nonimmi
08-13 03:56 PM
I believe some top-level IV core members are EB3-I with PD 2003-04. So it is hard to believe that they are not worried watching "U" month after month and don't want to do anything about it. But as IV-Core they can not just do something for EB3-I. We need to find a way to fix this issue without creating another subgroup for EB3-I and take advantage of IV movement.
wallpaper Tags: Kobe Bryant, Lakers,
ArkBird
09-15 05:18 PM
Dude,
show me one link where i can go back and change the language in the poll?
All of you are making it very hard for me to keep the decorum of this forum.
So much name calling.. nasty PMs.... All i can say is God Bless y'all
There is ancient Hebrew saying, which roughly goes like this:
“Before the word are spoken, man is master of his words but after they are spoken, he is their slave”
Something like this applies to your posting.
Again, nothing personal. My apologies if I have offended you.
show me one link where i can go back and change the language in the poll?
All of you are making it very hard for me to keep the decorum of this forum.
So much name calling.. nasty PMs.... All i can say is God Bless y'all
There is ancient Hebrew saying, which roughly goes like this:
“Before the word are spoken, man is master of his words but after they are spoken, he is their slave”
Something like this applies to your posting.
Again, nothing personal. My apologies if I have offended you.
ind_game
05-20 06:37 PM
Did any of you get the same letter with the same content below .........what baffles me is the last sentence that says "The application will be reopened and the processing continued. Once the processing is completed, you will receive a notice under separate cover."
Your help is really appreciated in this.........Sorry I am little bit pessimistic here......
I think I have answered my own question...........Here are the links for similar responses from USCIS
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=25761&highlight=103.5&page=2
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21474&highlight=103.5&page=9
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=23800&highlight=103.5&page=3
Your help is really appreciated in this.........Sorry I am little bit pessimistic here......
I think I have answered my own question...........Here are the links for similar responses from USCIS
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=25761&highlight=103.5&page=2
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21474&highlight=103.5&page=9
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=23800&highlight=103.5&page=3
2011 All-Star Game MVP – Kobe
sandiboy
08-02 04:01 PM
This is from my lawyer:
Where is my application for adjustment of status filed?
All employment based adjustment of status applications are filed at the Nebraska Service Center (NSC). The NSC will keep half of the cases it receives and send half to the Texas Service Center . There is no way of indicating which Service Center you want your case adjudicated at. Once the receipt notices are received you will know where your case is pending. All family based adjustment of status applications are filed at the National Benefits Center.
Where is my application for adjustment of status filed?
All employment based adjustment of status applications are filed at the Nebraska Service Center (NSC). The NSC will keep half of the cases it receives and send half to the Texas Service Center . There is no way of indicating which Service Center you want your case adjudicated at. Once the receipt notices are received you will know where your case is pending. All family based adjustment of status applications are filed at the National Benefits Center.
more...
vine93
05-01 03:33 PM
1. Another reply was If we use All permitted unsed visa, Where would we be in terms of EB visa. His response was Probably china/India Second category will be clear.
2. According to Him 65% of visa has been used for this year. less amount of visa remain now for this year. We shouldn't expect miracle for this year at least.
3. Let Join hands together and follow the HSMP people did in UK.
2. According to Him 65% of visa has been used for this year. less amount of visa remain now for this year. We shouldn't expect miracle for this year at least.
3. Let Join hands together and follow the HSMP people did in UK.
NKR
04-03 08:13 AM
First, try to ask the question properly with specifics. It could easily be understood the way I understood it. U ask a dumb question and u get a dumb answer . Also, there was never any sort of communication between ssnd and myself. That itself shows who's dumb.
Looks like all the dumb ppl r getting lots of green dots. Amazing forum...IV ki jai.
Oh, you couldn�t grasp the obvious and telling me that my question had to be more specific and on top of that you agree that your answer was dumb, lol. No wonder you are dumb.
BTW ssnd and I are not rude in calling you dumb. It�s ok to call a spade a spade.
The bagel is tasting soooo good this morning, yummy�
Looks like all the dumb ppl r getting lots of green dots. Amazing forum...IV ki jai.
Oh, you couldn�t grasp the obvious and telling me that my question had to be more specific and on top of that you agree that your answer was dumb, lol. No wonder you are dumb.
BTW ssnd and I are not rude in calling you dumb. It�s ok to call a spade a spade.
