eb3_nepa
04-13 11:08 PM
Thanks everyone. Please keep the updates coming :)
wallpaper Camera Canon Dslr
Suva
08-14 11:14 AM
Why are you taking all the H1s into the calculation? This only applies to companies which has more than 50% H1 employees. So it does not apply to all the companies.
I dont agree with the laws passed, but here is the math to come up with the $600 million figure they are quoting.
# of possible H1Bs = 85k (65k + 20k)
Fees (additional) = $2000
Total Fees = $170 million ($2k x 85k)
The fee increase is for 4 years = (2010-2014)
GRAND Total = $680 million ($170 million x 4)
I dont agree with the laws passed, but here is the math to come up with the $600 million figure they are quoting.
# of possible H1Bs = 85k (65k + 20k)
Fees (additional) = $2000
Total Fees = $170 million ($2k x 85k)
The fee increase is for 4 years = (2010-2014)
GRAND Total = $680 million ($170 million x 4)
dontcareaboutGC
03-19 11:24 AM
Ignore this if this is a repost!
U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on the Judiciary
Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security,
and International Law
Hearing on Comprehensive Immigration Reform: Government Perspectives
on Immigration Statistics
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim
Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division
Visa Services Office
U.S. Department of State
June 6, 2007
2:00 p.m.
2141 Rayburn House Office Building
Chairman Lofgren, Ranking Member King, and distinguished members of
the Committee, it is a pleasure to be here this afternoon to answer
your questions and provide an overview of our immigrant visa control
and reporting program operated by the U.S. Department of State. The
Department of State is responsible for administering the provisions of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) related to the numerical
limitations on immigrant visa issuances. At the beginning of each
month, the Visa Office (VO) receives a report from each consular post
listing totals of documentarily-qualified immigrant visa applicants in
categories subject to numerical limitation. Cases are grouped in three
different categories: 1) foreign state chargeability, 2) preference,
and 3) priority date.
Foreign state chargeability for visa purposes refers to the fact that
an immigrant is chargeable to the numerical limitation for the foreign
state or dependent area in which the immigrant's place of birth is
located. Exceptions are provided for a child (unmarried and under 21
years of age) or spouse accompanying or following to join a principal
to prevent the separation of family members, as well as for an
applicant born in the United States or in a foreign state of which
neither parent was a native or resident. Alternate chargeability is
desirable when the visa cut-off date for the foreign state of a parent
or spouse is more advantageous than that of the applicant's foreign
state.
As established by the Immigration and Nationality Act, preference is
the visa category that can be assigned based on relationships to U.S.
citizens or legal permanent residents. Family-based immigration falls
under two basic categories: unlimited and limited. Preferences
established by law for the limited category are:
Family First Preference (F1): Unmarried sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their minor children, if any.
Family Second Preference (F2): Spouses, minor children, and unmarried
sons and daughters of lawful permanent residents.
Family Third Preference (F3): Married sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their spouses and minor children.
Family Fourth Preference (F4): Brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens
and their spouses and minor children provided the U.S. citizen is at
least 21 years of age.
The Priority Date is normally the date on which the petition to accord
the applicant immigrant status was filed, generally with U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). VO subdivides the annual
preference and foreign state limitations specified by the INA into
monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily-qualified applicants
which have been reported to VO are compared each month with the
numbers available for the next regular allotment. The determination of
how many numbers are available requires consideration of several
variables, including: past number use; estimates of future number use
and return rates; and estimates of USCIS demand based on cut-off date
movements. Once this consideration is completed, the cutoff dates are
established and numbers are allocated to reported applicants in order
of their priority dates, the oldest dates first.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy
all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is
considered "Current." For example: If the monthly allocation target is
10,000, and we only have 5,000 applicants, the category can be
"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.
The cut-off date is the priority date of the first
documentarily-qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a
visa number. For example, if the monthly target is 10,000 and we have
25,000 applicants, then we would need to establish a cut-off date so
that only 10,000 numbers would be allocated. In this case, the cut-off
would be the priority date of the 10,001st applicant.
Only persons with a priority date earlier than a cut-off date are
entitled to allotment of a visa number. The cut-off dates are the 1st,
8th, 15th, and 22nd of a month, since VO groups demand for numbers
under these dates. (Priority dates of the first through seventh of a
month are grouped under the 1st, the eighth through the 14th under the
8th, etc.) VO attempts to establish the cut-off dates for the
following month on or about the 8th of each month. The dates are
immediately transmitted to consular posts abroad and USCIS, and also
published in the Visa Bulletin and online at the website
www.travel.state.gov. Visa allotments for use during that month are
transmitted to consular posts. USCIS requests visa allotments for
adjustment of status cases only when all other case processing has
been completed. I am submitting the latest Visa Bulletin for the
record or you can click on: Visa Bulletin for June 2007.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE SYSTEM AND CLARIFICATION OF SOME
FREQUENTLY MISUNDERSTOOD POINTS:
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become documentarily qualified
at their own initiative and convenience. By no means has every
applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date
been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, visa allotments
are made only on the basis of the total applicants reported
�documentarily qualified� (or, theoretically ready for interview) each
month. Demand for visa numbers can fluctuate from one month to
another, with the inevitable impact on cut-off dates.
