cnstudd
07-12 07:00 PM
Can someone please update this thread with your success with G-639 or I-824, requesting a copy of I-140 approval notice?
wallpaper So in short Kareena Kapoor has
AZ_GC
08-22 06:44 PM
Here is what i think ........USCIS works and approves according to RD till 140/485 approval. After this they hand over the case to DOS for visa issuance who work according to PD when allocating visa numbers. Correct me if i am wrong.
coopheal
10-07 11:18 AM
Could be -ve too .We will all be surprised if we see a +ve movement.
We have been watching VBs ever since Jan 2005 when priority dates were added.
. 1/1/2005 10/1/2008
------------------------------------
All - C 1/1/2005
CH - 1/1/2002 10/1/2001
IN - 1/1/2002 7/1/2001
ME - C 7/1/2002
PH - 1/1/2002 1/1/2005
ROW has shown some progress, but CH, IN, ME is behind what was in 2005. Thats almost 4 years after re-introduction of priority dates.
We need a solution now.
We have been watching VBs ever since Jan 2005 when priority dates were added.
. 1/1/2005 10/1/2008
------------------------------------
All - C 1/1/2005
CH - 1/1/2002 10/1/2001
IN - 1/1/2002 7/1/2001
ME - C 7/1/2002
PH - 1/1/2002 1/1/2005
ROW has shown some progress, but CH, IN, ME is behind what was in 2005. Thats almost 4 years after re-introduction of priority dates.
We need a solution now.
2011 Kareena Kapoor is seen on the
mikesin
04-07 06:08 PM
Thanks Karthik but I am just an MS :)
But one thin I enjoy is problem solving and this is one of the hardest out there as it is dynamic.
With Eb3 India the Horizontal spillover methodology kills most hope as there is the large Eb2 India backlog. In 2007(I think) the vertical spillover methodology was followed and Eb3 India got 17000 or so visa numbers. So with Horizontal spillover and no number increase I am sorry to say movement is limited.
Out of curiosity, what are your thoughts on ROW EB3?
But one thin I enjoy is problem solving and this is one of the hardest out there as it is dynamic.
With Eb3 India the Horizontal spillover methodology kills most hope as there is the large Eb2 India backlog. In 2007(I think) the vertical spillover methodology was followed and Eb3 India got 17000 or so visa numbers. So with Horizontal spillover and no number increase I am sorry to say movement is limited.
Out of curiosity, what are your thoughts on ROW EB3?
more...
EndlessWait
04-08 01:56 PM
We all admit, that we haven't served our birth land as much as we have served America. Maybe there is calling here amongst all the turmoil with getting GCs.
Our home country wants us back. I know we have huge issues back in India. Population, Politician :-) etc etc.
Our home country wants us back. I know we have huge issues back in India. Population, Politician :-) etc etc.
clear485
07-04 03:06 PM
I already sent a AC21 letter to USCIS through my Attorney - I am not sure if my file got updated.
My desi employer wants to withdraw the 140 petition now. He says, he cannot keep 140 petitions of employees who leave the organization and not on w2 and he will have "ability to pay issue"
I have heard horror stories of USCIS issuing denials and NOID because AC21 letter never reached the file even though it was sent in time and I guess this is exactly what my desi employer thinks - teach lesson by withdrawing 140.
I spoke to my Attorney and she says "your file may not be updated but we will keep a record that we sent" useful in case we want to respond to NOID or RFE.
Folks - please post your AC21 success/horror stories when previous employer withdrew the 140 petition.
What are my options to avoid a NOID or denial
Thanks in advance
You will not have any problems since you already submitted AC21 documents (keep certified mail receipt with you).....so whatever your attorney said, it is correct....you don't need to worry.....even your employer withdraws your I-140 it won't be having any problem.....it happened in my case....I have sent AC21 docs....after that employer withdraws I-140.....but nothing happened to I-140
"Ability to pay issue" is right in employer's view.....he can able show the ability for one more application if he withdraws your application.....
