ThinkTwice
09-20 12:09 AM
I agree with sunny1000, We definetly should consider it
We retain the name Immigration Voice but we add a slogan to it
for xample in a news report it would appear some thing like this -
"" IMMIGRATION VOICE- An organisation of Legal Immigrants, was directly responsible for driving the congress to increase the greencard numbers to 300,000, exclude the family members from the quota and reduce the FBI check times to no more than one month, after such huge success and having achieved their ultimate goal IMMIGRATION VOICE - An organisation of Legal Immigrants has decided to fight for world peace.""
Good point...
Just my 25 cents...;)
We retain the name Immigration Voice but we add a slogan to it
for xample in a news report it would appear some thing like this -
"" IMMIGRATION VOICE- An organisation of Legal Immigrants, was directly responsible for driving the congress to increase the greencard numbers to 300,000, exclude the family members from the quota and reduce the FBI check times to no more than one month, after such huge success and having achieved their ultimate goal IMMIGRATION VOICE - An organisation of Legal Immigrants has decided to fight for world peace.""
Good point...
Just my 25 cents...;)
wallpaper Miley Cyrus#39; father gives her
gcnirvana
08-03 02:55 PM
abhijitp,
Thanks for the update and good to know that we will get an RFE and not a rejection for our EVL.
But on (2), what if we already have an A# from our approved I-140? Is there any other way to know that our application has been accepted??
According to the person I spoke to:
1. I will be issued an RFE if my AOS packet did not contain the EVL
2. Once the A# is issued, that means the application has been accepted, so no outright rejection can happen, however RFEs can be issued at a later date.
Thanks for the update and good to know that we will get an RFE and not a rejection for our EVL.
But on (2), what if we already have an A# from our approved I-140? Is there any other way to know that our application has been accepted??
According to the person I spoke to:
1. I will be issued an RFE if my AOS packet did not contain the EVL
2. Once the A# is issued, that means the application has been accepted, so no outright rejection can happen, however RFEs can be issued at a later date.
StarSun
02-21 11:39 AM
We need members to donate a lot of airmiles!
Please contact vin13 if you want to donate miles or want to use the miles for the DC advocacy event. You have to be registered for the event.
Please contact sukhwinderd 2011carpool@gmail.com for the car pool options. We need members from states within driving distance to DC to make it for the event on both days.
Members please come forward with your donations NOW as it will members who plan to come to DC to use the miles, carpool options. Any delay will cause members to back away from attending the event.
This has to be a collective effort. Members call for action, - here is your chance to help be a part of it.
Please contact vin13 if you want to donate miles or want to use the miles for the DC advocacy event. You have to be registered for the event.
Please contact sukhwinderd 2011carpool@gmail.com for the car pool options. We need members from states within driving distance to DC to make it for the event on both days.
Members please come forward with your donations NOW as it will members who plan to come to DC to use the miles, carpool options. Any delay will cause members to back away from attending the event.
This has to be a collective effort. Members call for action, - here is your chance to help be a part of it.
2011 Miley Cyrus#39; dad Billy Ray is
dilber
07-20 05:37 AM
Here you go - conversion should not impact this as the number of LC approvals remains the same:
Here are all the LC approvals for India in the last seven years.
Year, Total LC Approved, Total India
2007 85112 24573
2006 79782 22298
2005 6133 1350
2004 43582 No Info
2003 62912 No Info
2002 79784 No Info
2001 77921 No Info
2000 70204 No Info
Lets assume about 25% of pre-PERM LCs are India based on post-PERM data. Thus for fiscal 2004 (Oct 2003 thru Sep 2004) the total LC number is 43,852. Assume 25% of that to be India based on PERM data. That gives about 11,000 India LCs in 2004 alone (All EB categories combined). If you assume an average of 2.5 dependents then the number of visas required for all India EB categories for 2004 is 27,500 (11,000*2.5). The regular quota for EB2 and EB3 combined is only about 9,800. That means 17,700 visas have to come from somewhere. I dont think those many visas are remaining for this year. Be prepared to see FIFO thrown under the bus and approvals with PDs that are all over the place. Please critique this analysis without piling on. Thoughts?