If an applicant is reported documentarily qualified but allocation of
a visa number is not possible because of a visa availability cut-off
date, the demand is recorded at VO and an allocation is made as soon
as the applicable cut-off date advances beyond the applicant's
priority date. There is no need for such applicant to be reported a
second time.
Visa numbers are always allotted for all documentarily-qualified
applicants with a priority date before the relevant cut-off date, as
long as the case had been reported to VO in time to be included in the
monthly calculation of visa availability. Failure of visa number
receipt by the overseas processing office could mean that the request
was not dispatched in time to reach VO for the monthly allocation
cycle, or that information on the request was incomplete or inaccurate
(e.g., incorrect priority date).
Allocations to Foreign Service posts outside the regular monthly cycle
are possible in emergency or exceptional cases, but only at the
request of the office processing the case. Note that, should
retrogression of a cut-off date be announced, VO can honor
extraordinary requests for additional numbers only if the applicant's
priority date is earlier than the retrogressed cut-off date. Not all
numbers allocated are actually used for visa issuance; some are
returned to VO and are reincorporated into the pool of numbers
available for later allocation during the fiscal year. The rate of
return of unused numbers may fluctuate from month to month, just as
demand may fluctuate. Lower returns mean fewer numbers available for
subsequent reallocation. Fluctuations can cause cut-off date movement
to slow, stop, or even retrogress. Retrogression is particularly
possible near the end of the fiscal year as visa issuance approaches
the annual limitations.
Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7 percent is a
cap, which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed.
Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The
country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the
annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This
limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled,
however. A portion of the numbers provided to the Family Second
preference category is exempt from this per-country cap. The American
Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act (AC21) removed the
per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant
demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of
such numbers available.
Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by
documentarily-qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds
the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation,
that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may
require the establishment of a cut-off date which is earlier than that
which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The
prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same
percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual
limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off
dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off
dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
The committee submitted several questions that fell outside of VO�s
area of work, therefore, I have provided in my written testimony today
the answers only to those questions that the Department of State can
answer. Thank you for this opportunity.
U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on the Judiciary
Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security,
and International Law
Hearing on Comprehensive Immigration Reform: Government Perspectives
on Immigration Statistics
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim
Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division
Visa Services Office
U.S. Department of State
June 6, 2007
2:00 p.m.
2141 Rayburn House Office Building
Chairman Lofgren, Ranking Member King, and distinguished members of
the Committee, it is a pleasure to be here this afternoon to answer
your questions and provide an overview of our immigrant visa control
and reporting program operated by the U.S. Department of State. The
Department of State is responsible for administering the provisions of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) related to the numerical
limitations on immigrant visa issuances. At the beginning of each
month, the Visa Office (VO) receives a report from each consular post
listing totals of documentarily-qualified immigrant visa applicants in
categories subject to numerical limitation. Cases are grouped in three
different categories: 1) foreign state chargeability, 2) preference,
and 3) priority date.
Foreign state chargeability for visa purposes refers to the fact that
an immigrant is chargeable to the numerical limitation for the foreign
state or dependent area in which the immigrant's place of birth is
located. Exceptions are provided for a child (unmarried and under 21
years of age) or spouse accompanying or following to join a principal
to prevent the separation of family members, as well as for an
applicant born in the United States or in a foreign state of which
neither parent was a native or resident. Alternate chargeability is
desirable when the visa cut-off date for the foreign state of a parent
or spouse is more advantageous than that of the applicant's foreign
state.
As established by the Immigration and Nationality Act, preference is
the visa category that can be assigned based on relationships to U.S.
citizens or legal permanent residents. Family-based immigration falls
under two basic categories: unlimited and limited. Preferences
established by law for the limited category are:
Family First Preference (F1): Unmarried sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their minor children, if any.
Family Second Preference (F2): Spouses, minor children, and unmarried
sons and daughters of lawful permanent residents.
Family Third Preference (F3): Married sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their spouses and minor children.
Family Fourth Preference (F4): Brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens
and their spouses and minor children provided the U.S. citizen is at
least 21 years of age.
The Priority Date is normally the date on which the petition to accord
the applicant immigrant status was filed, generally with U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). VO subdivides the annual
preference and foreign state limitations specified by the INA into
monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily-qualified applicants
which have been reported to VO are compared each month with the
numbers available for the next regular allotment. The determination of
how many numbers are available requires consideration of several
variables, including: past number use; estimates of future number use
and return rates; and estimates of USCIS demand based on cut-off date
movements. Once this consideration is completed, the cutoff dates are
established and numbers are allocated to reported applicants in order
of their priority dates, the oldest dates first.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy
all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is
considered "Current." For example: If the monthly allocation target is
10,000, and we only have 5,000 applicants, the category can be
"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.
