vbkris77
07-02 12:39 PM
That's my point. If we don't have volume.. All these letters will endup in recycle. Do we have a solution? No. .We don't.. we will just post and post in forums!!! later check LUDs..
wallpaper tattoo Blake Lively stuns in
AZ_GC
08-22 07:10 PM
I absolutely agee with Franklin.
kondur_007
02-22 08:29 PM
Hi All,
I filed my I485 in 08/05 and my labor date is 07/05 in perm. My I140 got approved in 2007.
I was in bench for around 6 months in 2008 starting from Jan 1st to 06/20th. I took full time position in last week of 06/08 and continuing in the same job. I got RFE on my I485 and asked for employment verification in 12/09. My attorney replied with presnt employment letter and applied for AC21 also at the same time. Now i got another RFE asking for last 5 years employment letter, w-2 forms and tax returns.
Can some one please let me know how i can handle the period that i was in bench in 2008.
Thanks,
Chandra.
Follow the advise of your lawyer.
Following is my take on this (I am not a lawyer):
- I dont think you need to have "continuous employment". (I am assuming that you were not any employement visa (H1) during the "bench period"
- You already have EVL letter that states that "a permanent job -same or similar- is ready for you once you get your GC"--that is your AC21
- Your 485 was filed way before "bench period".
- During the bench period if you were only with "pending 485 authorized period of stay" (ie. not on H visa), you were not "required" to maintain employment any way. (If you were on any employment visa, you are out of status during that period).
So my advise: Just submit all the documents related to your employment history. Do not lie or falsify any information. You will be just fine.
Again, this is just my opinion. Follow the lawyer's advise.
Good Luck.
I filed my I485 in 08/05 and my labor date is 07/05 in perm. My I140 got approved in 2007.
I was in bench for around 6 months in 2008 starting from Jan 1st to 06/20th. I took full time position in last week of 06/08 and continuing in the same job. I got RFE on my I485 and asked for employment verification in 12/09. My attorney replied with presnt employment letter and applied for AC21 also at the same time. Now i got another RFE asking for last 5 years employment letter, w-2 forms and tax returns.
Can some one please let me know how i can handle the period that i was in bench in 2008.
Thanks,
Chandra.
Follow the advise of your lawyer.
Following is my take on this (I am not a lawyer):
- I dont think you need to have "continuous employment". (I am assuming that you were not any employement visa (H1) during the "bench period"
- You already have EVL letter that states that "a permanent job -same or similar- is ready for you once you get your GC"--that is your AC21
- Your 485 was filed way before "bench period".
- During the bench period if you were only with "pending 485 authorized period of stay" (ie. not on H visa), you were not "required" to maintain employment any way. (If you were on any employment visa, you are out of status during that period).
So my advise: Just submit all the documents related to your employment history. Do not lie or falsify any information. You will be just fine.
Again, this is just my opinion. Follow the lawyer's advise.
Good Luck.
2011 2011 Blake Lively Photos,
kumjay
06-24 11:20 PM
There is one more option for you. H1 and L1 employees can go on long paid/unpaid leaves. If her company can support with document that she was on an unpaid leave for any reason (I do not know the reasons...make something) then there are chances that she will be able to change her status back to H4. All you have to prove that there was a good faith employee employer relationship for that particular duration. Talk to a lawyer, explain the situation..........every passing day is making your situation worse. Good Luck.
more...
.jpg "friend Blake blake lively")
va_12_2004
06-29 07:14 AM
Hi:
Lot of people get stuck in the name check in AOS, and many of them wait for at least 6 months. I am wondering if someone may get stuck in namcecheck and may have to wait for months in home country while doing cp?
Thanks
Lot of people get stuck in the name check in AOS, and many of them wait for at least 6 months. I am wondering if someone may get stuck in namcecheck and may have to wait for months in home country while doing cp?