EB2 has been on or Apr 2004 for a long time so all the ones before should have got the GC or at least most would have when we are calculation numbers for calculating retrogation We have to consider the numbers in in a particular category 11000 number as you say includes all the EB categories you have to discount out the EB1's because they have got their GCs long back. EB3 will also have to cut out form the calculation because they are not being counted. even if you consider 40% of these to be EB2 (a conservative estimate) then total GC needed including the dependents will be closer to 11000 (Total not just primary) and as Vdlrao and others have shown there should be more than this number available in this fiscal year alone. So I will have to agree with them that the numbers will go back but not all the way to Apr 2004 It should easily come in 2005 range may even come to 2006 since there were very few cases applied during 2005. Also can some one let me know if during 2005 when perm was instigated was regular labor processing also going on or was it completed stopped during that time.
Also conversations will affect this because people converting from EB3 to EB2 will make sure that they port their priority dates and hence if say all the EB3 people from 2003 convert to EB2 and successfully port their dates it will definitely push the dates south of 2003. Did I make sense???
Here are all the LC approvals for India in the last seven years.
Year, Total LC Approved, Total India
2007 85112 24573
2006 79782 22298
2005 6133 1350
2004 43582 No Info
2003 62912 No Info
2002 79784 No Info
2001 77921 No Info
2000 70204 No Info
Lets assume about 25% of pre-PERM LCs are India based on post-PERM data. Thus for fiscal 2004 (Oct 2003 thru Sep 2004) the total LC number is 43,852. Assume 25% of that to be India based on PERM data. That gives about 11,000 India LCs in 2004 alone (All EB categories combined). If you assume an average of 2.5 dependents then the number of visas required for all India EB categories for 2004 is 27,500 (11,000*2.5). The regular quota for EB2 and EB3 combined is only about 9,800. That means 17,700 visas have to come from somewhere. I dont think those many visas are remaining for this year. Be prepared to see FIFO thrown under the bus and approvals with PDs that are all over the place. Please critique this analysis without piling on. Thoughts?
EB2 has been on or Apr 2004 for a long time so all the ones before should have got the GC or at least most would have when we are calculation numbers for calculating retrogation We have to consider the numbers in in a particular category 11000 number as you say includes all the EB categories you have to discount out the EB1's because they have got their GCs long back. EB3 will also have to cut out form the calculation because they are not being counted. even if you consider 40% of these to be EB2 (a conservative estimate) then total GC needed including the dependents will be closer to 11000 (Total not just primary) and as Vdlrao and others have shown there should be more than this number available in this fiscal year alone. So I will have to agree with them that the numbers will go back but not all the way to Apr 2004 It should easily come in 2005 range may even come to 2006 since there were very few cases applied during 2005. Also can some one let me know if during 2005 when perm was instigated was regular labor processing also going on or was it completed stopped during that time.
Also conversations will affect this because people converting from EB3 to EB2 will make sure that they port their priority dates and hence if say all the EB3 people from 2003 convert to EB2 and successfully port their dates it will definitely push the dates south of 2003. Did I make sense???
more...
rajuseattle
07-14 07:14 PM
ajthakur,
U r covered under AC-21 if I-140 is not revoked by your previous employer.
Be truthful to USCIS and using a very good attorney firm drat AC-21 and Employment verification letter to USCIS. Since your PD is current chances are after reviewing the new employment letter USCIS might approve your case.
Please dont waste time in on this forum, instead spend some money to consult Rajeev Khanna or Sheela Murthy, it is worth spending every penny on the advice and their services for invoking AC-21.
Per your RFE notice it looks like, USCIS is only interested in verifying your current employment in the similar profession. good employment verification letter and AC-21 draft is good to save your GC.