The cut-off date is the priority date of the first
documentarily-qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a
visa number. For example, if the monthly target is 10,000 and we have
25,000 applicants, then we would need to establish a cut-off date so
that only 10,000 numbers would be allocated. In this case, the cut-off
would be the priority date of the 10,001st applicant.
Only persons with a priority date earlier than a cut-off date are
entitled to allotment of a visa number. The cut-off dates are the 1st,
8th, 15th, and 22nd of a month, since VO groups demand for numbers
under these dates. (Priority dates of the first through seventh of a
month are grouped under the 1st, the eighth through the 14th under the
8th, etc.) VO attempts to establish the cut-off dates for the
following month on or about the 8th of each month. The dates are
immediately transmitted to consular posts abroad and USCIS, and also
published in the Visa Bulletin and online at the website
www.travel.state.gov. Visa allotments for use during that month are
transmitted to consular posts. USCIS requests visa allotments for
adjustment of status cases only when all other case processing has
been completed. I am submitting the latest Visa Bulletin for the
record or you can click on: Visa Bulletin for June 2007.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE SYSTEM AND CLARIFICATION OF SOME
FREQUENTLY MISUNDERSTOOD POINTS:
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become documentarily qualified
at their own initiative and convenience. By no means has every
applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date
been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, visa allotments
are made only on the basis of the total applicants reported
�documentarily qualified� (or, theoretically ready for interview) each
month. Demand for visa numbers can fluctuate from one month to
another, with the inevitable impact on cut-off dates.
If an applicant is reported documentarily qualified but allocation of
a visa number is not possible because of a visa availability cut-off
date, the demand is recorded at VO and an allocation is made as soon
as the applicable cut-off date advances beyond the applicant's
priority date. There is no need for such applicant to be reported a
second time.
Visa numbers are always allotted for all documentarily-qualified
applicants with a priority date before the relevant cut-off date, as
long as the case had been reported to VO in time to be included in the
monthly calculation of visa availability. Failure of visa number
receipt by the overseas processing office could mean that the request
was not dispatched in time to reach VO for the monthly allocation
cycle, or that information on the request was incomplete or inaccurate
(e.g., incorrect priority date).
Allocations to Foreign Service posts outside the regular monthly cycle
are possible in emergency or exceptional cases, but only at the
request of the office processing the case. Note that, should
retrogression of a cut-off date be announced, VO can honor
extraordinary requests for additional numbers only if the applicant's
priority date is earlier than the retrogressed cut-off date. Not all
numbers allocated are actually used for visa issuance; some are
returned to VO and are reincorporated into the pool of numbers
available for later allocation during the fiscal year. The rate of
return of unused numbers may fluctuate from month to month, just as
demand may fluctuate. Lower returns mean fewer numbers available for
subsequent reallocation. Fluctuations can cause cut-off date movement
to slow, stop, or even retrogress. Retrogression is particularly
possible near the end of the fiscal year as visa issuance approaches
the annual limitations.
Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7 percent is a
cap, which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed.
Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The
country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the
annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This
limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled,
however. A portion of the numbers provided to the Family Second
preference category is exempt from this per-country cap. The American
Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act (AC21) removed the
per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant
demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of
such numbers available.
Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by
documentarily-qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds
the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation,
that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may
require the establishment of a cut-off date which is earlier than that
which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The
prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same
percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual
limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off
dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off
dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
The committee submitted several questions that fell outside of VO�s
area of work, therefore, I have provided in my written testimony today
the answers only to those questions that the Department of State can
answer. Thank you for this opportunity.
2011 Canon Digital Rebel XSi
ash0210
12-02 11:53 AM
**** READ question 3 from May12,2005 MEMO (or search/read the full Memo)
20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20529 HQPRD 70/6.2.8-P To: REGIONAL DIRECTORS SERVICE CENTER DIRECTORS From: William R. Yates /S/ Associate Director for Operations United States Citizenship and Immigration Services Department of Homeland Security Date: May 12, 2005
Memorandum for Service Center Directors, et al.
Q & A ON PROCESSING OF I-140 PETITIONS AND I-485 APPLICATIONS UNDER THE I-140 PORTABILITY PROVISIONS OF �106(C) OF AC21
Question 3. What is �same or similar� occupational classification for purposes of I-140 portability?
Answer:When making a determination if the new employment is the �same or similar� occupational classification in comparison to the employment in the initial I-140, adjudicators should consider the following factors:
A. Description of the job duties contained in the ETA 750A or the initial I-140 and the job duties of the new employment to determine if they are the �same or similar� occupational classification.
B. The DOT code and/or SOC code assigned to the initial I-140 employment for petitions that have a certified ETA 750A or consider what DOT and/or SOC code is appropriate for the position for an initial I-140 that did not require a certified ETA 750A. Then consider the DOT code and/or SOC code, whichever is appropriate for the new position to make a determination of �same or similar� occupational classification.
