factoryman
06-20 06:29 PM
Download and do it. Your attorney may be asking for that purpose. Only last 5 years.
Is there any official Period of Stay form or its just a summary statement from us about entry exit from start till now.
Is there any official Period of Stay form or its just a summary statement from us about entry exit from start till now.
wallpaper quotes about school life. quotes about school life. good
gcseeker2002
12-28 02:49 PM
I had similar problem with United last year. I was flying thruogh Malaysian airlines and United charged me for extra 20 LBs. But it was checked in till India.
Delta is more helpful that way, one of my friends family had separate tickets on Delta and Malaysian, but the delta checkin guy checked in for both flights upto India, and even allowed the 70lbs on the delta part of the flight.
Delta is more helpful that way, one of my friends family had separate tickets on Delta and Malaysian, but the delta checkin guy checked in for both flights upto India, and even allowed the 70lbs on the delta part of the flight.
logiclife
04-23 04:22 PM
-------------
Northern California members we need volunteers for an event on Wednesday (04/25) in Campbell @ 1:00 p.m. for an hour. This is much more interactive event. No undocumented immigration issues just EB related issues. Please join the yahoo group and get involved. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NC_Immigration_Voice/
Lets keep the momentum going.
You may want to start a new thread with an appropriate title, to get more attention from members in Northern CA.
Northern California members we need volunteers for an event on Wednesday (04/25) in Campbell @ 1:00 p.m. for an hour. This is much more interactive event. No undocumented immigration issues just EB related issues. Please join the yahoo group and get involved. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NC_Immigration_Voice/
Lets keep the momentum going.
You may want to start a new thread with an appropriate title, to get more attention from members in Northern CA.
2011 quotes on school life.
immigrationvoice1
03-15 08:47 PM
The biggest problem is interfiling from EB3 to EB2. USCIS must not allow anyone to change categories and retain old priority dates. This is nothing short of cheating ! What about the people who have been standing in line. You can't just change the rules when they suit you and get into the middle of the line. Pathetic !
...completely
...completely
more...
bigboy007
06-30 05:57 AM
Sorry didnt follow up this thread , i dont know why USCIS is asking for colored copies , Passport i dont know but i have seen in clearly through state of ILLINOIS website some where about ITS ILLEGAL TO TAKE ID COLOR COPIES i noticed this when i am taking photo copy color and fedex kinko's person and tore away the color copy and said we both will be at risk as its strictly illegal. I dont know about other states and hence said so , let the RFE come i will then send it for DL; i am sending the one for passport in color though. i enquired with my lawyer he said thats fine just to update you .They might be asking it for clarity in picture i achieved the same using color copier but B/W with light tone effect. It came really good. I hope that useful.
Rajeev
02-04 10:50 AM
We will all meet at the Bridgewater temple Cafeteria tomorrow, that is, 02/03/2007 at 11.00 PM. I will get the flyers with me. We will be doing a black and white text on colored paper as that costs 9 cents/page compared to colored text on colored paper that costs 89 cents/page. Please be there on time.
Address for the temple is:
780 old Farm Road,
Bridgewater,
NJ 08807
Thanks,
Varsha
How did it go?
Address for the temple is:
780 old Farm Road,
Bridgewater,
NJ 08807
Thanks,
Varsha
How did it go?
more...
lvinaykumar
05-21 10:15 AM
Congrats, Please keep supporting IV
2010 quotes on school days. quotes
jonty_11
12-13 10:13 AM
Count me and 2 more members with me....lets have a plan..and execute it.
more...
Kodi
04-01 11:36 AM
Does anyone have the format of the employment letter? My attorney didn't request one even when I emailed him few time.
Form I-140 has an area to write the wages per week? The amount my attorney wrote is wages for the year. Is this ok?
Thank you.
Form I-140 has an area to write the wages per week? The amount my attorney wrote is wages for the year. Is this ok?
Thank you.
hair quotes about school life. good
pcs
04-20 03:20 PM
Pl. send me the contact tel nos & names
more...
shreekhand
07-04 10:28 PM
A nicely presented opinion by Ramba, but there are obvious flaws in the anaylsis. Here are my observations
1.) The contention that they followed the recommendations of the Omb report and went back to pre-1982 method cannot be true. They cannot follow that without violating 8 USC Section 1255 (b) which clearly states that a visa number is reduced AFTER the approval of the I-485.