Thanks
rangeela
02-07 11:19 AM
This is not new, I was advised the same by my attorneys. I have heard "internet rumors" of people successfully filing EB-2 for job descriptions such as senior software engineer and senior systems analyst, which are normally classified as job zone 4. However, I was advised by two different law firms that this is not possible. According to both attorneys I consulted, you must get a job zone 5 classification to file EB-2. Note that "information technology manager" is job zone 5, so if you're in a senior position and supervising people (e.g., a manager or even a team lead), you may be able to obtain this classification.
- gs
Thank you all for the responses.
I am EB-ROW and EB2 is current for me.
GoneSouth,
you said "you must get a job zone 5 classification to file EB-2. Note that "information technology manager" is job zone 5". I am not in a manager position. I am software engineer/developer.
Is there any way EB2 can be filed. What should I tell my compary lawyer? I told him my friends in other companies are able to file EB2. they are also software developers. He says "The other companies should not be able to file EB2 for software engineers but I can't say what another company's hiring history would allow and what they are willing to risk in filing a case which surpasses the minimum requirements allowed by DOL."
How do I convince him. Is there any documentation or link which I can show him which states that software developers can file EB2?
Thanks again all..
- gs
Thank you all for the responses.
I am EB-ROW and EB2 is current for me.
GoneSouth,
you said "you must get a job zone 5 classification to file EB-2. Note that "information technology manager" is job zone 5". I am not in a manager position. I am software engineer/developer.
Is there any way EB2 can be filed. What should I tell my compary lawyer? I told him my friends in other companies are able to file EB2. they are also software developers. He says "The other companies should not be able to file EB2 for software engineers but I can't say what another company's hiring history would allow and what they are willing to risk in filing a case which surpasses the minimum requirements allowed by DOL."
How do I convince him. Is there any documentation or link which I can show him which states that software developers can file EB2?
Thanks again all..
more...
reddymjm
10-06 11:32 AM
BUT Nothing can be done till Jan 09. eb3 - i 03/03. Little hope could be EB3 ROW becoming current.
2010 Blake Lively and Ryan Gosling
gsc999
05-29 02:25 PM
Nola,
Thanks for clarifying. IV appreciates support from LGBT community. You have done amazing amount of work for IV in the recent past. Some of the Bay area folks still remember your leadership at 5K run at San Francisco Golden Gate. You created a decent amount of buzz by bringing along your friends all the way to California.
IV members: Having said that, I would just like to remind some IV members to be mindful of the fact that we enjoy support from diverse groups of people and it makes sense to extend reciprocal courtesy when responding to some of the posts here e.g. the UAFA bill etc.
Cheers!
g
Weldonsprings, you might be mistaken about the UAFA bill which is up for a vote on June 3, 2009. The intent of the UAFA is to allow US Citizens and permanent residents to sponsor their foreign-born partners for permanent residency by means of demonstrating a "permanent partnership". Let me re-emphasize, this bill is geared primarily for the LGBT Community of which I am a proud member, so if you are supporting this bill, my thanks to you.
[QUOTE=WeldonSprings;343823]That is correct! The bills in the house and senate coming up for discussion does not mention visa re-capture. However, Please look at the titles-don't they sound the same. The contents are different. The content of S.424 is to give permanent residents the same STATUS as US citizens so that they can sponsor their wives, parents, brothers, sisters and doggies...So an amendment is necessary. That's why I have written in the original post-
Thanks for clarifying. IV appreciates support from LGBT community. You have done amazing amount of work for IV in the recent past. Some of the Bay area folks still remember your leadership at 5K run at San Francisco Golden Gate. You created a decent amount of buzz by bringing along your friends all the way to California.
IV members: Having said that, I would just like to remind some IV members to be mindful of the fact that we enjoy support from diverse groups of people and it makes sense to extend reciprocal courtesy when responding to some of the posts here e.g. the UAFA bill etc.
Cheers!
g
Weldonsprings, you might be mistaken about the UAFA bill which is up for a vote on June 3, 2009. The intent of the UAFA is to allow US Citizens and permanent residents to sponsor their foreign-born partners for permanent residency by means of demonstrating a "permanent partnership". Let me re-emphasize, this bill is geared primarily for the LGBT Community of which I am a proud member, so if you are supporting this bill, my thanks to you.