How did you find your file was not updated AC21 docs..... better way is go to local USCIS and asked your attorney name whether it is the changed one or previous one if you have changed them.....call I800 and asked them few details like attorney name and company name etc..... see some times they won't reveal any info....you have to find out the way to get right answer (like tell them old attorney's name and say didn't get any updated information about your case etc)....
My desi employer wants to withdraw the 140 petition now. He says, he cannot keep 140 petitions of employees who leave the organization and not on w2 and he will have "ability to pay issue"
I have heard horror stories of USCIS issuing denials and NOID because AC21 letter never reached the file even though it was sent in time and I guess this is exactly what my desi employer thinks - teach lesson by withdrawing 140.
I spoke to my Attorney and she says "your file may not be updated but we will keep a record that we sent" useful in case we want to respond to NOID or RFE.
Folks - please post your AC21 success/horror stories when previous employer withdrew the 140 petition.
What are my options to avoid a NOID or denial
Thanks in advance
You will not have any problems since you already submitted AC21 documents (keep certified mail receipt with you).....so whatever your attorney said, it is correct....you don't need to worry.....even your employer withdraws your I-140 it won't be having any problem.....it happened in my case....I have sent AC21 docs....after that employer withdraws I-140.....but nothing happened to I-140
"Ability to pay issue" is right in employer's view.....he can able show the ability for one more application if he withdraws your application.....
How did you find your file was not updated AC21 docs..... better way is go to local USCIS and asked your attorney name whether it is the changed one or previous one if you have changed them.....call I800 and asked them few details like attorney name and company name etc..... see some times they won't reveal any info....you have to find out the way to get right answer (like tell them old attorney's name and say didn't get any updated information about your case etc)....
more...
BECsufferer
09-29 12:54 PM
Guys ... first of all thanks for starting this thread. Worth every bit of space on server.
I am based in Michigan and would like to get in touch with someone locally to guide me in setting up a LLC. Well saying that, I don't mind venturing with like minded people outside MI too. I have few ideas and would like to work on those, these are in products and industry I am working with (Mechanical/ Industrial). However, I think same approach can be used to generate IP in other fields too. So i am open to collaborate with like minded people to benefit from each other. i emphasize on like minded people, because their would be failures too and so need equal buy in.
Neverhteless, what I am saying is if their is an opportunity to collaborate to succeed collectively? Write me back what you think and good Luck.
I am based in Michigan and would like to get in touch with someone locally to guide me in setting up a LLC. Well saying that, I don't mind venturing with like minded people outside MI too. I have few ideas and would like to work on those, these are in products and industry I am working with (Mechanical/ Industrial). However, I think same approach can be used to generate IP in other fields too. So i am open to collaborate with like minded people to benefit from each other. i emphasize on like minded people, because their would be failures too and so need equal buy in.
Neverhteless, what I am saying is if their is an opportunity to collaborate to succeed collectively? Write me back what you think and good Luck.
2010 for u: Hot Kareena Kapoor,
gc_on_demand
06-12 01:01 PM
Most of the folks are missing the point about the prior years approval numbers. All the approvals from 2004 - 2008 are padded with huge visa number from FB spillover and the recapture provision of AC21. From this year onwards we have to live with the usual ~3K per country per category limit. This is the reason why Charles Oppenheim is predicting decade long wait for EB2 I/C and all EB3's. We continue to beat down Oppenheim claim with our own numbers, but he knows more about visa numbers than any one of us.
Let us dream about recapture being a panacea to the problem. There is only limited amount of visa's to be recaptured (~180K) even with that not all categories can become current. Also during that last recapture debates there where lots of suggestions to stagger the usage of recaptured visa over a long time frame like 5 yrs. Even with recapture, the date movement will not be rapid, but it will be remarkably better than what it is now.
Yeah you are right. 180k visas will clean almost will 2006 end but then those 2007 and 2008 onwards has to live with 3k apps. removing counrty cap along with Recapture helps all ..
Let us dream about recapture being a panacea to the problem. There is only limited amount of visa's to be recaptured (~180K) even with that not all categories can become current. Also during that last recapture debates there where lots of suggestions to stagger the usage of recaptured visa over a long time frame like 5 yrs. Even with recapture, the date movement will not be rapid, but it will be remarkably better than what it is now.