2.)There were 40K visas remaining at the time of the Jun 13 bulletin according to AILA. The 60K number as per DoS might have been from end of May. We most note the fact from the CIS I-485 Standard Operating Procedure that when a petition is "documentarily qualified and approvable" a request is made for a visa number, if such number is not available that petition is put into a approved pending availability of visa number list. This makes it amply clear that the CIS knew the exact number of approvable petitions.(might be ~40-60K) The DoS might also have known that.
3.) So what happened ? Looks like the DoS did not expect the CIS to get those petitions quickly from storage, assign a visa number, stamp and sign petitions with the speed that CIS did it with. As a matter of fact, we can clearly deduce from inquiries made my petitioners in the month of May that soon after the June bulletin was released in May, the petitioners were informed by IO's that their files are now been retrieved and have been assigned to officers for approval in June !
4.) This shows that the CIS swift approval (i.e retrieval, assigning visa #, stamp, signature) activity especially the retrieval part did not start on June 1, or June 13 but well before in mid May if not earlier.
5.) Now maybe they assigned the visa #'s to the approvable petitions (in line with the law) already but they are still going on with the stamp, signature part (as evidenced by people receiving approvals e-mails even on July 2nd and 3rd.. and other forums)
6.) Suspension of PPS at NSC and TSC -- Now why should that happen ?
If they have already used up the EB quota one would ask that much amount of man hours are now free isn't it !!?
But the above points might show us that they might need it to simply finish off the paperwork of the approvable petitions in the month of July. Remember signing off on 40K+ petitions is not a 1 month job, but just assigning visa numbers might be. It is very certain to me that we will see approvals well within July!
Loose ends:
1.) What baffles though is the allocation of all visa numbers before the last quarter of FY 07 ! Maybe there is loophole there that allowed them to do so.
2.) How did visa number for EB1 for a top scientist from say an undersubscribed country such as Ukraine also get used up ??!
1.) The contention that they followed the recommendations of the Omb report and went back to pre-1982 method cannot be true. They cannot follow that without violating 8 USC Section 1255 (b) which clearly states that a visa number is reduced AFTER the approval of the I-485.
2.)There were 40K visas remaining at the time of the Jun 13 bulletin according to AILA. The 60K number as per DoS might have been from end of May. We most note the fact from the CIS I-485 Standard Operating Procedure that when a petition is "documentarily qualified and approvable" a request is made for a visa number, if such number is not available that petition is put into a approved pending availability of visa number list. This makes it amply clear that the CIS knew the exact number of approvable petitions.(might be ~40-60K) The DoS might also have known that.
3.) So what happened ? Looks like the DoS did not expect the CIS to get those petitions quickly from storage, assign a visa number, stamp and sign petitions with the speed that CIS did it with. As a matter of fact, we can clearly deduce from inquiries made my petitioners in the month of May that soon after the June bulletin was released in May, the petitioners were informed by IO's that their files are now been retrieved and have been assigned to officers for approval in June !
4.) This shows that the CIS swift approval (i.e retrieval, assigning visa #, stamp, signature) activity especially the retrieval part did not start on June 1, or June 13 but well before in mid May if not earlier.
5.) Now maybe they assigned the visa #'s to the approvable petitions (in line with the law) already but they are still going on with the stamp, signature part (as evidenced by people receiving approvals e-mails even on July 2nd and 3rd.. and other forums)
6.) Suspension of PPS at NSC and TSC -- Now why should that happen ?
If they have already used up the EB quota one would ask that much amount of man hours are now free isn't it !!?
But the above points might show us that they might need it to simply finish off the paperwork of the approvable petitions in the month of July. Remember signing off on 40K+ petitions is not a 1 month job, but just assigning visa numbers might be. It is very certain to me that we will see approvals well within July!
Loose ends:
1.) What baffles though is the allocation of all visa numbers before the last quarter of FY 07 ! Maybe there is loophole there that allowed them to do so.
2.) How did visa number for EB1 for a top scientist from say an undersubscribed country such as Ukraine also get used up ??!
hot quotes about school life.
memyselfandus
09-18 11:40 PM
I have registered this domain. If needed, please send me PM; I can initiate the transfer process. I have already added a forwarding address to the immigrationvoice.com.
This is my from of contribution.
1. We must immediately change our name to LegalImmigrationVoice.com( LIV.org)...But still Immigrationvoice.org should work....This should be done ASAP...like within next week...Please conduct a poll for this ASAP.
This is my from of contribution.
1. We must immediately change our name to LegalImmigrationVoice.com( LIV.org)...But still Immigrationvoice.org should work....This should be done ASAP...like within next week...Please conduct a poll for this ASAP.
more...
house quotes about school days.
ronhira
03-12 12:24 PM
So now only paid people get access to information. Why don't you start contributing now?