[QUOTE=WeldonSprings;343823]That is correct! The bills in the house and senate coming up for discussion does not mention visa re-capture. However, Please look at the titles-don't they sound the same. The contents are different. The content of S.424 is to give permanent residents the same STATUS as US citizens so that they can sponsor their wives, parents, brothers, sisters and doggies...So an amendment is necessary. That's why I have written in the original post-
more...
Macaca
08-12 06:08 PM
In fall 2003, an applicant filed a green card application, which remained pending due to FBI name checks until spring 2007. During the course of the adjudication, the applicant was fingerprinted and applied for interim benefits several times.
Although the applicant applied for most of the interim benefits in a timely manner, the filing of the last EAD was not timely, and the applicant had to end his employment. In correspondence to the Ombudsman in the winter of 2007, the applicant related that he is a cancer patient who no longer has income necessary to pay for treatments. (page 40)
A green card application filed in late spring 2003 with a service center remains pending. The applicant filed his fourth EAD in the fall of 2006. In January 2007, the applicant needed the EAD to continue employment, but had not yet received it more than 90 days after filing. As advised by USCIS, the applicant visited the USCIS field office to obtain an interim EAD. At the field office, USCIS told the applicant it no longer issues interim EADs. USCIS gave the applicant a form to request an interim EAD, which the applicant filed with the service center but received no response.28 The applicant contacted the Ombudsman in February 2007. The applicant�s green card application remains pending, while the interim EAD was approved late. (page 17)
Although the applicant applied for most of the interim benefits in a timely manner, the filing of the last EAD was not timely, and the applicant had to end his employment. In correspondence to the Ombudsman in the winter of 2007, the applicant related that he is a cancer patient who no longer has income necessary to pay for treatments. (page 40)
A green card application filed in late spring 2003 with a service center remains pending. The applicant filed his fourth EAD in the fall of 2006. In January 2007, the applicant needed the EAD to continue employment, but had not yet received it more than 90 days after filing. As advised by USCIS, the applicant visited the USCIS field office to obtain an interim EAD. At the field office, USCIS told the applicant it no longer issues interim EADs. USCIS gave the applicant a form to request an interim EAD, which the applicant filed with the service center but received no response.28 The applicant contacted the Ombudsman in February 2007. The applicant�s green card application remains pending, while the interim EAD was approved late. (page 17)
hair Sophie+monks+tattoos
GT7481
07-20 02:33 PM
Delivered July 2 @9:01am Fedex,
I spoke to a IO from Nebraska center ,they said my data is not in the system.She said no memo has been issued how to process the July 2nd cases,but they will process all the other cases according to VB 107.when i asked more she said she cannot give me any more information i asked her should i resubmit , she did not comment on that i was totally surprised when i asked her when the cheque will be cashed she said october, I again asked her and told her it is not for H1 b it is for I 485 again she said october.Did you any of you guys call the USCIS ??
I spoke to a IO from Nebraska center ,they said my data is not in the system.She said no memo has been issued how to process the July 2nd cases,but they will process all the other cases according to VB 107.when i asked more she said she cannot give me any more information i asked her should i resubmit , she did not comment on that i was totally surprised when i asked her when the cheque will be cashed she said october, I again asked her and told her it is not for H1 b it is for I 485 again she said october.Did you any of you guys call the USCIS ??
more...
walking_dude
12-12 10:38 AM
I did create a poll to make a guesstimate of how many are ready to march in Detroit (when the weather was much better !).
Guess what only 14 members showed interest ! 14 members strolling down Detroit riverfront in freezing sub-zero temperatures - do you call it a rally?
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=15456
When we conducted D.C. rally, there were roughly 1500 people attended. Each member has his/her own reason for not attending the rally.
The reasons could be, taking a day off from work or to far from their place etc..,
As a first step……..:)
Why don’t we plan for rally on the same day, same time at various major cities? This would enable members to attend in their respective cities.