C. A substantial discrepancy between the previous and the new wage. (See Question 5 of this section for further clarification).
Guys,
Is it ok to have a title of Business Analyst and do software development? Programmer Analyst makes more sense for the position. Like wise Is it ok to have a programmer analyst title for a systems administrator? What kind of issues can one expect if the title and job duties/resume are not in sync?
Thanks
20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20529 HQPRD 70/6.2.8-P To: REGIONAL DIRECTORS SERVICE CENTER DIRECTORS From: William R. Yates /S/ Associate Director for Operations United States Citizenship and Immigration Services Department of Homeland Security Date: May 12, 2005
Memorandum for Service Center Directors, et al.
Q & A ON PROCESSING OF I-140 PETITIONS AND I-485 APPLICATIONS UNDER THE I-140 PORTABILITY PROVISIONS OF �106(C) OF AC21
Question 3. What is �same or similar� occupational classification for purposes of I-140 portability?
Answer:When making a determination if the new employment is the �same or similar� occupational classification in comparison to the employment in the initial I-140, adjudicators should consider the following factors:
A. Description of the job duties contained in the ETA 750A or the initial I-140 and the job duties of the new employment to determine if they are the �same or similar� occupational classification.
B. The DOT code and/or SOC code assigned to the initial I-140 employment for petitions that have a certified ETA 750A or consider what DOT and/or SOC code is appropriate for the position for an initial I-140 that did not require a certified ETA 750A. Then consider the DOT code and/or SOC code, whichever is appropriate for the new position to make a determination of �same or similar� occupational classification.
C. A substantial discrepancy between the previous and the new wage. (See Question 5 of this section for further clarification).
Guys,
Is it ok to have a title of Business Analyst and do software development? Programmer Analyst makes more sense for the position. Like wise Is it ok to have a programmer analyst title for a systems administrator? What kind of issues can one expect if the title and job duties/resume are not in sync?
Thanks
more...
gcdreamer05
11-12 04:02 PM
Folks, wanted to share the feedback from my immigration attorney, the attorney office which did my h1b, h4, eb3 etc, it is a pretty big firm and has good reputation.
The attorney clearly told me, that as long as there is no salary and if it is volunteering then we can go ahead whether it is profit making or non-profit it does not matter.
Now im still confused what do i do......
to be on safer side i may suggest going for non-profit org.
The attorney clearly told me, that as long as there is no salary and if it is volunteering then we can go ahead whether it is profit making or non-profit it does not matter.
Now im still confused what do i do......
to be on safer side i may suggest going for non-profit org.
leo2606
09-24 03:50 PM
Any thoughts
more...
santb1975
02-14 12:22 AM
We really need it
I volunteer. I will be in Los Angeles this Sunday. See you there.
Cheers!
g
I volunteer. I will be in Los Angeles this Sunday. See you there.
Cheers!
g
2010 Canon EOS Rebel XSi
logiclife
01-01 11:03 PM
I have been looking at a lot of posts on this Rajiv Khanna�s immigrationportal and there seems to be a lot of confusion about who is legit and really interested in our cause and who is faking it to collect money and run with it.
I agree that its hard to trust someone you�ve never met and get involved in discussing strategy, participate etc let alone cut a check of $50.
LET ME BE CLEAR ABOUT SOMETHING HERE:
I have no vested interested in diverting people from any website to any website and re-divert people from one organization to another. If you know someone who works for you and you trust � fine. Go with it.
I personally am really really mad at the retrogression going on in EB GC. I applied for my Labor in Sept 2004. Got it approved in June 2005. I have been sitting on my hands since. I-140 is in process. With the speed things are going now, I will have GC no sooner than 6 years.
AND I AM JUST MAD THAT AFTER ALL THESE YEARS�I CAN�T EVEN APPLY FOR I-485.
Then I came across this website on the morning of 31st DEC and then looked at immigrationvoice.org. Talked to a couple of people on the phone from immigrationvoice.org. I am going to post tomorrow�s agenda of conference call RIGHT HERE.
If you want to participate in this call, either to suggest ideas or to check out if we are legit or not, just register on immigrationvoice.org (ITS FREE) and send an email with your phone numbers (its free) so that we can verify that you are legit and not a heckler who is going to disrupt the conference call.
If you still are not convinced and trust someone else, go with it.
Another thing�immigrationvoice.org is only 4 days old. Bear with us if we are not perfect. But we will surely be fully functional with all the bells and whistles before you know it.
AGENDA for tomorrow�s conference call:
A) GENERATE PUBLICITY ABOUT IMMIGRATIONVOICE.ORG.
Spread the word that this website is going to consolidate all efforts to have provisions to eliminate retrogression. Convince people that immigrationvoice.org is legit and operated by people WHO DON�T HAVE GC/CITIZENSHIP and are waiting in line for GC.
B) GATHER FACTS FROM BOOKS, AUTHENTIC SOURCES.