I am not on any side and seriously want atleast the bashing stopped. But don't want some piece of jerk doing this for sake of passing time. I would consider Ron Hira a better candidate to counter bashing. He is paid (thats what it shows on his status as "donor").
More, I sincerely don't believe that paid employee of competitor can do this. 2 reasons:
1. By any kind of conversation, site gets more traffic. Thats exactly competitors don't want.
2. This could lead to serious legal issue and opposites can lose their shirts.
I think the people on opposite sites are some old finger burnt people from IV itself like Kumar. Think what Kumar will do if he is banned from IV today for harsh bashing!
gckaMara.... i love u for volunteering me for doing something.... not sure what..... but that's ok.....
btw.... greyhair is just giving excuses...... but u look like someone who cares.... y r u not a donor....
I am not on any side and seriously want atleast the bashing stopped. But don't want some piece of jerk doing this for sake of passing time. I would consider Ron Hira a better candidate to counter bashing. He is paid (thats what it shows on his status as "donor").
More, I sincerely don't believe that paid employee of competitor can do this. 2 reasons:
1. By any kind of conversation, site gets more traffic. Thats exactly competitors don't want.
2. This could lead to serious legal issue and opposites can lose their shirts.
I think the people on opposite sites are some old finger burnt people from IV itself like Kumar. Think what Kumar will do if he is banned from IV today for harsh bashing!
gckaMara.... i love u for volunteering me for doing something.... not sure what..... but that's ok.....
btw.... greyhair is just giving excuses...... but u look like someone who cares.... y r u not a donor....
tattoo quotes about school life.
justAnotherFile
07-01 09:59 PM
in 2005 visa bulletin...
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_2712.html
they are clearly violating their own stated policy.
it also proves that the USCIS rate of adjudication was very slow until june 13, and they have been doing extraordinary efforts to approve petitions since then to avoid the predicament of recieving 200K applications on july 2.
I guess they have 40 K approvable/approved petitions by today. And are going to use up those tomorrow to make numbers unavailable and force DoS hand.
But question is how long does it take for the USCIS to request and recieve those numbers on MOnday.
WHAT CAUSES THE ESTABLISHMENT OF CUT-OFF DATES?
The Visa Office subdivides the annual preference and foreign state limitations specified in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) into twelve monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily qualified applicants that have been reported to VO are compared each month with the numbers available for the next regular allotment and numbers are allocated to reported applicants in order of their priority dates, the oldest dates first.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered “Current.” For example, if the Employment Third preference monthly target is 5,000 and there are only 3,000 applicants, the category is considered “Current”.
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be “oversubscribed” and a visa availability cut-off date is established. The cut-off date is the priority date of the first documentarily qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a visa number. For example, if the Employment Third preference monthly target is 5,000 and there are 15,000 applicants, a cut-off date would be established so that only 5,000 numbers would be used, and the cut-off date would be the priority date of the 5,001st applicant.
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_2712.html
they are clearly violating their own stated policy.
it also proves that the USCIS rate of adjudication was very slow until june 13, and they have been doing extraordinary efforts to approve petitions since then to avoid the predicament of recieving 200K applications on july 2.
I guess they have 40 K approvable/approved petitions by today. And are going to use up those tomorrow to make numbers unavailable and force DoS hand.
But question is how long does it take for the USCIS to request and recieve those numbers on MOnday.
WHAT CAUSES THE ESTABLISHMENT OF CUT-OFF DATES?
The Visa Office subdivides the annual preference and foreign state limitations specified in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) into twelve monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily qualified applicants that have been reported to VO are compared each month with the numbers available for the next regular allotment and numbers are allocated to reported applicants in order of their priority dates, the oldest dates first.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered “Current.” For example, if the Employment Third preference monthly target is 5,000 and there are only 3,000 applicants, the category is considered “Current”.
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be “oversubscribed” and a visa availability cut-off date is established. The cut-off date is the priority date of the first documentarily qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a visa number. For example, if the Employment Third preference monthly target is 5,000 and there are 15,000 applicants, a cut-off date would be established so that only 5,000 numbers would be used, and the cut-off date would be the priority date of the 5,001st applicant.
more...
pictures quotes about school days.
mugwump
09-26 05:00 PM
I understand your point, doesn't make sense to burn bridges. we might need her in the future
dresses quotes on school life. quotes
hara_patta_for_rico
07-09 07:05 PM
I came across this law about the departmental control of numerical limitations, and I'd appreciate it if you all could post your interpretations of the same.