We knew that, we are 25K+ members strong and can hold rallies/protests, where we have (major cities) at least 100+ members.
We must invite media and local US leader’s for rally and show our strength and request them to work towards the Green Cards.
Why don’t we plan for a rally during the this Christmas season?
Guess what only 14 members showed interest ! 14 members strolling down Detroit riverfront in freezing sub-zero temperatures - do you call it a rally?
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=15456
When we conducted D.C. rally, there were roughly 1500 people attended. Each member has his/her own reason for not attending the rally.
The reasons could be, taking a day off from work or to far from their place etc..,
As a first step……..:)
Why don’t we plan for rally on the same day, same time at various major cities? This would enable members to attend in their respective cities.
We knew that, we are 25K+ members strong and can hold rallies/protests, where we have (major cities) at least 100+ members.
We must invite media and local US leader’s for rally and show our strength and request them to work towards the Green Cards.
Why don’t we plan for a rally during the this Christmas season?
hot friend Blake blake lively
Suva
05-25 04:50 PM
Myself and my friend are eager to join with guys at DC. We are still not confirmed due to work pressure. Is there anybody to give us a lift from NJ. We are located in central NJ.
What is everyone doing about hotel stay at DC?
Thanks
What is everyone doing about hotel stay at DC?
Thanks
more...
house tattoo Blake Lively blake
sanju
11-15 11:36 AM
Guys,
Thats what my Question is......how i am gonna prove it i paid 3k for my H1. They are deducting 500 (for my H1) everymonth from my paycheck in the name of CASH ADVANCE DEDUCTION.
I really want to teach them a lesson....so that they stop messing many vulenerable people like me who go to them every year. Could somebody tell me how i am gonna complain DOL in new jersey about this company and does DOL really takes any action.
Greencard is not i am much looking for......i am planning to go back to india after 2-3 years.
Thnx
Here is the starting point. One way to do this to start from 'Wage & Hour Division' of US DOL. In NJ, this could be reported to the district office of US DOL at the following contact information.
http://www.dol.gov/esa/whd/america2.htm#NewJersey
Will soon post specific regulation that says your employer cannot deduct H1 fee from your paycheck. Although, no one is going to dispute that, it is always good to keep it available to show it to DOL officer to put additional weight in your conversation, so that DOL officer knows that you have done your research and know the rules and regulations.
http://www.dol.gov/esa/whd/forms/wh-4.pdf
Also, DOL will tell you to file WH-4 form. They will assure you that you identity will will kept confidential. So you will never have to tell your employer that you are the one you cmplaint. They will simply plan a visit to your employer's office and summon all the records. And the truth will be know.
All the Best.
.
Thats what my Question is......how i am gonna prove it i paid 3k for my H1. They are deducting 500 (for my H1) everymonth from my paycheck in the name of CASH ADVANCE DEDUCTION.
I really want to teach them a lesson....so that they stop messing many vulenerable people like me who go to them every year. Could somebody tell me how i am gonna complain DOL in new jersey about this company and does DOL really takes any action.
Greencard is not i am much looking for......i am planning to go back to india after 2-3 years.
Thnx
Here is the starting point. One way to do this to start from 'Wage & Hour Division' of US DOL. In NJ, this could be reported to the district office of US DOL at the following contact information.
http://www.dol.gov/esa/whd/america2.htm#NewJersey
Will soon post specific regulation that says your employer cannot deduct H1 fee from your paycheck. Although, no one is going to dispute that, it is always good to keep it available to show it to DOL officer to put additional weight in your conversation, so that DOL officer knows that you have done your research and know the rules and regulations.
http://www.dol.gov/esa/whd/forms/wh-4.pdf
Also, DOL will tell you to file WH-4 form. They will assure you that you identity will will kept confidential. So you will never have to tell your employer that you are the one you cmplaint. They will simply plan a visit to your employer's office and summon all the records. And the truth will be know.
All the Best.