The bagel is tasting soooo good this morning, yummy�
more...
makemygc
07-06 01:15 PM
Today.. 12:00 EST:)
SKD's next question should be, what was he wearing when you talked to him? Hope he was not in his sleepwear..just waking up from his beautiful dreams.:o
SKD's next question should be, what was he wearing when you talked to him? Hope he was not in his sleepwear..just waking up from his beautiful dreams.:o
2010 Kobe Bryant (game MVP for the
chanduv23
05-18 04:33 PM
Hi Chanduv23,
Thanks for the reply.
Can you let all of us know the follwoing:
1. What are the steps involved in to do everything right?
2. Is one of the step "ex employer informing USCIS about the job change has gone through this"?
3. If not then what are the disadvantages or if can't trust employer ?
Please let us know about all the steps involved to switch employer by invoking AC-21?
regards,
waitingmygc
Ok, basic steps
(1) Make sure you have your petitions in the online portfolio.
(2) Make sure you report address changes promptly and they have latest address on file
(3) Try to get a copy of labor or atleast know what skills have been mentioned - remember it has to be similar and does not exactly be the same
(4) Make sure, you work for atleast 180 days with your sponsering employer after filing 485
(5) It is always good to get a 140 approved before you move. Pending 140s though allowed in AC21, maybe kinda risky because if your sponsering employer is having ability to pay issues, or your current employment is not paying proper salary - then you may be subject to ability to pay issues and 140 may never get approved
(6) Always good to inform USCIS of job change via AC21 letter - you must keep a copy and also track fedex and keep proof of delivery
(7) Keep a copy of 140 approval - though it may not be required, but good to keep.
(8) Always expect that your ex employer may revoke your 140 any time - USCIS is now conducting audits and employers may want to kee their records clean, so expect the 140 revoke anytime.
(9) If 485 gets denied, file for a Motion to reopen and immediately open a case problem with Ombudsman's office and keep the motion to reopen receipts
(10) If MTR is getting elayed, contact senators or congressman's office and do a congressional enquiry. Their liason will be more helpful.
(11) Customer service or infopass may never help unless it is address change or fingerprint or name check issues.
Thanks for the reply.
Can you let all of us know the follwoing:
1. What are the steps involved in to do everything right?
2. Is one of the step "ex employer informing USCIS about the job change has gone through this"?
3. If not then what are the disadvantages or if can't trust employer ?
Please let us know about all the steps involved to switch employer by invoking AC-21?
regards,
waitingmygc
Ok, basic steps
(1) Make sure you have your petitions in the online portfolio.
(2) Make sure you report address changes promptly and they have latest address on file
(3) Try to get a copy of labor or atleast know what skills have been mentioned - remember it has to be similar and does not exactly be the same
(4) Make sure, you work for atleast 180 days with your sponsering employer after filing 485
(5) It is always good to get a 140 approved before you move. Pending 140s though allowed in AC21, maybe kinda risky because if your sponsering employer is having ability to pay issues, or your current employment is not paying proper salary - then you may be subject to ability to pay issues and 140 may never get approved
(6) Always good to inform USCIS of job change via AC21 letter - you must keep a copy and also track fedex and keep proof of delivery
(7) Keep a copy of 140 approval - though it may not be required, but good to keep.
(8) Always expect that your ex employer may revoke your 140 any time - USCIS is now conducting audits and employers may want to kee their records clean, so expect the 140 revoke anytime.
(9) If 485 gets denied, file for a Motion to reopen and immediately open a case problem with Ombudsman's office and keep the motion to reopen receipts
(10) If MTR is getting elayed, contact senators or congressman's office and do a congressional enquiry. Their liason will be more helpful.
(11) Customer service or infopass may never help unless it is address change or fingerprint or name check issues.
more...
eb3_nepa
07-05 01:17 PM
Finally spoke to my congressman's Immigration contact in Bucks County PA.
He sounded supportive and said he will investigate the matter. I am going to call my state senators Sen Specter and Sen Casey's office as well.
People in PA, unite and call these lawmakers.
He sounded supportive and said he will investigate the matter. I am going to call my state senators Sen Specter and Sen Casey's office as well.
