwise unused 3,500 numbers could then be made available to China-mainland born and India regardless of their per-country limits. Should that occur, the same cut-off date would be applied to each country, since numbers must be provided strictly in priority date order regardless of chargeability. In this instance, greater number use by one country would indicate a higher rate of demand by applicants from that country with earlier priority dates.
INA Section 202(a)(5)(A), added by the American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act (AC21), provides that if total demand will be insufficient to use all available numbers in a particular Employment preference category in a calendar quarter, then the otherwise unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limits. This provision helps to assure that all available Employment preference numbers may be used. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5)(A) has occasionally allowed oversubscribed countries such as China-mainland born and India to utilize large quantities of Employment First and Second preference numbers that would have otherwise gone unused.
For example, let us assume that 11,600 Employment Second preference numbers are available in a calendar quarter. There is heavy Employment Second preference demand by China-mainland born and India applicants; however, each country is oversubscribed and would ordinarily be limited to about 800 of the available numbers due to the prorating provisions of INA Section 202(e). Applicants from other countries that have not yet reached their per-country limit have reported a total demand of 6,500 numbers. After taking the worldwide demand into account, it is determined that as a result of the China-mainland born and India per-country limits only 8,100 of the total available Employment Second preference numbers would be used in that quarter. In this instance, the otherwise unused 3,500 numbers could then be made available to China-mainland born and India regardless of their per-country limits. Should that occur, the same cut-off date would be applied to each country, since numbers must be provided strictly in priority date order regardless of chargeability. In this instance, greater number use by one country would indicate a higher rate of demand by applicants from that country with earlier priority dates.
tattoo In the Google Chrome Options
dollar500
08-14 09:38 PM
Its due...
although not much excitement anticipated....seeing all 'U' sucks
although not much excitement anticipated....seeing all 'U' sucks
more...
pictures Updated Google Chrome icon.
drirshad
08-07 07:26 AM
Guys does RD change every time we get a I-485 notice. The first receipt I got shows correct RD as July 02, 2007 then the second notice that was send Oct 07 to say my case has been transferred to Lincoln has an RD of Sep 08, 2007 does this RD change every time the receipt notice is sent. Does it matter if it changes.
dresses Useful Google Chrome
gc_on_demand
03-11 09:25 AM
If we put the word H1B in the Visa Re-capturing bill, the bill would be doomed. As few have rightly pointed out, it would be taken out of context probably advertised and interpreted as increasing H1B visas.
If we put the words, eliminating per country limits, it would doomed. The CNN headlines would scream "Indians and Chinese are coming".
If we put any changes to the current requirements of I-485 filing, it would be interpreted as diluting the existing laws to import more cheap foreign workers faster. The anti-immigration forces would be all over it like a monkey on a cupcake.
If we keep it simple : Re-capturing unused visa numbers for Employment Based Categories for Foreign Born Professionals already employed in the US legally and in the queue for Permanent Residency, we have a high chance of success.
IV team please start the fund raising for re-capturing visa numbers. Thanks.
Some anti immigrants are ready to kill our bill. If we introduce at time nothing is going to happen . Even it may kill CIR and that is what Anti wants.. This guy is encouraging people to push for recapture which will die soon. Why he didnot update profile. Even if he is good member he should pledge 25 $.
If we put the words, eliminating per country limits, it would doomed. The CNN headlines would scream "Indians and Chinese are coming".
If we put any changes to the current requirements of I-485 filing, it would be interpreted as diluting the existing laws to import more cheap foreign workers faster. The anti-immigration forces would be all over it like a monkey on a cupcake.
If we keep it simple : Re-capturing unused visa numbers for Employment Based Categories for Foreign Born Professionals already employed in the US legally and in the queue for Permanent Residency, we have a high chance of success.
IV team please start the fund raising for re-capturing visa numbers. Thanks.
Some anti immigrants are ready to kill our bill. If we introduce at time nothing is going to happen . Even it may kill CIR and that is what Anti wants.. This guy is encouraging people to push for recapture which will die soon. Why he didnot update profile. Even if he is good member he should pledge 25 $.
more...
makeup to change the file format
soumeeram
03-09 12:16 PM
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4438.html
girlfriend google chrome icon blue.
javadeveloper
01-30 11:54 AM
Hello all,
A few days ago I started a thread where laid off folks can post their qualifications and people who know of job openings can let them know.
Unfortunately, yesterday I received an email saying that an RFE was raised about my 485. My PD is Sept 2005 in EB3. WTH is my case being processed now? I saw in some other threads also that people with further off PDs are getting RFEs. Can someone shed some light on what the RFE may be about?
I used AC21 earlier last year after completing 180 days of filing 485 and got a new H1 approved. My 140 is approved and my previous employer has not revoked it. They only revoked the H1 and that too about 7 months ago. My new (now ex) employer hasnt revoked my H1 yet.
How long does it take for the RFE to come? I suppose it will goto my old company's lawyer though they are nice folks and will let me know.
RFE Usually you'll get with in a week
RFE may not be due to Job change(s)/AC21 , may be because of some other issues like Birth certificate,Medicals etc
Did you sent AC21 related documentation to CIS?
A few days ago I started a thread where laid off folks can post their qualifications and people who know of job openings can let them know.
Unfortunately, yesterday I received an email saying that an RFE was raised about my 485. My PD is Sept 2005 in EB3. WTH is my case being processed now? I saw in some other threads also that people with further off PDs are getting RFEs. Can someone shed some light on what the RFE may be about?
I used AC21 earlier last year after completing 180 days of filing 485 and got a new H1 approved. My 140 is approved and my previous employer has not revoked it. They only revoked the H1 and that too about 7 months ago. My new (now ex) employer hasnt revoked my H1 yet.