.
tattoo Blake Lively on March 31, 2011
raysaikat
07-08 07:39 PM
I do have a copy of I-140 approval notice and also I do have a copy of the labor petition, but do not have the job code.
Attorney said that they have represented Employer also along with the employee and hence they need an authorization from Employer in order to answer any questions or to do any thing with my pending I-485.
Either this is not an honest statement (or an excuse for not working on the case if you already paid him/her), or the lawyer is not competent. You are better off with a new lawyer. Simply contact another good lawyer. S/he will file a G-28 form.
Attorney said that they have represented Employer also along with the employee and hence they need an authorization from Employer in order to answer any questions or to do any thing with my pending I-485.
Either this is not an honest statement (or an excuse for not working on the case if you already paid him/her), or the lawyer is not competent. You are better off with a new lawyer. Simply contact another good lawyer. S/he will file a G-28 form.
more...
pictures tattoo lake lively up
Macaca
08-14 12:19 PM
Please post verifiable #s (from DOL) for backlogged labor certifications cases. Thanks!
dresses tattoo Blake Lively Ball Gown
jsb
08-03 02:19 PM
Let us say USCIS has unused visas, which they want to allocate and they have moved cutoff dates to Jun, 2006 for EB2, similarly Sep 03 for EB3.
My question is, will the visa issuance would be in the order of Priority Dates? or Notification Dates? Recently there has been lot of pressure on USCIS to issue processing results based on Priority Dates, will this force USCIS to correct its ways and issue visas based on Priority Dates.
I might have digressed a little bit on the topic of predicting cutoff dates but this question is lingering among all the IV folks who would be current or already current.
USCIS procedures suggest that for preadjudicated cases, they assign visas in order of PD, which should be the case now as focus appears to be on preadjudication. However, if there are no preadjudicated cases, as seemingly was the case last year, they have no way to do it in PD sequence. In that case, they pick files case by case in sequence of receive date (not the RD on your receipt, but the date when someone entered case data, which is close to ND) which works better for USCIS (but not for us) with wide open cut off dates.
My question is, will the visa issuance would be in the order of Priority Dates? or Notification Dates? Recently there has been lot of pressure on USCIS to issue processing results based on Priority Dates, will this force USCIS to correct its ways and issue visas based on Priority Dates.
I might have digressed a little bit on the topic of predicting cutoff dates but this question is lingering among all the IV folks who would be current or already current.
USCIS procedures suggest that for preadjudicated cases, they assign visas in order of PD, which should be the case now as focus appears to be on preadjudication. However, if there are no preadjudicated cases, as seemingly was the case last year, they have no way to do it in PD sequence. In that case, they pick files case by case in sequence of receive date (not the RD on your receipt, but the date when someone entered case data, which is close to ND) which works better for USCIS (but not for us) with wide open cut off dates.
more...
makeup tattoo Sexy Blake Lively Heats
sunny1000
07-09 02:57 PM
Aaj nahin uthogey toh kab uthogey....
means.....
If not today, when shall you wake up????
Thanks
means.....
If not today, when shall you wake up????
Thanks
girlfriend tattoo Who Made It? Blake
sanjeev_2004
08-22 03:51 PM
Jun 2004 EB2. how much time it will take to get the GC.
hairstyles featured lake lively and
Hassan11
07-20 02:45 PM
The short answer is most republicans voted yes for the senator Cornyn's bill to recapture the unused employment -based visas from previous years and almost all Democrats voted No (except Murray democrat from Washington voted yes for the bill. I guess Microsoft does have influencial power on the senator from Washington state)
see the info here about bill: http://www.immigration-law.com/Canada.html
Yesterday, Senator Cornyn introduced on the Senate floor Amendment 2339 to H.R. 2669, FY 2008 Budget, proposing the following temporaary relieffor the employment-based immigrants. Sadly, the bill was rejected by 55 Nays, 40 Yeas, and one No Vote. Do your want to know who voted against this bill? Click here.
SEC. __. EMPLOYMENT-BASED VISAS.