RFE might have triggered due to previous H1B transfer, it has nothing to do with your employer revoking I-140. Trust me lot of desi consulting companies dont want to take any "Panga" with USCIS and 99% of the time they just ignore employees leaving them. So dont worry, dial in Murthy or Khanna consulting services and see what's their take on your case. If you are getting any help from new Employer's attorney that will be free of cost to you.
Bottomline you need a competent attorney for answering this RFE and invoking AC-21.
U r covered under AC-21 if I-140 is not revoked by your previous employer.
Be truthful to USCIS and using a very good attorney firm drat AC-21 and Employment verification letter to USCIS. Since your PD is current chances are after reviewing the new employment letter USCIS might approve your case.
Please dont waste time in on this forum, instead spend some money to consult Rajeev Khanna or Sheela Murthy, it is worth spending every penny on the advice and their services for invoking AC-21.
Per your RFE notice it looks like, USCIS is only interested in verifying your current employment in the similar profession. good employment verification letter and AC-21 draft is good to save your GC.
RFE might have triggered due to previous H1B transfer, it has nothing to do with your employer revoking I-140. Trust me lot of desi consulting companies dont want to take any "Panga" with USCIS and 99% of the time they just ignore employees leaving them. So dont worry, dial in Murthy or Khanna consulting services and see what's their take on your case. If you are getting any help from new Employer's attorney that will be free of cost to you.
Bottomline you need a competent attorney for answering this RFE and invoking AC-21.
puddonhead
08-10 07:40 PM
Could you elaborate on how this is a "wishful" reinterpretation of the law?
I have no intention of playing spoilsport if you are taking some good faith initiative. In fact, if there is some campaign launched on this - I will probably even contribute (well - if you are doing something in good faith for a community then I have a moral obligation to support it if it is not harmful for the community).
However, this part "I would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis" souonds wishful to me based on my understanding of what the immigration law says. I spent some time going over the law a couple of years ago - so its possible that my memory may be failing me. If you can show some place in the Immigration law that actually supports this reinterpretation then I will correct myself.
I have no intention of playing spoilsport if you are taking some good faith initiative. In fact, if there is some campaign launched on this - I will probably even contribute (well - if you are doing something in good faith for a community then I have a moral obligation to support it if it is not harmful for the community).
However, this part "I would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis" souonds wishful to me based on my understanding of what the immigration law says. I spent some time going over the law a couple of years ago - so its possible that my memory may be failing me. If you can show some place in the Immigration law that actually supports this reinterpretation then I will correct myself.
more...
PresidentO
02-11 01:19 PM
Read this
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY08-AR-TableV.pdf
and tell us, where do you see 13,000 unused numbers?
Desi3933,
+1
People keep falling for the attorney's sensationalism. If he is so *darn* right, why does not he got to DOS and get an explanation on why they did not extend dates further and why DOS did not do the math right. Just because you have a blog does not mean that you can write what ever you want. Well I guess you could. Obviously, our fellow members think that they really lost a chance at the green card. An attorney writes a piece of crap with out substantiative evidence or an authority such as DOS confirming underutilization of visa numbers and our members go on the roof and start yelling What is IV doing?
If any one has looked at the bills sponsored by congresswoman lofgren in the past congress, one of the bills eliminate the spill over of visas from FB to EB and vice versa. If the numbers are coming into EB from FB this year, FB was the one that was supposed to get numbers from EB last year. As I recall during the final Q of 08, DOS announced that there were 22K visa numbers or what so ever that came in from FB and moved dates all the way into Aug 06 for EB2 India. Hence there must *NOT* have been any spill over last year and DOS unable to walk on the slippery slope actually issued 1120 more visas as you pointed and benefitted AOS applicants.
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY08-AR-TableV.pdf
and tell us, where do you see 13,000 unused numbers?