Yeah you are right. 180k visas will clean almost will 2006 end but then those 2007 and 2008 onwards has to live with 3k apps. removing counrty cap along with Recapture helps all ..
more...
belmontboy
03-15 10:15 PM
You want to bet with me on this.. I am not wrong here. Why would I scare someone..Even if this is Misdemeanor or felony charges irrespective of wheather this is state or federal it is one's record and every officer at POE has an access to this record.
RV
sure prove me wrong.
If you are telling me that VO or IO has access to all criminal records from all 51 states, i can't stop laughing here.
If they have access, why do they even have a section for declaring voluntarily?? to test honesty of the applicant??
RV
sure prove me wrong.
If you are telling me that VO or IO has access to all criminal records from all 51 states, i can't stop laughing here.
If they have access, why do they even have a section for declaring voluntarily?? to test honesty of the applicant??
hair images Madhuri without makeup
royus77
08-29 04:51 PM
Folks
I need you guys help how to correct My advance parole document
Wrong valid date printed on form I-131(Advance parole document) .
Date of issue : 10/18/2007
Valid till also : 10/18/2007 instead of 10/18/2008
How can I get correct the Valid till date ?
Thanks in advance.
How fast you found the mistake ? By the time USICS acts on your case the AP will be useless ..better apply for a renewal
I need you guys help how to correct My advance parole document
Wrong valid date printed on form I-131(Advance parole document) .
Date of issue : 10/18/2007
Valid till also : 10/18/2007 instead of 10/18/2008
How can I get correct the Valid till date ?
Thanks in advance.
How fast you found the mistake ? By the time USICS acts on your case the AP will be useless ..better apply for a renewal
more...
gaz
08-26 04:22 PM
i do wonder if the poll results from earlier polls if used to compare with the current one would help get an idea of the trend - kind of overlaying the snapshots in different points in time and then determining what the situation was and what is and then extrapolating based on data that is already known/ published by uscis applied to the trend. question is if we have the poll data from earlier polls?
I have also been wondering how to extrapolate this to total numbers. Its probably a good reprsentation of spread. (ie. 1% is 2003 and earlier, 20% are in 2004). but actual numbers???
if you choose to multiply 2004 by 10, we should also multiply the total votes (300) and assume that wehave only 3000 pending485 applications... that does not seem right. More like x75 or x100 based on whatever we have been hearing...
Note that in some cases this is just one person who responded to the poll in a family of 2 or 3. Their PDs are the same (most probably) but the count of cases would need to be adjusted.
I have also been wondering how to extrapolate this to total numbers. Its probably a good reprsentation of spread. (ie. 1% is 2003 and earlier, 20% are in 2004). but actual numbers???
if you choose to multiply 2004 by 10, we should also multiply the total votes (300) and assume that wehave only 3000 pending485 applications... that does not seem right. More like x75 or x100 based on whatever we have been hearing...
Note that in some cases this is just one person who responded to the poll in a family of 2 or 3. Their PDs are the same (most probably) but the count of cases would need to be adjusted.
hot Spotted: Kareena Kapoor
makemygc
07-06 11:30 AM
Guys,
Here are my thoughts:
---------------------
There are Four group of people (Became current with July bulletin) who are affected and suffered.
1) The people whose applications reached to USCIS before 10:00 AM
07/02/07, i.e. before USCIS's new revision/update.
Note: Legally this group is the SAFEST one as their file reached to the
USCIS table on time while USCIS's first bulletin was in effect. Their
case is strong as far as "Law and Justice" is concerned.
2) The people whose applications reached on 07/02/07 but after USCIS's
declaration of new revision.
Note: This group can be fit in a category "Who did not receive ample
notice from USCIS for its intention to change the bulletin. And so
may be considered "Probable beneficiaries" by the judiciary
3) The people whose applications reached or will reach to USCIS from any
time between 12:00 AM 07/03/07 to 11:59 PM 07/31/07.