(a) Recapture of Unused Employment-Based Immigrant Visas.--Section 106(d) of the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-first Century Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-313; 8 U.S.C. 1153 note) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by inserting ``1994, 1996, 1997, 1998,'' after ``available in fiscal year'';
(B) by striking ``or 2004'' and inserting ``2004, or 2006''; and
(C) by striking ``be available'' and all that follows and inserting the following: ``be available only to--
``(A) employment-based immigrants under paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1153(b));
``(B) the family members accompanying or following to join such employment-based immigrants under section 203(d) of such Act; and
``(C) those immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor.''; and
(2) in paragraph (2)--
(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``1999 through 2004'' and inserting ``1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006''; and
(B) in subparagraph (B), by amending clause (ii) to read as follows:
``(ii) DISTRIBUTION OF VISAS.--The total number of visas made available under paragraph (1) from unused visas from fiscal years 1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006 shall be distributed as follows:
``(I) The total number of visas made available for immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor shall be 61,000.
``(II) The visas remaining from the total made available under subclause (I) shall be allocated equally among employment-based immigrants with approved petitions under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (and their family members accompanying or following to join).''.
(b) H-1B Visa Availability.--Section 214(g)(1)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(g)(1)(A)) is amended--
(1) in clause (vi), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) by redesignating clause (vii) as clause (ix); and
(3) by inserting after clause (vi) the following:
``(vii) 65,000 in each of fiscal years 2004 through 2007
``(viii) 115,000 in fiscal year 2008; and''.
This reporter asks the readers to join him to extend our "THANK YOU" to the Senator Cornyn for continuously supporting the American businesses, foreign brains, and employment-based immigration. This reporter also urges the readers to send a thank-you email for his support.
We are proud of the Senators from Minnesota, Norm Coleman (R) and Amy Klochubar, by setting aside the partisan politics and casting bi-parisan support for this bill. THANK YOU, and THANK!!
here is the list of the senators of their votes:
U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 110th Congress - 1st Session
as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate
Vote Summary
Question: On the Motion (Motion to Waive Cornyn Amdt No. 2339 )
Vote Number: 266 Vote Date: July 19, 2007, 11:00 PM
Required For Majority: 3/5 Vote Result: Motion Rejected
Amendment Number: S.Amdt. 2339 to S.Amdt. 2327 to H.R. 2669 (College Cost Reduction Act of 2007 )
Statement of Purpose: To provide interim relief for shortages in employment-based visas for aliens with extraordinary ability and advanced degrees and for nurses.
Vote Counts: YEAs 55
NAYs 40
Not Voting 5
Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State
Alphabetical by Senator Name Akaka (D-HI), Nay
Alexander (R-TN), Yea
Allard (R-CO), Yea
Barrasso (R-WY), Yea
Baucus (D-MT), Yea
Bayh (D-IN), Yea
Bennett (R-UT), Yea
Biden (D-DE), Nay
Bingaman (D-NM), Nay
Bond (R-MO), Yea
Boxer (D-CA), Nay
Brown (D-OH), Nay
Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting
Bunning (R-KY), Yea
Burr (R-NC), Yea
Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting
Cantwell (D-WA), Yea
Cardin (D-MD), Nay
Carper (D-DE), Nay
Casey (D-PA), Nay
Chambliss (R-GA), Yea
Clinton (D-NY), Nay
Coburn (R-OK), Yea
Cochran (R-MS), Yea
Coleman (R-MN), Yea
Collins (R-ME), Yea
Conrad (D-ND), Nay
Corker (R-TN), Yea
Cornyn (R-TX), Yea
Craig (R-ID), Yea
Crapo (R-ID), Yea
DeMint (R-SC), Yea
Dodd (D-CT), Nay
Dole (R-NC), Yea
Domenici (R-NM), Yea
Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Durbin (D-IL), Nay
Ensign (R-NV), Yea
Enzi (R-WY), Yea
Feingold (D-WI), Nay
Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Graham (R-SC), Yea
Grassley (R-IA), Yea
Gregg (R-NH), Yea
Hagel (R-NE), Yea
Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting
Kennedy (D-MA), Nay
Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Kyl (R-AZ), Yea
Landrieu (D-LA), Yea
Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay
Leahy (D-VT), Nay
Levin (D-MI), Nay
Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Lincoln (D-AR), Nay
Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Martinez (R-FL), Yea
McCain (R-AZ), Yea
McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Murkowski (R-AK), Yea
Murray (D-WA), Yea
Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Pryor (D-AR), Nay
Reed (D-RI), Nay
Reid (D-NV), Nay
Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Schumer (D-NY), Yea
Sessions (R-AL), Nay
Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Smith (R-OR), Yea
Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Specter (R-PA), Yea
Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Sununu (R-NH), Yea
Tester (D-MT), Nay
Thune (R-SD), Yea
Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Warner (R-VA), Yea
Webb (D-VA), Nay
Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State
see the info here about bill: http://www.immigration-law.com/Canada.html
Yesterday, Senator Cornyn introduced on the Senate floor Amendment 2339 to H.R. 2669, FY 2008 Budget, proposing the following temporaary relieffor the employment-based immigrants. Sadly, the bill was rejected by 55 Nays, 40 Yeas, and one No Vote. Do your want to know who voted against this bill? Click here.
SEC. __. EMPLOYMENT-BASED VISAS.
(a) Recapture of Unused Employment-Based Immigrant Visas.--Section 106(d) of the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-first Century Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-313; 8 U.S.C. 1153 note) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by inserting ``1994, 1996, 1997, 1998,'' after ``available in fiscal year'';
(B) by striking ``or 2004'' and inserting ``2004, or 2006''; and
(C) by striking ``be available'' and all that follows and inserting the following: ``be available only to--
``(A) employment-based immigrants under paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1153(b));
``(B) the family members accompanying or following to join such employment-based immigrants under section 203(d) of such Act; and
``(C) those immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor.''; and
(2) in paragraph (2)--
(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``1999 through 2004'' and inserting ``1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006''; and
(B) in subparagraph (B), by amending clause (ii) to read as follows:
``(ii) DISTRIBUTION OF VISAS.--The total number of visas made available under paragraph (1) from unused visas from fiscal years 1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006 shall be distributed as follows:
``(I) The total number of visas made available for immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor shall be 61,000.
``(II) The visas remaining from the total made available under subclause (I) shall be allocated equally among employment-based immigrants with approved petitions under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (and their family members accompanying or following to join).''.
(b) H-1B Visa Availability.--Section 214(g)(1)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(g)(1)(A)) is amended--
(1) in clause (vi), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) by redesignating clause (vii) as clause (ix); and
(3) by inserting after clause (vi) the following:
``(vii) 65,000 in each of fiscal years 2004 through 2007
``(viii) 115,000 in fiscal year 2008; and''.
This reporter asks the readers to join him to extend our "THANK YOU" to the Senator Cornyn for continuously supporting the American businesses, foreign brains, and employment-based immigration. This reporter also urges the readers to send a thank-you email for his support.
We are proud of the Senators from Minnesota, Norm Coleman (R) and Amy Klochubar, by setting aside the partisan politics and casting bi-parisan support for this bill. THANK YOU, and THANK!!
here is the list of the senators of their votes:
U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 110th Congress - 1st Session
as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate
Vote Summary
Question: On the Motion (Motion to Waive Cornyn Amdt No. 2339 )
Vote Number: 266 Vote Date: July 19, 2007, 11:00 PM
Required For Majority: 3/5 Vote Result: Motion Rejected
Amendment Number: S.Amdt. 2339 to S.Amdt. 2327 to H.R. 2669 (College Cost Reduction Act of 2007 )
Statement of Purpose: To provide interim relief for shortages in employment-based visas for aliens with extraordinary ability and advanced degrees and for nurses.