There are at least 3 books out there that deal with exodus of talent from this country either due to cultural reasons or due to hostile immigration policy. These books claim that there is competition for talent out there (�Talent� being people like H1Bs, researchers, engineers etc) between US and other countries and USA IS LOSING. Check out �Flight Capital� by David Heenan and �The flight of the creative class� by Richard Florida.
We want those facts to convince congress that eliminating retrogression is not only in an immigrant�s interest, BUT IN THE INTEREST OF AN AVERAGE AMERICAN EMPLOYER. We are not looking for a frigging charity or a handout. We are not saying �O dear congress, give us a green card and we shall be eternally thankful to thy congress�. That is a wrong strategy and an unnecessary one.We are legal immigrants. We are not looking for amnesty. Just a fair deal for people who stand in line for GC and play by the rules, pay their taxes, protect their status and obey the rule of the law.
We are looking to consolidate an already existing symbiotic relationship. A win-win situation.
C) INFLUENCE CONGRESS.
By this time, anyone who is not living under a rock knows that there is a comprehensive immigration bill coming up before congress. The bill will be introduced, debated and most likely passed. The question is whether or not the retrogression relief measures are included or thrown out.
We need to plan a strategy to
1) Convince congress with FACTS and NUMBERS how the current H1B program has given an edge to US employers and contributed to the society in general and how it is in America�s interest to put this symbiotic relationship on a solid ground by speeding up Employment based green card.
2) To work with congress, devise a strategy to meet them in person, as many as possible. Create an A-list of senators and congressmen who have the most say in committees and sub-committee hearings. We would work to communicate and convince these men first and then have a message machine to send a blanket message to ALL.
If you are still not convinced and go with someone else or go with do-nothing-and-hope-for-best strategy, then go ahead.
OTHERWISE register and participate. And you wont lose a dime by doing that.
I agree that its hard to trust someone you�ve never met and get involved in discussing strategy, participate etc let alone cut a check of $50.
LET ME BE CLEAR ABOUT SOMETHING HERE:
I have no vested interested in diverting people from any website to any website and re-divert people from one organization to another. If you know someone who works for you and you trust � fine. Go with it.
I personally am really really mad at the retrogression going on in EB GC. I applied for my Labor in Sept 2004. Got it approved in June 2005. I have been sitting on my hands since. I-140 is in process. With the speed things are going now, I will have GC no sooner than 6 years.
AND I AM JUST MAD THAT AFTER ALL THESE YEARS�I CAN�T EVEN APPLY FOR I-485.
Then I came across this website on the morning of 31st DEC and then looked at immigrationvoice.org. Talked to a couple of people on the phone from immigrationvoice.org. I am going to post tomorrow�s agenda of conference call RIGHT HERE.
If you want to participate in this call, either to suggest ideas or to check out if we are legit or not, just register on immigrationvoice.org (ITS FREE) and send an email with your phone numbers (its free) so that we can verify that you are legit and not a heckler who is going to disrupt the conference call.
If you still are not convinced and trust someone else, go with it.
Another thing�immigrationvoice.org is only 4 days old. Bear with us if we are not perfect. But we will surely be fully functional with all the bells and whistles before you know it.
AGENDA for tomorrow�s conference call:
A) GENERATE PUBLICITY ABOUT IMMIGRATIONVOICE.ORG.
Spread the word that this website is going to consolidate all efforts to have provisions to eliminate retrogression. Convince people that immigrationvoice.org is legit and operated by people WHO DON�T HAVE GC/CITIZENSHIP and are waiting in line for GC.
B) GATHER FACTS FROM BOOKS, AUTHENTIC SOURCES.
There are at least 3 books out there that deal with exodus of talent from this country either due to cultural reasons or due to hostile immigration policy. These books claim that there is competition for talent out there (�Talent� being people like H1Bs, researchers, engineers etc) between US and other countries and USA IS LOSING. Check out �Flight Capital� by David Heenan and �The flight of the creative class� by Richard Florida.
We want those facts to convince congress that eliminating retrogression is not only in an immigrant�s interest, BUT IN THE INTEREST OF AN AVERAGE AMERICAN EMPLOYER. We are not looking for a frigging charity or a handout. We are not saying �O dear congress, give us a green card and we shall be eternally thankful to thy congress�. That is a wrong strategy and an unnecessary one.We are legal immigrants. We are not looking for amnesty. Just a fair deal for people who stand in line for GC and play by the rules, pay their taxes, protect their status and obey the rule of the law.
We are looking to consolidate an already existing symbiotic relationship. A win-win situation.
C) INFLUENCE CONGRESS.
By this time, anyone who is not living under a rock knows that there is a comprehensive immigration bill coming up before congress. The bill will be introduced, debated and most likely passed. The question is whether or not the retrogression relief measures are included or thrown out.
We need to plan a strategy to
1) Convince congress with FACTS and NUMBERS how the current H1B program has given an edge to US employers and contributed to the society in general and how it is in America�s interest to put this symbiotic relationship on a solid ground by speeding up Employment based green card.