People in PA, unite and call these lawmakers.
hair Bryant, a three-time All-Star
Jeniya2006feb27INDIA
11-06 04:03 AM
I read somwhere that another bill is in que of senete for allowing the reinstatement of schedule A
is it true? if yes, is there any chance that it will become a bill
is it true? if yes, is there any chance that it will become a bill
more...
samrat_bhargava_vihari
04-27 02:52 PM
Hello Onemay,
I live in Minneapolis. I too am on H4.Same thing happened to both my husband and myself here last October.We had moved recently from Indiana and the DMV said they won't issue new licenses for both myself and my husband (it doesn't matter if u r on H1 or H4)until we give the extended I94. We had our Indiana licences also canceled .We didn't know what to do and then we enquired some of our friends and came to know that if we show our original USCIS Receipts for Extension filed they give ur license for 6 months from the USCIS Receipt Date. So we did that and got our extension until April. U have to show the Original Receipt ,No Xerox .And now we got our extension papers and reapplied for a new license and got it. May be u too can enquire about this,because I think all DMVs tend to follow similar rules.
This is true. I went through this process several times in Minneapolis.
I live in Minneapolis. I too am on H4.Same thing happened to both my husband and myself here last October.We had moved recently from Indiana and the DMV said they won't issue new licenses for both myself and my husband (it doesn't matter if u r on H1 or H4)until we give the extended I94. We had our Indiana licences also canceled .We didn't know what to do and then we enquired some of our friends and came to know that if we show our original USCIS Receipts for Extension filed they give ur license for 6 months from the USCIS Receipt Date. So we did that and got our extension until April. U have to show the Original Receipt ,No Xerox .And now we got our extension papers and reapplied for a new license and got it. May be u too can enquire about this,because I think all DMVs tend to follow similar rules.
This is true. I went through this process several times in Minneapolis.
hot Bryant then brought home his
pappu
08-12 10:55 AM
Senate Passage of Border Security Legislation
August 12, 2010
Today, I come to the floor to seek unanimous consent to pass a smart, tough, and effective $600 million bill that will significantly enhance the security and integrity of our nation’s southern border—which currently lacks the resources needed to fully combat the drug smugglers, gun-runners, human-traffickers, money launderers and other organized criminals that seek to do harm to innocent Americans along our border….
The best part of this border package, Mr. President, is that it is fully paid for and does not increase the deficit by a single penny. In actuality, the Congressional Budget Office has determined that this bill will yield a direct savings to taxpayers of $50 million….
The emergency border funds we are passing today are fully paid for by assessing fees on certain types of companies who hire foreign workers using certain types of visas in a way that Congress did not intend. I want to take a moment to explain exactly what we are doing in this bill a little further because I want everyone to clearly understand how these offsets are designed.
In 1990, Congress realized that the world was changing rapidly and that technological innovations like the internet were creating a high demand in the United States for high-tech workers to create new technologies and products. Consequently, Congress created the H-1B visa program to allow U.S. employers to hire foreign tech workers in special circumstances when they could not find an American citizen who was qualified for the job.
Many of the companies that use this program today are using the program in the exact way Congress intended. That is, these companies (like Microsoft, IBM, and Intel) are hiring bright foreign students educated in our American universities to work in the U.S. for 6 or 7 years to invent new product lines and technologies so that Microsoft, IBM, and Intel can sell more products to the American public. Then—at the expiration of the H-1B visa period—these companies apply for these talented workers to earn green cards and stay with the company.
When the H-1B visa program is used in this manner, it is a good program for everyone involved. It is good for the company. It is good for the worker. And it is good for the American people who benefit from the products and jobs created by the innovation of the H-1B visa holder.
Every day, companies like Oracle, Cisco, Apple and others use the H-1B visa program in the exact way I have just described—and their use of the program has greatly benefitted this country.
But recently, some companies have decided to exploit an unintended loophole in the H-1B visa program to use the program in a manner that many in Congress, including myself, do not believe is consistent with the program’s intent.
Rather than being a company that makes something, and simply needs to bring in a talented foreign worker to help innovate and create new products and technologies—these other companies are essentially creating “multinational temp agencies” that were never contemplated when the H-1B program was created.
The business model of these newer companies is not to make any new products or technologies like Microsoft or Apple does. Instead, their business model is to bring foreign tech workers into the United States who are willing to accept less pay than their American counterparts, place these workers into other companies in exchange for a “consulting fee,” and transfer these workers from company to company in order to maximize profits from placement fees. In other words, these companies are petitioning for foreign workers simply to then turn around and provide these same workers to other companies who need cheap labor for various short term projects.