Note: This group will have a "Strongest" weak argument and case. Their
act of sending files perhaps may not be considered "Law-abiding" as
they have already received ample notice from USCIS and clear
statement of USCIS about "Rejecting applications upon receiving"
then also this group sent the applications.
4) The People who will not send applications at all with respect to the
USCIS's revision.
Note: In my oinion and mostly I believe in Judiciary's opinion thsi group will
be considered "Law-abiding" and who acted as per USCIS's
instruction within the periphery of respecting legal authority.
Now other points to be noted are as under:
-----------------------------------------
DOS and USCIS screwed up? Yes... Did not happen ever and now it happened , yes.. People suffered stress..expenses.. yes. Now what we must stress on is one time bulletin per month is a tradition and it is a long time tradition but probably DOS has a power to change that... It seems that there is no such law that DOS can not do that so there exactly Lawsuite filer may have a week case. Nos USCIS is supposed to follow DOS and make bulletin as per DOS's guideline and that is what USCIS did so where is the "Law-Breaking" ? USCIS acted perfectly in legal manner. Probably if Lawsuite filer decide to file the lawsuite on the basis of "Why the helll USCIS decalred "All Current" at the first place" then there they have a chance to make a case strong but if they go another route like "Why USCIS revised the bulletin" then I personally do not see "much worth".
Now having said this, to me it looks like whether you file till in July or not OR whether you become plantiff or not, it should not matter. AILF and/or any other organization ethically and perhaps legally can not define "Class" narrowly to the limited group of people. If real justice is prevalent in this country judiciary should not allow any entity to define "Class" narrowly. To me "ALL affected" is the "Class" and if judiciary is considering it as a "class action" then it should consider "All affected" as a class. Now US justice system would go this way, I do not know but if it is not going that way then I would consider that as abig black loop hole in justice system itself. My guess is that if AILF would go defining "Class" narrowly, there will be some mechanism by which individually or with group you should be able to challenge that legally as well.
Now Judiciary, in my opinion may not take stand that ok this is a "Class lawsuite" and now Mr.X has become the plantiff so he would only be the beneficary if lawsuite is won. Either ALL affected should be considered for whatever the benefits come out ot everbody looses it. Same argument goes for people who are not filing. By not filing they are obeying the leagl instruction of government department of USA and for that they should not be punished and can not be punished by not granting any benefit to them whereas granting the benefits to the people who clearly challenged USCIS's revision by filing from 07/03 and onwards....
If USCIS is smart, it should accept all files now and create the process to have them rotted in the queue for years and that way it will be able save it face and limit on visa numbers wil automatically send whole bunch of files for eating the dust for years.
I personally see our strong point only at have reimbursement of the money and time if "We are not getting current before one year (Validity of Medicals)
Any thoughts?
How do you define "All effected"?
Here are my thoughts:
---------------------
There are Four group of people (Became current with July bulletin) who are affected and suffered.
1) The people whose applications reached to USCIS before 10:00 AM
07/02/07, i.e. before USCIS's new revision/update.
Note: Legally this group is the SAFEST one as their file reached to the
USCIS table on time while USCIS's first bulletin was in effect. Their
case is strong as far as "Law and Justice" is concerned.
2) The people whose applications reached on 07/02/07 but after USCIS's
declaration of new revision.
Note: This group can be fit in a category "Who did not receive ample
notice from USCIS for its intention to change the bulletin. And so
may be considered "Probable beneficiaries" by the judiciary
3) The people whose applications reached or will reach to USCIS from any
time between 12:00 AM 07/03/07 to 11:59 PM 07/31/07.
Note: This group will have a "Strongest" weak argument and case. Their
act of sending files perhaps may not be considered "Law-abiding" as
they have already received ample notice from USCIS and clear
statement of USCIS about "Rejecting applications upon receiving"
then also this group sent the applications.
4) The People who will not send applications at all with respect to the
USCIS's revision.
Note: In my oinion and mostly I believe in Judiciary's opinion thsi group will
be considered "Law-abiding" and who acted as per USCIS's
instruction within the periphery of respecting legal authority.