2) To work with congress, devise a strategy to meet them in person, as many as possible. Create an A-list of senators and congressmen who have the most say in committees and sub-committee hearings. We would work to communicate and convince these men first and then have a message machine to send a blanket message to ALL.
If you are still not convinced and go with someone else or go with do-nothing-and-hope-for-best strategy, then go ahead.
OTHERWISE register and participate. And you wont lose a dime by doing that.
more...
gkaplan
04-22 01:27 PM
I think i understand:) Thank you.
As I might have already mentioned, i've been working for a company for 2 years now with my EAD, they are willing to sponsor for H1B. so as long as my J principal has a waiver, then my company shoulnd face any problems on applying for a H1B right?
Could you please explain "As long as the H1-B quota is not exhausted and the petition was correctly filed". ? Is there a deadline to apply for H1B ?
i really appreciate your opinoins, thank you very much.
As I might have already mentioned, i've been working for a company for 2 years now with my EAD, they are willing to sponsor for H1B. so as long as my J principal has a waiver, then my company shoulnd face any problems on applying for a H1B right?
Could you please explain "As long as the H1-B quota is not exhausted and the petition was correctly filed". ? Is there a deadline to apply for H1B ?
i really appreciate your opinoins, thank you very much.
hair canon rebel xsi dslr. canon
eeezzz
02-19 01:18 PM
I still don't see where this "spill from EB-1 ABC country to EB-2 ABC country" idea coming from.
We all know there's no fixed number of quota for any country in each EB category. There's only "up to" limit for each country. Although some countries may hit their limit early, but that doesn't mean that is reserved quota for that counrty. Since there's no reserved quota for any country, where is the "spill from EB-1 ABC country to EB-2 ABC country" idea coming from ?
"There is some possibility that India EB-2 could again become available if it appears that the demand for India EB-1 will not exceed the annual limit, but, that determination will not be able to be made until the second half of the fiscal year"
I think this means
1. If EB-3 RoW Current, unused quota goes to other countries which is not current, from EB-1 -> EB-2 -> EB-3, either randomly or again by country limit to use these extra quota.
or
2. If EB-3 Row not current. unused quota goes to other countries which is not current, from EB-1 -> EB-2 ->EB-3, either randomly or again by country limit to use these extra quota at 4th quarter in order to not waste any quota.
We all know there's no fixed number of quota for any country in each EB category. There's only "up to" limit for each country. Although some countries may hit their limit early, but that doesn't mean that is reserved quota for that counrty. Since there's no reserved quota for any country, where is the "spill from EB-1 ABC country to EB-2 ABC country" idea coming from ?
"There is some possibility that India EB-2 could again become available if it appears that the demand for India EB-1 will not exceed the annual limit, but, that determination will not be able to be made until the second half of the fiscal year"
I think this means
1. If EB-3 RoW Current, unused quota goes to other countries which is not current, from EB-1 -> EB-2 -> EB-3, either randomly or again by country limit to use these extra quota.
or
2. If EB-3 Row not current. unused quota goes to other countries which is not current, from EB-1 -> EB-2 ->EB-3, either randomly or again by country limit to use these extra quota at 4th quarter in order to not waste any quota.
more...
kumar1
12-05 10:58 AM
Please do not post news from timesofindia.com over here! This is not a mirror image site of TOI. Besides, timesofindia.com is good for nothing anyway.
They put H1-B/Green Card rumors left and right on the front page. It is propaganda to get more hits and that is where it ends. Thank you.
They put H1-B/Green Card rumors left and right on the front page. It is propaganda to get more hits and that is where it ends. Thank you.
hot canon-digital-rebel-xsi
fundo14
10-15 02:52 PM
I don't think it has anything to do with H1. I think its just a mistake on their part that they issued this to derivative instead of principal applicant. This is because they are asking for intended permanent employer letter and that terms of LC /I-140 is same. This seems typical of standard employment letter RFE that is issued to the principal applicant.
Is there a way you contact the IO to get confirmation if the RFE is for you or principal applicant? Do keep us updated on how your attorney plans to respond to this.
My Attorney is preparing the reply explaining my derivative applicant status, for all others docs like W2's, Tax returns etc. I am anyway submitting.
Is there a way you contact the IO to get confirmation if the RFE is for you or principal applicant? Do keep us updated on how your attorney plans to respond to this.
My Attorney is preparing the reply explaining my derivative applicant status, for all others docs like W2's, Tax returns etc. I am anyway submitting.
more...
house canon rebel xs dslr Buy Canon
gsc999
09-07 12:54 PM
I noticed that California has around 20 names. I know that around 35 to 40 ppl are flying from CA. I think that is would be a similar case with other states.
Guys, this is required info. that will allow us to schedule an appointment with lawmakers. We have to provide this info. to them to receive meeting confirmation.