Don’t take my word for it. If you look at the marketing materials of some of the companies that fall within the scope covered by today’s legislation, their materials boast about their “outsourcing expertise” and say that their advantage is their ability to conduct what they call “labor arbitrage” which is—in their own words—“transferring work functions to a lower cost environment for increased savings.”
The business model used by these companies within the United States is creating three major negative side effects. First, it is ruining the reputation of the H-1B program, which is overwhelmingly used by good actors for beneficial purposes. Second, according to the Economic Policy institute, it is lowering the wages for American tech workers already in the marketplace. Third, it is also discouraging many of our smartest students from entering the technology industry in the first place. Students can see that paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for advanced schooling is not worth the cost when the market is being flooded with foreign temporary workers willing to do tech-work for far less pay because their foreign education was much cheaper and they intend to move back home when their visa expires to a country where the cost of living is far less expensive.
This type of use of the H-1B visa program will be addressed as part of comprehensive immigration reform and will likely be dramatically restricted. We will be reforming the legal immigration system to encourage the world’s best and brightest individuals to come to the United States and create the new technologies and businesses that will employ countless American workers, but will discourage businesses from using our immigration laws as a means to obtain temporary and less-expensive foreign labor to replace capable American workers.
Nevertheless, I do wish to clarify a previous mischaracterization of these firms, where I labeled them as “chop shops.” That statement was incorrect, and I wish to acknowledge that. In the tech industry, these firms are sometimes known as “body shops” and that’s what I should have said.
While I strongly oppose the manner in which these firms are using the H-1B visa to accomplish objectives that Congress never intended, it would be unfortunate if anyone concluded from my remarks that these firms are engaging in illegal behavior.
But I also want to make clear that the purpose of this fee is not to target businesses from any particular country. Many news articles have reported that the only companies that will be affected by this fee are companies based in India and that, ipso facto, the purpose of this legislation must be to target Indian IT companies.
Well, it is simply untrue that the purpose of this legislation is to target Indian companies. We are simply raising fees for businesses who use the H-1B visa to do things that are contrary to the program’s original intent.
Visa fees will only increase for companies with more than 50 workers who continue to employ more than 50 percent of their employees through the H-1B program. Congress does not want the H-1B visa program to be a vehicle for creating multinational temp agencies where workers do not know what projects they will be working on—or what cities they will be working in—when they enter the country.
The fee is based solely upon the business model of the company, not the location of the company.
If you are using the H-1B visa to innovate new products and technologies for your own company to sell, that is a good thing regardless of whether the company was originally founded in India, Ireland, or Indiana.
But if you are using the H-1B visa to run a glorified international temp agency for tech workers in contravention of the spirit of the program, I and my colleagues believe that you should have to pay a higher fee to ensure that American workers are not losing their jobs because of unintended uses of the visa program that were never contemplated when the program was created.
This belief is consistent regardless of whether the company using these staffing practices was founded in Bangalore, Beijing, or Boston.
Raising the fees for companies hiring more than 50 percent of their workforce through foreign visas will accomplish two important goals. First, it will provide the necessary funds to secure our border without raising taxes or adding to the deficit. Second, it will level the playing field for American workers so that they do not lose out on good jobs here in America because it is cheaper to bring in a foreign worker rather than hire an American worker.
Let me tell you what objective folks around the world are saying about the impact of this fee increase. In an August 6, 2010, Wall Street Journal article, Avinash Vashistha—the CEO of a Bangalore based off-shoring advisory consulting firm—told the Journal that the new fee in this bill “would accelerate Indian firms’ plans to hire more American-born workers in the U.S.” What’s wrong with that? In an August 7, 2010 Economic Times Article, Jeya Kumar, a CEO of a top IT company, said that this bill would “erode cost arbitrage and cause a change in the operational model of Indian offshore providers.”
The leaders of this business model are agreeing that our bill will make it more expensive to bring in foreign tech workers to compete with American tech workers for jobs here in America. That means these companies are going to start having to hire U.S. tech workers again.
So Mr. President, this bill is not only a responsible border security bill, it has the dual advantage of creating more high-paying American jobs.