Now other points to be noted are as under:
-----------------------------------------
DOS and USCIS screwed up? Yes... Did not happen ever and now it happened , yes.. People suffered stress..expenses.. yes. Now what we must stress on is one time bulletin per month is a tradition and it is a long time tradition but probably DOS has a power to change that... It seems that there is no such law that DOS can not do that so there exactly Lawsuite filer may have a week case. Nos USCIS is supposed to follow DOS and make bulletin as per DOS's guideline and that is what USCIS did so where is the "Law-Breaking" ? USCIS acted perfectly in legal manner. Probably if Lawsuite filer decide to file the lawsuite on the basis of "Why the helll USCIS decalred "All Current" at the first place" then there they have a chance to make a case strong but if they go another route like "Why USCIS revised the bulletin" then I personally do not see "much worth".
Now having said this, to me it looks like whether you file till in July or not OR whether you become plantiff or not, it should not matter. AILF and/or any other organization ethically and perhaps legally can not define "Class" narrowly to the limited group of people. If real justice is prevalent in this country judiciary should not allow any entity to define "Class" narrowly. To me "ALL affected" is the "Class" and if judiciary is considering it as a "class action" then it should consider "All affected" as a class. Now US justice system would go this way, I do not know but if it is not going that way then I would consider that as abig black loop hole in justice system itself. My guess is that if AILF would go defining "Class" narrowly, there will be some mechanism by which individually or with group you should be able to challenge that legally as well.
Now Judiciary, in my opinion may not take stand that ok this is a "Class lawsuite" and now Mr.X has become the plantiff so he would only be the beneficary if lawsuite is won. Either ALL affected should be considered for whatever the benefits come out ot everbody looses it. Same argument goes for people who are not filing. By not filing they are obeying the leagl instruction of government department of USA and for that they should not be punished and can not be punished by not granting any benefit to them whereas granting the benefits to the people who clearly challenged USCIS's revision by filing from 07/03 and onwards....
If USCIS is smart, it should accept all files now and create the process to have them rotted in the queue for years and that way it will be able save it face and limit on visa numbers wil automatically send whole bunch of files for eating the dust for years.
I personally see our strong point only at have reimbursement of the money and time if "We are not getting current before one year (Validity of Medicals)
Any thoughts?
How do you define "All effected"?
more...
house hair akshay kareena wallpaper
chiraj
07-14 06:21 PM
Prudential
Metlifef
NewYork Life
AXA
Originally Posted by 21stIcon
H1B-GC
Premium depends on your age,duration of policy(10/20/30) and place of living if you you do not have any health problems. unless you disclose your age , no one can help you on your rate comparison.
hoping you don't mind sharing your secret!()
Thank You
I want to take Term and Whole Insurance. But Does Place of living matters? because i move state to state where ever my job takes me.
Metlifef
NewYork Life
AXA
Originally Posted by 21stIcon
H1B-GC
Premium depends on your age,duration of policy(10/20/30) and place of living if you you do not have any health problems. unless you disclose your age , no one can help you on your rate comparison.
hoping you don't mind sharing your secret!()
Thank You
I want to take Term and Whole Insurance. But Does Place of living matters? because i move state to state where ever my job takes me.
tattoo Kareena Kapoor Pictures
floridasun
12-30 09:45 PM
thats the problem.... I cannot switch to another job as I am in the 7th year of H1B and I-140 approved but did not apply for I-485 yet. friends told me its risky to switch jobs now as I may be out of status.
more...
pictures KAREENA KAPOOR WITHOUT
ashkam
12-31 02:39 PM
"If there is a God, He is infinitely incomprehensible, since, having, neither parts nor limits, He has no affinity to us. We are then incapable of knowing either what He is or if He is ... you must wager. It is not optional. You are embarked. Which will you choose then? Let us weigh the gain and the loss in wagering that God is. Let us estimate these two chances. If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing. Wager then without hesitation that he is."
Blaise Pascal
The chance is 50/50.