Desi3933,
+1
People keep falling for the attorney's sensationalism. If he is so *darn* right, why does not he got to DOS and get an explanation on why they did not extend dates further and why DOS did not do the math right. Just because you have a blog does not mean that you can write what ever you want. Well I guess you could. Obviously, our fellow members think that they really lost a chance at the green card. An attorney writes a piece of crap with out substantiative evidence or an authority such as DOS confirming underutilization of visa numbers and our members go on the roof and start yelling What is IV doing?
If any one has looked at the bills sponsored by congresswoman lofgren in the past congress, one of the bills eliminate the spill over of visas from FB to EB and vice versa. If the numbers are coming into EB from FB this year, FB was the one that was supposed to get numbers from EB last year. As I recall during the final Q of 08, DOS announced that there were 22K visa numbers or what so ever that came in from FB and moved dates all the way into Aug 06 for EB2 India. Hence there must *NOT* have been any spill over last year and DOS unable to walk on the slippery slope actually issued 1120 more visas as you pointed and benefitted AOS applicants.
2010 High and dry: Miley Cyrus#39; dad
varshadas
12-14 08:20 PM
Except for myself and Rajeev, no one joined the conference call tonight. C'mmon guys, we need some action here. We all ought to participate in these calls. Writing emails, coming and posting I am in is not going to help. We have to take actions here. I will set up a conference call on another day next week and please make sure you all attend.
Thanks,
Varsha
Thanks,
Varsha
more...
alex99
07-11 07:35 PM
EB3 PERM
Labor Filed: August 27th 2006
I-140 filed at NSC on 12th November
Still waiting for approval
Sent 485 App to NSC on July 2nd....
Regards,
Alex
Labor Filed: August 27th 2006
I-140 filed at NSC on 12th November
Still waiting for approval
Sent 485 App to NSC on July 2nd....
Regards,
Alex
hair Cyrus and her father
lost
02-15 09:24 AM
Anybody from KY attending the event?
more...
desi3933
01-30 02:35 PM
I dont get it, u r a EB3- india (ur profile says that) with SEp 05 PD and you got an RFE on 485? Cos, i know uscis did not even touch eb3 india with any PD of even 2002. something is not right?
Incorrect! This is just a myth. I-485 RFE can be issued and it can be denied when PD is not current.
Read on my post on same thread
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=313977&postcount=14
Incorrect! This is just a myth. I-485 RFE can be issued and it can be denied when PD is not current.
Read on my post on same thread
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=313977&postcount=14
hot miley-cyrus-hannah-montana-the
Buran
02-14 12:30 AM
Dear friends,
I am appalled and disgusted by the mudslinging going on between ROW and India-born applicants. .....
1) Per country quotas in EB immigration cause infighting
I understand your frustration, but the rules are the same for everybody, and if India sends more immigrants to the US then any other country, that\\\'s not the US Government\'s fault.
If there were not per country limits, Indians would consume all those EB visas visas leaving no chance to the applicants from other countries to immigrate to the US legally.
I am appalled and disgusted by the mudslinging going on between ROW and India-born applicants. .....
1) Per country quotas in EB immigration cause infighting
I understand your frustration, but the rules are the same for everybody, and if India sends more immigrants to the US then any other country, that\\\'s not the US Government\'s fault.
If there were not per country limits, Indians would consume all those EB visas visas leaving no chance to the applicants from other countries to immigrate to the US legally.
more...
house miley-cyrus-pole-dancing-3
pitha
06-30 09:30 PM
my attorney says even if you send it today to be delivered on Monday July 2 USCIS might also reject cases delivered on july 2, if visa bulleten is revised on july 2. does anybody have any idea what USCIS did for others workers category, did they reject cases filed after June 5 or reject from June 5 itself (I believe June 5 was the date when DOS said they retrogressed)
My company has just told all employees that became current and were planning on filing in July that the historical revision is VERY likely to happen on Monday or Tuesday. If you have the I-485 documents in your hand SEND THEM NOW!