Finally, Mr. President, I want to be clear about one other thing. Even though passing this bill will secure our border, I again say that the only way to fully restore the rule of law to our entire immigration system is by passing comprehensive immigration reform….
The urgency for immigration reform cannot be overstated because it is so overdue. The time for excuses is now over, it is now time to get to work.
August 12, 2010
Today, I come to the floor to seek unanimous consent to pass a smart, tough, and effective $600 million bill that will significantly enhance the security and integrity of our nation’s southern border—which currently lacks the resources needed to fully combat the drug smugglers, gun-runners, human-traffickers, money launderers and other organized criminals that seek to do harm to innocent Americans along our border….
The best part of this border package, Mr. President, is that it is fully paid for and does not increase the deficit by a single penny. In actuality, the Congressional Budget Office has determined that this bill will yield a direct savings to taxpayers of $50 million….
The emergency border funds we are passing today are fully paid for by assessing fees on certain types of companies who hire foreign workers using certain types of visas in a way that Congress did not intend. I want to take a moment to explain exactly what we are doing in this bill a little further because I want everyone to clearly understand how these offsets are designed.
In 1990, Congress realized that the world was changing rapidly and that technological innovations like the internet were creating a high demand in the United States for high-tech workers to create new technologies and products. Consequently, Congress created the H-1B visa program to allow U.S. employers to hire foreign tech workers in special circumstances when they could not find an American citizen who was qualified for the job.
Many of the companies that use this program today are using the program in the exact way Congress intended. That is, these companies (like Microsoft, IBM, and Intel) are hiring bright foreign students educated in our American universities to work in the U.S. for 6 or 7 years to invent new product lines and technologies so that Microsoft, IBM, and Intel can sell more products to the American public. Then—at the expiration of the H-1B visa period—these companies apply for these talented workers to earn green cards and stay with the company.
When the H-1B visa program is used in this manner, it is a good program for everyone involved. It is good for the company. It is good for the worker. And it is good for the American people who benefit from the products and jobs created by the innovation of the H-1B visa holder.
Every day, companies like Oracle, Cisco, Apple and others use the H-1B visa program in the exact way I have just described—and their use of the program has greatly benefitted this country.
But recently, some companies have decided to exploit an unintended loophole in the H-1B visa program to use the program in a manner that many in Congress, including myself, do not believe is consistent with the program’s intent.
Rather than being a company that makes something, and simply needs to bring in a talented foreign worker to help innovate and create new products and technologies—these other companies are essentially creating “multinational temp agencies” that were never contemplated when the H-1B program was created.
The business model of these newer companies is not to make any new products or technologies like Microsoft or Apple does. Instead, their business model is to bring foreign tech workers into the United States who are willing to accept less pay than their American counterparts, place these workers into other companies in exchange for a “consulting fee,” and transfer these workers from company to company in order to maximize profits from placement fees. In other words, these companies are petitioning for foreign workers simply to then turn around and provide these same workers to other companies who need cheap labor for various short term projects.
Don’t take my word for it. If you look at the marketing materials of some of the companies that fall within the scope covered by today’s legislation, their materials boast about their “outsourcing expertise” and say that their advantage is their ability to conduct what they call “labor arbitrage” which is—in their own words—“transferring work functions to a lower cost environment for increased savings.”
The business model used by these companies within the United States is creating three major negative side effects. First, it is ruining the reputation of the H-1B program, which is overwhelmingly used by good actors for beneficial purposes. Second, according to the Economic Policy institute, it is lowering the wages for American tech workers already in the marketplace. Third, it is also discouraging many of our smartest students from entering the technology industry in the first place. Students can see that paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for advanced schooling is not worth the cost when the market is being flooded with foreign temporary workers willing to do tech-work for far less pay because their foreign education was much cheaper and they intend to move back home when their visa expires to a country where the cost of living is far less expensive.
This type of use of the H-1B visa program will be addressed as part of comprehensive immigration reform and will likely be dramatically restricted. We will be reforming the legal immigration system to encourage the world’s best and brightest individuals to come to the United States and create the new technologies and businesses that will employ countless American workers, but will discourage businesses from using our immigration laws as a means to obtain temporary and less-expensive foreign labor to replace capable American workers.
Nevertheless, I do wish to clarify a previous mischaracterization of these firms, where I labeled them as “chop shops.” That statement was incorrect, and I wish to acknowledge that. In the tech industry, these firms are sometimes known as “body shops” and that’s what I should have said.