Please add your information asap, this is urgent and important
Guys, this is required info. that will allow us to schedule an appointment with lawmakers. We have to provide this info. to them to receive meeting confirmation.
Please add your information asap, this is urgent and important
tattoo Canon EOS Rebel XSi Digital
skd
01-09 05:07 PM
Not a bad idea, I don't know what's purpose it will serve, Still just to know...I don't mind this poll.
more...
pictures Canon Digital Rebel XSi
shreekhand
07-25 12:11 PM
Some clarifications needed here !
1.) Data entry is not done by adjudication officers (AO)
2.) Unless an AO is trained in a particular "production line"
(I-485, I-765 etc.) they cannot move them around
3.) Bear in mind AO's have the option to and do work from home too.
4.) The adjudication rate per past service center reports is
around 2 or3 cases per hour for I-485
The assumptions here are all the 50 guys are working only on EB cases no family and other cases, they are not doing any other data entry job like putting 450/ead/ap applications into system, they are not approving any of ead/ap cases. And they are working 8 hours daily. Looking at the general work environment around i bet the productive hrs in 8 hr work day is around 5/6 hrs. So keeping in mind these factors i feel the 80000 is okay number. They certainly need more staff. My 2 cents.
1.) Data entry is not done by adjudication officers (AO)
2.) Unless an AO is trained in a particular "production line"
(I-485, I-765 etc.) they cannot move them around
3.) Bear in mind AO's have the option to and do work from home too.
4.) The adjudication rate per past service center reports is
around 2 or3 cases per hour for I-485
The assumptions here are all the 50 guys are working only on EB cases no family and other cases, they are not doing any other data entry job like putting 450/ead/ap applications into system, they are not approving any of ead/ap cases. And they are working 8 hours daily. Looking at the general work environment around i bet the productive hrs in 8 hr work day is around 5/6 hrs. So keeping in mind these factors i feel the 80000 is okay number. They certainly need more staff. My 2 cents.
dresses canon rebel xsi dslr. PhatBoyG
FinalGC
05-01 10:02 AM
You may be able to reopen the old case, provided the old emploer has not sent a letter to USCIS stating the intent to not persue......if not talk to old employer and lawyer....they may ask you to pay some money for it.....eventually, you may need to work for them for at least 6 months, after getting GC, which will get you legally correct in front of USCIS.
The best thing you can do now is file a new GC with new employer and recapture the 2001 PD. This is possible since your 140 was approved the first time. Make sure the first LC application is similar to the new one. This is only possible, if you keep your calm, negotiate with the old lawyer and get all the LC and 140 approval papers or whatever is needed so that you can PORT the PD and use them for the new case.
I know I am asking you to jump ahead of my case which has a PD of 2005, but hey we are here to help....hope you are able to get this sorted. Just keep calm, remember there is no problem in this world that cannot be solved....your anger will only make you do things that you might regret later.
All the best.
The best thing you can do now is file a new GC with new employer and recapture the 2001 PD. This is possible since your 140 was approved the first time. Make sure the first LC application is similar to the new one. This is only possible, if you keep your calm, negotiate with the old lawyer and get all the LC and 140 approval papers or whatever is needed so that you can PORT the PD and use them for the new case.
I know I am asking you to jump ahead of my case which has a PD of 2005, but hey we are here to help....hope you are able to get this sorted. Just keep calm, remember there is no problem in this world that cannot be solved....your anger will only make you do things that you might regret later.
All the best.
more...
makeup Canon Digital Rebel XSi with
fromnaija
08-18 04:41 PM
If she is here on H4 and while she was here her H1B got approved then there is no problem. As H1B is not VISA and its intent to hire. Infact if she wanted to to Join work on H1B, she will need to apply status change application for H4 to H1B.
No, not correct. Since she got a new I-94 her status changed to H1 w.e.f October 1, 2008.
However, because she did not work she is currently out of status. She will have to change her status back to H4 either by going out of country and re-entering with H4 visa or filing I-539.
No, not correct. Since she got a new I-94 her status changed to H1 w.e.f October 1, 2008.
However, because she did not work she is currently out of status. She will have to change her status back to H4 either by going out of country and re-entering with H4 visa or filing I-539.
girlfriend canon eos rebel xs dslr camera
javadeveloper
09-27 04:30 PM
Hi All,
I received the I-485 reciept notice yesterday from my lawyer (see below for my info), but the alien number on I-485 is different from the number on my approved I-140. My I-140 has a number starting with A099, but my I-485 reciept notice has a number starting with A088. Someone in this forum mentioned that A099 is for the primary applicant and A088 is for the dependant. I am the primary applicant for I-485, so if it is true, I should get A099, not A088. I am not sure if I can have two different alien numbers or if this is a mistake by USCIS. Is anyone in the same situation?
I am sorry if this issue is discussed previously (I couldn't find the related thread). I would greatly appreciate your input.
Thank you very much.