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
Clause B is not the only thing. In any quarter they are not supposed to issue any more than 27% of 140,000(100%) = 37800. according to Clause A. After June 15th they issued 140,000 - 66000 = 74000. What about the last quarter quota of 37800? Where did it go? It was not supposed to be used before July.
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
Clause B is not the only thing. In any quarter they are not supposed to issue any more than 27% of 140,000(100%) = 37800. according to Clause A. After June 15th they issued 140,000 - 66000 = 74000. What about the last quarter quota of 37800? Where did it go? It was not supposed to be used before July.
more...
makeup quotes about school life
pappu
01-16 11:29 AM
Date of sign up: Jan. 16, 2007
Subscription Name: Secure $20 Per Month Recurring Contribution
Subscription Number: S-92E2356024336193V
Can you confirm?
pls update your profile so that we can confirm.
Subscription Name: Secure $20 Per Month Recurring Contribution
Subscription Number: S-92E2356024336193V
Can you confirm?
pls update your profile so that we can confirm.
girlfriend quotes about school life.
akhilmahajan
09-26 10:45 AM
There is a non-profit organization (like Business & Media Institute (http://www.businessandmedia.org/about/about.aspx)) that reports on wrong media reports. They have lot of reports on Lou Dobbs.
The details were posted in one of the many Lou Dobbs Threads. I can not find it.
If anyone can find it please post details of the organization and send email to this organization also.
Misrepresentation of facts regarding the recent rally in Washington DC. The rally was about increasing the number of Green Cards, and not H1-Bs. This reporter - Eileen Zimmermann has clearly gotten the two distinct issues mixed up.
The intent of the rally was to garner support and highlight the inefficiencies in the immigrant visa(also known as green card) process. This is different from the H-1B issue.. H-1B is a highly-skilled temporary work visa.
I ask that CNN must immediately issue a correction to this article to reflect the correct information.
Please call with any questions,
{Name}
{Phone Number}
The details were posted in one of the many Lou Dobbs Threads. I can not find it.
If anyone can find it please post details of the organization and send email to this organization also.
Misrepresentation of facts regarding the recent rally in Washington DC. The rally was about increasing the number of Green Cards, and not H1-Bs. This reporter - Eileen Zimmermann has clearly gotten the two distinct issues mixed up.
The intent of the rally was to garner support and highlight the inefficiencies in the immigrant visa(also known as green card) process. This is different from the H-1B issue.. H-1B is a highly-skilled temporary work visa.
I ask that CNN must immediately issue a correction to this article to reflect the correct information.
Please call with any questions,
{Name}
{Phone Number}
hairstyles quotes about school life.
ajthakur
07-14 08:07 PM
Thanks rajuseattle. I am first going to try find out whether my previous employer did revoke the 140. In case he didnt i am safe. In case he did, when he did it is the key.
One more thing AC-21 is not a formal USCIS form which one can fill in and send it over to USCIS, its just a letter wherein you or your legal representative informs USCIS about the change in employment, be it a job promotion with same employer or u switching the Job using the AC-21 provisions.
As explained earlier in this forum, 180 day rule interpretation is solely USCIS's descretion, if USCIS adjudicator who is working on your case accepts your new EVL and approves your case you are good to go, but for some reason the adjudicator keeps sending more RFE then you will need someone who can answer them in a legal language and thats where attorney services comes in handy.
I am hoping for the best for you that once they see your new EVL, they are satisfied and sends you GC.
One more thing AC-21 is not a formal USCIS form which one can fill in and send it over to USCIS, its just a letter wherein you or your legal representative informs USCIS about the change in employment, be it a job promotion with same employer or u switching the Job using the AC-21 provisions.
As explained earlier in this forum, 180 day rule interpretation is solely USCIS's descretion, if USCIS adjudicator who is working on your case accepts your new EVL and approves your case you are good to go, but for some reason the adjudicator keeps sending more RFE then you will need someone who can answer them in a legal language and thats where attorney services comes in handy.
I am hoping for the best for you that once they see your new EVL, they are satisfied and sends you GC.
wandmaker
08-21 04:34 PM
Has anyone else dealt with this or can you direct me to someone who knows what needs to be done and how?
Most of the people here are under employment based green cards - So, I would recommend get yourself an attorney.
Most of the people here are under employment based green cards - So, I would recommend get yourself an attorney.
vivid_bharti
05-07 12:13 AM
cool down...I did pay for that effort, I am not a member of donor forum though..If you had contributed for the FOIA effort you would have known the actions IV has taken in donor forum. Its a shame that people like you dont contribute and have audacity to come back and demand answers.
No comments:
Post a Comment