If not (my case, my lawyer is still getting them ready), hold tight and see what happens. I swear that if USCIS screws me (and thousands more) next week I will join a class-action lawsuit against USCIS. This is outrageous, I couldn't believe the news when I heard it. I just hope it's wrong but even Murphy's site says it's 95-98% likely.
Our stress, frustration, wasted time and money will cost them dearly if they attempt this travesty.
My company has just told all employees that became current and were planning on filing in July that the historical revision is VERY likely to happen on Monday or Tuesday. If you have the I-485 documents in your hand SEND THEM NOW!
If not (my case, my lawyer is still getting them ready), hold tight and see what happens. I swear that if USCIS screws me (and thousands more) next week I will join a class-action lawsuit against USCIS. This is outrageous, I couldn't believe the news when I heard it. I just hope it's wrong but even Murphy's site says it's 95-98% likely.
Our stress, frustration, wasted time and money will cost them dearly if they attempt this travesty.
tattoo Miley Cyrus is not happy that
rajuseattle
07-15 07:14 PM
Thakurji,
Until yesterday you were suggesting your employer asked you to do something which you didnt agree and that forced you to quit him.
today you are changing your version suggesting you are feeling sorry you quit him earlier...what had made this sudden transformation. Anyways thats personal thing between you and your ex-employer.
Anyways we are all happy for the Happy end of this story...that your ex-employer is willing to accept you as employee once he gets you GC and he is going to answer RFE.
I dont think you need any competant attorney now, your ex-employer's attorney should be able to answer the RFE.
cheer up...!!!
Until yesterday you were suggesting your employer asked you to do something which you didnt agree and that forced you to quit him.
today you are changing your version suggesting you are feeling sorry you quit him earlier...what had made this sudden transformation. Anyways thats personal thing between you and your ex-employer.
Anyways we are all happy for the Happy end of this story...that your ex-employer is willing to accept you as employee once he gets you GC and he is going to answer RFE.
I dont think you need any competant attorney now, your ex-employer's attorney should be able to answer the RFE.
cheer up...!!!
more...
pictures Miley+cyrus+and+her+dad+
nojoke
03-01 04:00 AM
But as soon as he talks about his senseless economic plans, Investors pull their money out from the Market. Investors don't see a direction with Obama w.r.t solving this mess. Lack of investor confidence has a direct impact on the main street as companies will have to cut their Opex due to shortage of investment. Government can cut capital gains , lower down the taxes and bring more people to invest in the stock market.
If Obama goes by and spends all that money on government bull crap programs, it will not help private enterprise which in turn won't help in job growth or recovery. With no jobs and less consumer spending, economy will go into further hole with a huge debt.
That has been tried for the past 8 years and all it did was create this mess.
Oh yeah, the private enterprises are hiring people left and right. :rolleyes:You must be from alternate universe or wathcing too much faux news.
If Obama goes by and spends all that money on government bull crap programs, it will not help private enterprise which in turn won't help in job growth or recovery. With no jobs and less consumer spending, economy will go into further hole with a huge debt.
That has been tried for the past 8 years and all it did was create this mess.
Oh yeah, the private enterprises are hiring people left and right. :rolleyes:You must be from alternate universe or wathcing too much faux news.
dresses Meet Miley Cyrus#39; secret half-
nixstor
07-04 09:44 PM
Please stop posting this on every thread. In one line you are just spamming. We all visit Attorney Oh's website often. He does not need any publicity
immigration-law.com
07/04/2007: Status and Issues Involving July 2007 485 Fiasco
* The AILF work on the lawsuit appears to be in progress without any hurdles. It has reported that enough candidates have come forward to participate in the lawsuit as the plaintiffs and it does not need any more candidates to move forward for the lawsuit. Some of other people are likely to be covered as members of the class action regardless of their actual participation in the lawsuit. People should send "THANK YOU" to the AILF Legal Action Center leaders and the attorneys who are actually working on this case. Some contribution to the AILF may be more than appropriate. Please visit the AILF site to learn how they can send in contribution.