-------------------------------------------------------------
EB1 ROW
PD: 08/2006
140: approved in 06/2007 (NSC)
485 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
765 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
131 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
FP notice recieved on 09/24/07
FP appointment (self and spouse): 10/16/07
I have same issue:
My paralegals response:
He gave USCIS's Ph# and asked me to call them
USCIS's response:
Don't worry , during 485's approval time USCIS will find that I have two A#'s and consolidate those two numbers.
Now as per other members , do I need to raise this issue with IO at the time of Finger printing??? If we do what we can expect from IO at FP office?
I received the I-485 reciept notice yesterday from my lawyer (see below for my info), but the alien number on I-485 is different from the number on my approved I-140. My I-140 has a number starting with A099, but my I-485 reciept notice has a number starting with A088. Someone in this forum mentioned that A099 is for the primary applicant and A088 is for the dependant. I am the primary applicant for I-485, so if it is true, I should get A099, not A088. I am not sure if I can have two different alien numbers or if this is a mistake by USCIS. Is anyone in the same situation?
I am sorry if this issue is discussed previously (I couldn't find the related thread). I would greatly appreciate your input.
Thank you very much.
-------------------------------------------------------------
EB1 ROW
PD: 08/2006
140: approved in 06/2007 (NSC)
485 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
765 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
131 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
FP notice recieved on 09/24/07
FP appointment (self and spouse): 10/16/07
I have same issue:
My paralegals response:
He gave USCIS's Ph# and asked me to call them
USCIS's response:
Don't worry , during 485's approval time USCIS will find that I have two A#'s and consolidate those two numbers.
Now as per other members , do I need to raise this issue with IO at the time of Finger printing??? If we do what we can expect from IO at FP office?
hairstyles New DSLR Battlemodo: Canon
bluez25
10-28 07:26 PM
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21572&highlight=leaving
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=3305&page=2
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=3305&page=2
panky72
07-21 10:38 PM
Also with regards to BCG vaccine , the skin test comes positive only within 10 years after BCG is given. If you still have a reaction after 10 years then that means that you have a passive TB and it is recommended that you get it treated. I had a long conversation with an Infectious Disease specialist and he mentioned that there is no urgency to start the treatment because of age factor. So if there is a doctor you know who says that you do not need to be treated even after 10 years of taking the BCG , then probably you should change your doctor for the sake of your own health.
I second that. For more info on the subject please see this link which details the link between BCG and positive skin test in layman language.
http://www.pamf.org/patients/bcg_ppd.html
I second that. For more info on the subject please see this link which details the link between BCG and positive skin test in layman language.
http://www.pamf.org/patients/bcg_ppd.html
walking_dude
11-25 06:01 PM
To all IV members (and others), who have decided not to participate in the rally due to various reasons, I request you to give a very serious thought, and consideration, before reaching the final decision.
It's highly critical that we do this Rally and/or Lobby Day before CIR 2009 is introduced. If we miss the CIR next year, it may be difficult to get any relief to our community for many years. I agree with you that times are tough. But if we don't act now, it'll keep getting tougher & tougher.
I don't live near DC, and if you are too, understand where you are coming from. However, there is still several months time for the planned rally. If you book in advance, you should be able to lock-in a lower airfare on a budget airline. It may be a good idea to cash-in any Frequent flyer miles etc. you might be having ( I'm just throwing ideas here)
Get in touch with your State chapter or nearest state active chapter. If enough members like you step forward, you guys can sponsor a few members willing to participate.
If you still think you can't, please pledge or contribute donations/contributions for the planned Rally. If enough members like you, step forward IV may be to sponsor some members willing to participate, but can't due to economic hardship (out of job etc.) IV would also need funds to organize an event of this magnitude, to advertise it and arrange it.
If you decide to contribute now, you can do so by clicking the 'Contribute' option on the Homepage. If you decide to pledge, please post your pledge of support here.
I am confident that we will make it a success with your support.
It's highly critical that we do this Rally and/or Lobby Day before CIR 2009 is introduced. If we miss the CIR next year, it may be difficult to get any relief to our community for many years. I agree with you that times are tough. But if we don't act now, it'll keep getting tougher & tougher.
I don't live near DC, and if you are too, understand where you are coming from. However, there is still several months time for the planned rally. If you book in advance, you should be able to lock-in a lower airfare on a budget airline. It may be a good idea to cash-in any Frequent flyer miles etc. you might be having ( I'm just throwing ideas here)
Get in touch with your State chapter or nearest state active chapter. If enough members like you step forward, you guys can sponsor a few members willing to participate.
If you still think you can't, please pledge or contribute donations/contributions for the planned Rally. If enough members like you, step forward IV may be to sponsor some members willing to participate, but can't due to economic hardship (out of job etc.) IV would also need funds to organize an event of this magnitude, to advertise it and arrange it.
If you decide to contribute now, you can do so by clicking the 'Contribute' option on the Homepage. If you decide to pledge, please post your pledge of support here.
I am confident that we will make it a success with your support.
No comments:
Post a Comment