Vote Counts: YEAs 55
NAYs 40
Not Voting 5
Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State
Alphabetical by Senator Name Akaka (D-HI), Nay
Alexander (R-TN), Yea
Allard (R-CO), Yea
Barrasso (R-WY), Yea
Baucus (D-MT), Yea
Bayh (D-IN), Yea
Bennett (R-UT), Yea
Biden (D-DE), Nay
Bingaman (D-NM), Nay
Bond (R-MO), Yea
Boxer (D-CA), Nay
Brown (D-OH), Nay
Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting
Bunning (R-KY), Yea
Burr (R-NC), Yea
Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting
Cantwell (D-WA), Yea
Cardin (D-MD), Nay
Carper (D-DE), Nay
Casey (D-PA), Nay
Chambliss (R-GA), Yea
Clinton (D-NY), Nay
Coburn (R-OK), Yea
Cochran (R-MS), Yea
Coleman (R-MN), Yea
Collins (R-ME), Yea
Conrad (D-ND), Nay
Corker (R-TN), Yea
Cornyn (R-TX), Yea
Craig (R-ID), Yea
Crapo (R-ID), Yea
DeMint (R-SC), Yea
Dodd (D-CT), Nay
Dole (R-NC), Yea
Domenici (R-NM), Yea
Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Durbin (D-IL), Nay
Ensign (R-NV), Yea
Enzi (R-WY), Yea
Feingold (D-WI), Nay
Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Graham (R-SC), Yea
Grassley (R-IA), Yea
Gregg (R-NH), Yea
Hagel (R-NE), Yea
Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting
Kennedy (D-MA), Nay
Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Kyl (R-AZ), Yea
Landrieu (D-LA), Yea
Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay
Leahy (D-VT), Nay
Levin (D-MI), Nay
Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Lincoln (D-AR), Nay
Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Martinez (R-FL), Yea
McCain (R-AZ), Yea
McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Murkowski (R-AK), Yea
Murray (D-WA), Yea
Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Pryor (D-AR), Nay
Reed (D-RI), Nay
Reid (D-NV), Nay
Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Schumer (D-NY), Yea
Sessions (R-AL), Nay
Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Smith (R-OR), Yea
Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Specter (R-PA), Yea
Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Sununu (R-NH), Yea
Tester (D-MT), Nay
Thune (R-SD), Yea
Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Warner (R-VA), Yea
Webb (D-VA), Nay
Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State
stevensjd
07-31 03:13 PM
Please end this BS (B***S***)..
texanmom
09-27 04:37 PM
This was discussed before and I cannot find it now..but here is an extension of the degrees idea.
1. Get everyone involved in the GC process to make a copy of their degrees/ qualifications/ certifications/ patents/ papers/ publications/ etc
2. Format it into standard size (perhaps A4)
3. Get a stamp on each of those sheets that says 'TRASH' or something else - maybe 'REVERSE BRAIN DRAIN' or 'KEEP TALENT IN THE US' - we can work that out. - it has to be bold, in RED, if possible across the page.
4. Get each State Chapter to create a binder/ maybe more if we can get enough participation.
5. We can submit a copy of that to local congressman and senators. We can also put all states together and send that to the White House, perhaps.
This will take a lot of coordination from all state chapter...but it is doable.
Any thoughts???
Please don't shoot me down if you don't like it :) I just wanted to put my 2 cents in :p
1. Get everyone involved in the GC process to make a copy of their degrees/ qualifications/ certifications/ patents/ papers/ publications/ etc
2. Format it into standard size (perhaps A4)
3. Get a stamp on each of those sheets that says 'TRASH' or something else - maybe 'REVERSE BRAIN DRAIN' or 'KEEP TALENT IN THE US' - we can work that out. - it has to be bold, in RED, if possible across the page.
4. Get each State Chapter to create a binder/ maybe more if we can get enough participation.
5. We can submit a copy of that to local congressman and senators. We can also put all states together and send that to the White House, perhaps.
This will take a lot of coordination from all state chapter...but it is doable.
Any thoughts???
Please don't shoot me down if you don't like it :) I just wanted to put my 2 cents in :p