While I strongly oppose the manner in which these firms are using the H-1B visa to accomplish objectives that Congress never intended, it would be unfortunate if anyone concluded from my remarks that these firms are engaging in illegal behavior.
But I also want to make clear that the purpose of this fee is not to target businesses from any particular country. Many news articles have reported that the only companies that will be affected by this fee are companies based in India and that, ipso facto, the purpose of this legislation must be to target Indian IT companies.
Well, it is simply untrue that the purpose of this legislation is to target Indian companies. We are simply raising fees for businesses who use the H-1B visa to do things that are contrary to the program’s original intent.
Visa fees will only increase for companies with more than 50 workers who continue to employ more than 50 percent of their employees through the H-1B program. Congress does not want the H-1B visa program to be a vehicle for creating multinational temp agencies where workers do not know what projects they will be working on—or what cities they will be working in—when they enter the country.
The fee is based solely upon the business model of the company, not the location of the company.
If you are using the H-1B visa to innovate new products and technologies for your own company to sell, that is a good thing regardless of whether the company was originally founded in India, Ireland, or Indiana.
But if you are using the H-1B visa to run a glorified international temp agency for tech workers in contravention of the spirit of the program, I and my colleagues believe that you should have to pay a higher fee to ensure that American workers are not losing their jobs because of unintended uses of the visa program that were never contemplated when the program was created.
This belief is consistent regardless of whether the company using these staffing practices was founded in Bangalore, Beijing, or Boston.
Raising the fees for companies hiring more than 50 percent of their workforce through foreign visas will accomplish two important goals. First, it will provide the necessary funds to secure our border without raising taxes or adding to the deficit. Second, it will level the playing field for American workers so that they do not lose out on good jobs here in America because it is cheaper to bring in a foreign worker rather than hire an American worker.
Let me tell you what objective folks around the world are saying about the impact of this fee increase. In an August 6, 2010, Wall Street Journal article, Avinash Vashistha—the CEO of a Bangalore based off-shoring advisory consulting firm—told the Journal that the new fee in this bill “would accelerate Indian firms’ plans to hire more American-born workers in the U.S.” What’s wrong with that? In an August 7, 2010 Economic Times Article, Jeya Kumar, a CEO of a top IT company, said that this bill would “erode cost arbitrage and cause a change in the operational model of Indian offshore providers.”
The leaders of this business model are agreeing that our bill will make it more expensive to bring in foreign tech workers to compete with American tech workers for jobs here in America. That means these companies are going to start having to hire U.S. tech workers again.
So Mr. President, this bill is not only a responsible border security bill, it has the dual advantage of creating more high-paying American jobs.
Finally, Mr. President, I want to be clear about one other thing. Even though passing this bill will secure our border, I again say that the only way to fully restore the rule of law to our entire immigration system is by passing comprehensive immigration reform….
The urgency for immigration reform cannot be overstated because it is so overdue. The time for excuses is now over, it is now time to get to work.
more...
house 2011 NBA All-Star Game
nik.patelc
02-18 06:04 PM
EB3 to EB2 porting is so huge. I dont think PERM 2005 data really matters. i think a pattern of gradual moving dates ( 1 month or 2 month per bulletin) forward for EB2 India till Spet 2009. Then with OCT, dates will go back to 2002 due to EB3 - EB2 porting.
Somewhere in another thread i saw that roughly total 60000 EB2 India cases are in pending state by Ron gotcher analysis.
if hypothetically, After July 2007 fiasco, thousands of EB3 cases prior to 2004 PD date were converted to Eb2, I assume It will take alteast 2 to 3 years to clear all EB2 cases with PD < DEC 2004 even if there is new cases of Eb3 to EB2 porting going forward from today.