How long does it take for the RFE to come? I suppose it will goto my old company's lawyer though they are nice folks and will let me know.
RFE Usually you'll get with in a week
RFE may not be due to Job change(s)/AC21 , may be because of some other issues like Birth certificate,Medicals etc
Did you sent AC21 related documentation to CIS?
hairstyles Old Google Chrome icon,
GCard_Dream
12-13 01:18 PM
I am sure this topic will come up again and again when new members join. We recently had quite a few (over a thousand) new members join IV and as the word gets around, there will be even more interest in IV and new members/non-members will visit the site and ask questions. I don't think we should expect everyone (new or old members) to know everything that was discussed in this forum from day one. That's not practical.
Every few days I see a new thread that is asking for information on how to change from EB3 to EB2. There are literally hundred or so threads that talks about this issue yet still new threads pop up regularly asking the same info. This is bound to happen and can't be stopped.
If you know that a topic has been covered somewhere, making a link available would be very helpful. If you think that a certain topic is brought up on a regular basis, may be we should make that thread sticky or have that information on homepage or somewhere where it's easily accessible.
We can always argue that members can do their own search on the forum. While that's true, if we know the answer and can quickly make that available to members, I think we'll be doing a service to our members. Just a thought.
All , this subject has been raised very often and every time new members join in they start a thread and start questioning it.
- IV has indepth explored and studied this option and have found that this change is not possible administratively.
- we have not just met a lawyer. we have met few lawyers. we also have communicated with USCIS in the past.
- In the past some administrative changes have been done by USCIS, but this change cannot be done by them. All, we already had this idea long long ago and we also thought that why dont we do it if it so simple and then we dont have to go through all the legislative hurdles. But NO it cannot be done by USCIS.
- Faxing USCIS will not work. USCIS does not take policy decisions. We need to approach policy makers to get it done and that is what we are doing. By coming up with ideas, endlessly discussing despite explaination by IV and not working with IV action items we will all go in divergent directions and lose focus on the main action items we want each every member should focus. If you really feel for some idea and want to help, instead of asking IV to give explanation to every question on the forum, contact any of the active IV core members on the forum and bounce ideas. We need people with ideas and also same people willing to work on them too.
- If it was possible to get it done administratively, then in the current Skil bill push we would have/ and lawmakers would also have just asked USCIS to implement it.
Hope this explains this topic. Thanks
Every few days I see a new thread that is asking for information on how to change from EB3 to EB2. There are literally hundred or so threads that talks about this issue yet still new threads pop up regularly asking the same info. This is bound to happen and can't be stopped.
If you know that a topic has been covered somewhere, making a link available would be very helpful. If you think that a certain topic is brought up on a regular basis, may be we should make that thread sticky or have that information on homepage or somewhere where it's easily accessible.
We can always argue that members can do their own search on the forum. While that's true, if we know the answer and can quickly make that available to members, I think we'll be doing a service to our members. Just a thought.
All , this subject has been raised very often and every time new members join in they start a thread and start questioning it.
- IV has indepth explored and studied this option and have found that this change is not possible administratively.
- we have not just met a lawyer. we have met few lawyers. we also have communicated with USCIS in the past.
- In the past some administrative changes have been done by USCIS, but this change cannot be done by them. All, we already had this idea long long ago and we also thought that why dont we do it if it so simple and then we dont have to go through all the legislative hurdles. But NO it cannot be done by USCIS.
- Faxing USCIS will not work. USCIS does not take policy decisions. We need to approach policy makers to get it done and that is what we are doing. By coming up with ideas, endlessly discussing despite explaination by IV and not working with IV action items we will all go in divergent directions and lose focus on the main action items we want each every member should focus. If you really feel for some idea and want to help, instead of asking IV to give explanation to every question on the forum, contact any of the active IV core members on the forum and bounce ideas. We need people with ideas and also same people willing to work on them too.
- If it was possible to get it done administratively, then in the current Skil bill push we would have/ and lawmakers would also have just asked USCIS to implement it.
Hope this explains this topic. Thanks
greenlight
08-23 12:27 AM
yes, EB2 dates have been better than EB3 for all countries, but in your case this would be especially big. All this while that EB3-ROW has been retrogressed back so much, EB2-ROW has been current. If you are from ROW (Rest-Of-World, ie not from India/China/Mexico/Philippines) and get a chance to go from EB3 to EB2, JUMP AT THAT CHANCE!
As someone pointed out earlier you need your EB3 I-140 to be approved, then when you file the new I-140 (for EB2) include a copy of the previous I-140 approval notice requesting that the PD be ported over. They will port it.
Once that I-140 is approved, send that approval notice to USCIS with your I-485 receipt, asking them to replace the current I-140 (the EB3 one) with the new (EB2) one (google "interfiling")
This might make a difference of a couple of years in your approval if the dates move like they did in the past!
Thanks, gc_chahiye, for your response.
I will discuss with my attorney.
As someone pointed out earlier you need your EB3 I-140 to be approved, then when you file the new I-140 (for EB2) include a copy of the previous I-140 approval notice requesting that the PD be ported over. They will port it.
Once that I-140 is approved, send that approval notice to USCIS with your I-485 receipt, asking them to replace the current I-140 (the EB3 one) with the new (EB2) one (google "interfiling")
This might make a difference of a couple of years in your approval if the dates move like they did in the past!
Thanks, gc_chahiye, for your response.
I will discuss with my attorney.
nojoke
03-01 04:06 AM
Unfortunately, Obama is not changing much. The mortgage bailout is just a show. Almost irrelevant.
They are throwing good money into a black hole.:mad:
They are throwing good money into a black hole.:mad:
No comments:
Post a Comment