#
# We have been asked by the readers to report the alleged conspiracy theory. We declined to do it. However, people may want to know potential issues that should be answered and explored. We will discuss these issues on following hypotehtical premises:
* Presumption of Facts: (1) The I-485 applications have been experiencing a tremendous backlog lately. (2) The causes for the backlog have been known to be delays in the security checks. Some of these applicants have sought a relief in federal courts in the form of mandamus actions. (3) Allegedly, the USCIS pull together local and Service Center employees and pull out pending I-485 cases which were older than six months in backlog, working overtime and during the weekend right before July 1, 2007. This is an assumption at this point. (4) As evidenced by the revised Visa Bulletin, apparently these employees contacted "en mass" the DOS to request the visa numbers for these pending I-485 cases, which the DOS reported in the release of the revised VB turned out exceeding 60,000. (5) The rule requires that the USCIS approves I-485 cases "prior to" to contacting and requesting a visa number. (6) The current USCIS policy and procedure also require that I-485 applications be adjudicated and approved "only after" the completion of clearance of the security checks.
* Issue I: Hypothetically, what happens if the USCIS takes out the visa number before they obtain the security clearace?
o Answer I: Obviously it would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: It will constitue a serious security lapse, compromising the homeland security.
* Issue II: Hypothetically, what hppens if the USCIS requests and takes out the visa numbers prior to adjudication and approval of the pending I-485 applications?
o Answer I: It is evident that the USCIS would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: There could be two probable consequences affecting the backlog I-485 applicants and the new July Visa Bulletin eligible I-485 applicants, shoud the hypothetical facts develop. (1) The backlog I-485 applicants who have been issued I-485 approval notices should not be affected by the fiasco, albeit the potential revocation of the I-485 approvals. In most cases, revocation of the approved I-485 requires the time-consuming immigration court proceedings, assuming that the USCIS has a sufficient cause of action which may be questionable in this case. (2) The backlog I-485 applicants who have yet to receive the approval notice and the USCIS has yet to adjudicate and approve the application might be vulnerable in that the USCIS might be required to return the visa numbers for these cases as there was an error. Hypothetically, these numbers could be returned to the State Department and based on these returned number, the State Department might be required to revise the July Visa Bulletin again.
immigration-law.com
07/04/2007: Status and Issues Involving July 2007 485 Fiasco
* The AILF work on the lawsuit appears to be in progress without any hurdles. It has reported that enough candidates have come forward to participate in the lawsuit as the plaintiffs and it does not need any more candidates to move forward for the lawsuit. Some of other people are likely to be covered as members of the class action regardless of their actual participation in the lawsuit. People should send "THANK YOU" to the AILF Legal Action Center leaders and the attorneys who are actually working on this case. Some contribution to the AILF may be more than appropriate. Please visit the AILF site to learn how they can send in contribution.
#
# We have been asked by the readers to report the alleged conspiracy theory. We declined to do it. However, people may want to know potential issues that should be answered and explored. We will discuss these issues on following hypotehtical premises:
* Presumption of Facts: (1) The I-485 applications have been experiencing a tremendous backlog lately. (2) The causes for the backlog have been known to be delays in the security checks. Some of these applicants have sought a relief in federal courts in the form of mandamus actions. (3) Allegedly, the USCIS pull together local and Service Center employees and pull out pending I-485 cases which were older than six months in backlog, working overtime and during the weekend right before July 1, 2007. This is an assumption at this point. (4) As evidenced by the revised Visa Bulletin, apparently these employees contacted "en mass" the DOS to request the visa numbers for these pending I-485 cases, which the DOS reported in the release of the revised VB turned out exceeding 60,000. (5) The rule requires that the USCIS approves I-485 cases "prior to" to contacting and requesting a visa number. (6) The current USCIS policy and procedure also require that I-485 applications be adjudicated and approved "only after" the completion of clearance of the security checks.