Somewhere in another thread i saw that roughly total 60000 EB2 India cases are in pending state by Ron gotcher analysis.
if hypothetically, After July 2007 fiasco, thousands of EB3 cases prior to 2004 PD date were converted to Eb2, I assume It will take alteast 2 to 3 years to clear all EB2 cases with PD < DEC 2004 even if there is new cases of Eb3 to EB2 porting going forward from today.
tattoo He was the All-Star Game MVP
fruity
07-23 04:50 AM
My case was completed at the NVC last year, this was when there were still schedule A visas. Then retro came in Nov. In June 2007, NVC asked to re submit ds230. Why did they ask to resubmit it if we weren't assigned a visa number yet? and now that there are no visas left for CP, our file gets stuck again, and when our PD becomes current, do we have to resubmit for the 3rd time our ds230.... So confusing......
more...
pictures Kobe Bryant poured in a
Mouns
04-30 03:29 PM
OK so here it is, it will get 2 years before the backlogs due to the surge clear and to get back to normal... :mad:
dresses NBA 2010 2011 Kobe Bryant
BharatPremi
07-05 03:24 PM
Guys,
Please Pound on this as well.
http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/485
- BharatPRemi
Please Pound on this as well.
http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/485
- BharatPRemi
more...
makeup kobe bryant 2011 all star
cygent
09-02 08:04 PM
Oh man! Landed here in 1998. But your PD is 2008 and IN EB3?!?!? Originally Posted by kalinga_sena
* Landed here on jan 1st, 1998 (F1)
Survived 2 recessions
No hope as labour filled in eb3
You must be the oldest person in this thread as well. :D
In my signature... 13 yrs.; '97 as student, survived 2 recessions & a huge bloodsucker from '00 (who has since been sued & investigated & closed). Tried to leave, but H1 issues kept me. By Luck, hard work & planning managed to file 140/485 in '07 & by God's grace 140 approved 12/08, which enabled me to leave aforementioned bloodsucker. Working on EAD since 10/08.
* Landed here on jan 1st, 1998 (F1)
Survived 2 recessions
No hope as labour filled in eb3
You must be the oldest person in this thread as well. :D
In my signature... 13 yrs.; '97 as student, survived 2 recessions & a huge bloodsucker from '00 (who has since been sued & investigated & closed). Tried to leave, but H1 issues kept me. By Luck, hard work & planning managed to file 140/485 in '07 & by God's grace 140 approved 12/08, which enabled me to leave aforementioned bloodsucker. Working on EAD since 10/08.
girlfriend West All Star Kobe Bryant of
asanghi
09-10 12:51 PM
I can not go to DC due to an important issue. I am however a monthly contributer. I already contributed $100 to sponsor someone flying from North California. Here is another $100 contribution that I made through paypal just now.
Paypal confirmation no: 5RB35180W0586983K
Paypal confirmation no: 5RB35180W0586983K
hairstyles Kobe Bryant put on a great
hebron
10-29 08:56 AM
Hi Hebron,
I have filed EB2 & EB3 with the same company (As explained earlier). EB3 as Programmer Analyst and EB2 as Database Adminstrator ( MS + 2 yrs exp.). I think it is better to take some expert attorney advice on your case. It does not hurt if you consult ( or crosscheck ) with some other attorney about your case. Most of the legal experts charge around $250 to evaluate your case and suggest.
Best of Luck to you.
Thanks.
Hi 9Years,
Thanks for the information! I will consult a another attorney.
I was looking up the SOC job codes and I noticed is that in your case the SOC job codes are different. (Programmer Analyst 15-1021.00 and Database Administrator 15-1061.00.)
In my case both Software Engineer and Principal Software Engineer falls under the same SOC code.
This could be why my attorney thinks my case is not portable with the same employer.
I have filed EB2 & EB3 with the same company (As explained earlier). EB3 as Programmer Analyst and EB2 as Database Adminstrator ( MS + 2 yrs exp.). I think it is better to take some expert attorney advice on your case. It does not hurt if you consult ( or crosscheck ) with some other attorney about your case. Most of the legal experts charge around $250 to evaluate your case and suggest.
Best of Luck to you.
Thanks.
Hi 9Years,
Thanks for the information! I will consult a another attorney.
I was looking up the SOC job codes and I noticed is that in your case the SOC job codes are different. (Programmer Analyst 15-1021.00 and Database Administrator 15-1061.00.)
In my case both Software Engineer and Principal Software Engineer falls under the same SOC code.
This could be why my attorney thinks my case is not portable with the same employer.
NKR
09-10 11:20 AM
Just curious, is it possible they have some reasoning to push applications to the end of the year? it'll be interesting to think of what could be the reason...
There is no reason for this madness, stop analysing, it will drive you crazy..
There is no reason for this madness, stop analysing, it will drive you crazy..
reedandbamboo
09-13 07:38 PM
The USCIS!!!
No comments:
Post a Comment