Seriously, did you just bring up Pascal's wager? You seem to be behind the times, man. Pascal's wager has been knocked down and ridiculed time and time again. Just one of its refutations : Why God? Why not believe in a pink unicorn? or a flying spaghetti monster? Or a giant cosmic turtle? Shouldn't one believe in each and every one of these things for the fear that they might be true since no one can really disprove their existence? Again it comes down to probability. The probability of there being a God is very close to zero, thus making belief in God untenable.
Blaise Pascal
The chance is 50/50.
Seriously, did you just bring up Pascal's wager? You seem to be behind the times, man. Pascal's wager has been knocked down and ridiculed time and time again. Just one of its refutations : Why God? Why not believe in a pink unicorn? or a flying spaghetti monster? Or a giant cosmic turtle? Shouldn't one believe in each and every one of these things for the fear that they might be true since no one can really disprove their existence? Again it comes down to probability. The probability of there being a God is very close to zero, thus making belief in God untenable.
dresses Katrina kaif without makeup
neerajkandhari
10-28 04:53 PM
Correct, there are problems with the online status with TSC.
My AP status say pending since 10/04/2007, I got my AP documents from attorney this afternoon.Still the status says pending.
SAME PROB WITH ME TO
MY ONLINE STATUS FOR AP SHOWS PENDING FROM 8/31/2007
I HAVE RECEIVED MY AP FROM MY ATTORNEY YESTERDAY
IT SEEMS IT HAS BEEN APPROVED FROM 9 OCT 2007
My AP status say pending since 10/04/2007, I got my AP documents from attorney this afternoon.Still the status says pending.
SAME PROB WITH ME TO
MY ONLINE STATUS FOR AP SHOWS PENDING FROM 8/31/2007
I HAVE RECEIVED MY AP FROM MY ATTORNEY YESTERDAY
IT SEEMS IT HAS BEEN APPROVED FROM 9 OCT 2007
more...
makeup Sonam Kapoor without makeup:
rdehar
05-02 05:18 PM
Kids,
Let us talk about EB3-India category experiencing the discrimination against EB2-India. Why there are few EB3-India approvals this FY so far???????.
One of my friend with same PD as me (Jun 2004) got approved sometime in Aug/Sep 2007. His labor was pproved in a month from NH and I-485 was filed long back when dates were current for EB3 India (early 2005?).
It is for sure that there are a few EB3 approvals this FY ? I know a lot more guys with PDs in 2002 and 2003 who got approved.
Let us talk about EB3-India category experiencing the discrimination against EB2-India. Why there are few EB3-India approvals this FY so far???????.
One of my friend with same PD as me (Jun 2004) got approved sometime in Aug/Sep 2007. His labor was pproved in a month from NH and I-485 was filed long back when dates were current for EB3 India (early 2005?).
It is for sure that there are a few EB3 approvals this FY ? I know a lot more guys with PDs in 2002 and 2003 who got approved.
girlfriend kareena-no-makeup-1-mastione.
bbct
04-02 06:48 PM
I got a second fingerprint notice for 04/07. I am from EB2-I. Don't know what's the next bulletin has?
hairstyles Kareena Kapoor without makeup pics (100% unseen)
felix31
04-26 05:47 PM
Great job IV team,
I am so glad about this article - and I am circulating it among my friends at my school..
I am so glad about this article - and I am circulating it among my friends at my school..
kumhyd2
07-18 07:41 PM
The growing no of posts on this thread seems to indicate this as a bigger problem than was thought of. I guess many people just get in here before the marriage with the plans of settling in career and then get married
But they finally end up to take a decision on choosing one
Green Card ?
or
Spouse ?
But they finally end up to take a decision on choosing one
Green Card ?
or
Spouse ?
sledge_hammer
01-15 01:43 PM
Could it just be because there are a lot of immigrants from that state in India?
The pattern of these killings is so strange that most of the people that got killed are from AP.
My friends from AP, Be careful. They are coming after you :)
The pattern of these killings is so strange that most of the people that got killed are from AP.
My friends from AP, Be careful. They are coming after you :)