* Issue I: Hypothetically, what happens if the USCIS takes out the visa number before they obtain the security clearace?
o Answer I: Obviously it would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: It will constitue a serious security lapse, compromising the homeland security.
* Issue II: Hypothetically, what hppens if the USCIS requests and takes out the visa numbers prior to adjudication and approval of the pending I-485 applications?
o Answer I: It is evident that the USCIS would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: There could be two probable consequences affecting the backlog I-485 applicants and the new July Visa Bulletin eligible I-485 applicants, shoud the hypothetical facts develop. (1) The backlog I-485 applicants who have been issued I-485 approval notices should not be affected by the fiasco, albeit the potential revocation of the I-485 approvals. In most cases, revocation of the approved I-485 requires the time-consuming immigration court proceedings, assuming that the USCIS has a sufficient cause of action which may be questionable in this case. (2) The backlog I-485 applicants who have yet to receive the approval notice and the USCIS has yet to adjudicate and approve the application might be vulnerable in that the USCIS might be required to return the visa numbers for these cases as there was an error. Hypothetically, these numbers could be returned to the State Department and based on these returned number, the State Department might be required to revise the July Visa Bulletin again.
more...
makeup Billy Ray and Miley Cyrus to
BlueSunD
03-11 12:23 AM
I�m really sorry. I uploaded the wrong image, now fixed. Tahnks for the remark soulty.
Guess I better catch some sleep....:tired:
Guess I better catch some sleep....:tired:
girlfriend Miley Cyrus bong video: Dad
asia2america
01-19 09:40 PM
Hi! I am planning to apply EAD on my own as I could no longer afford to pay my expensive lawyer, but there I am not sure how to answer question 13 in the form which says, "Have you ever before applied for employment authorization from USCIS? Since I was and still am on H1, should I answer yes? Please help. Thanks.
hairstyles Miley Cyrus has spoken out in
bugmenot
07-16 06:17 PM
thats what is needed, someone needs to hit the numbers coz thats what talks here, calculate the amount that all the h1b's combined are paying/have paid so far, amount that directly benefits the social system , and the amount they will never see as they would have to leave
you have to showcase big big numbers i.e h1b tax is paying for so n so etc social dole etc, and that is the money that they have no gaurantee in ever benefetting from. thats the key
you have to showcase big big numbers i.e h1b tax is paying for so n so etc social dole etc, and that is the money that they have no gaurantee in ever benefetting from. thats the key
NKR
10-16 02:09 PM
Second: What happened (the flood of applications) were definitely caused by an ill thought Visa bulletin, but USCIS had no control over the massive amount of applications that they had to deal with. Even commercial operations (amazon etc) break down when overloaded. So to put extensive blame on USCIS for the "reaction" (I assume you are talking about the backlogs) is not right.
I beg to disagree. If it was the visa bulletin, then why did they process newer applications first?. That shows some disorder out there. Even when Amazon breaks up, they set their operations right. Here we are being fed the same story over and over again.
Coming to backlogs, they introduced perm before all the existing labor applications were processed and what happened after that?. All the existing applications were sent to the infamous backlog elimination centers. While those applications were waiting to be picked up, perm applications were being processed left, right and centre.
I beg to disagree. If it was the visa bulletin, then why did they process newer applications first?. That shows some disorder out there. Even when Amazon breaks up, they set their operations right. Here we are being fed the same story over and over again.
Coming to backlogs, they introduced perm before all the existing labor applications were processed and what happened after that?. All the existing applications were sent to the infamous backlog elimination centers. While those applications were waiting to be picked up, perm applications were being processed left, right and centre.
pappu
07-23 03:06 PM
Employment letter is a MUST. Without this letter, your application can be denied without even an RFE. Read the latest USCIS memo. Please tell your lawyer and HR.
No comments:
Post a Comment