abhijitp
07-18 12:37 AM
Continuing on this forum with more generic title
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=10383
Per Greg Siskind -- July 2nd filers might have to file again, as all July 2nd application were rejected. Check out the link below as well as the comment section for the blog
Greg Siskind is reporting the following about July2nd rejection here
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2007/07/faqs-part-1.html
part of above post --
USCIS did not state how cases filed and rejected on the 2nd are to be handled other than to say that properly filed applications would be accepted. This presumably covers the many cases filed after the second that were held, but it doesn�t explain what will happen to the cases received earlier. We hope USCIS will issue special instructions to issue July 2nd receipt dates to those who are able to document they attempted to file. We presume some folks are still waiting on their July 2nd cases to be returned and are debating refiling new cases rather than waiting. Unfortunately, there is a risk of not getting the package back before August 17th and some people will need to refile without proof of the earlier filing. Hopefully, again, USCIS will institute a process for such individuals to avoid being penalized.
USCIS has not announced any details yet on how it will determine which cases get 2007 visa numbers that might still be available. We also don�t know yet how cases will be processed that are not in the batch of cases that get green card numbers this year. For those who will have to get numbers in future years, applications should be worked by the order of the priority date. So applicants with labor certifications approved some time back, for example, should go before people in the same category with later priority dates.
For individuals filing cases not requiring a labor certification (such as Schedule A cases and national interest waivers), the priority date is the date of filing. Because there may be hundreds of thousands of applications received between July 2nd and August 17th with many of these cases not requiring a labor certification, the date during this six week period a case is filed could make a big difference in terms of when a case will complete processing. And, again, getting that July 2nd priority date for those who filed early and were rejected could make a big difference in when their cases are ultimately processed through to completion.
This would be interesting as well as cause for concern for many of us. Do we have to go through the whole process one more time and file again?
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=10383
Per Greg Siskind -- July 2nd filers might have to file again, as all July 2nd application were rejected. Check out the link below as well as the comment section for the blog
Greg Siskind is reporting the following about July2nd rejection here
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2007/07/faqs-part-1.html
part of above post --
USCIS did not state how cases filed and rejected on the 2nd are to be handled other than to say that properly filed applications would be accepted. This presumably covers the many cases filed after the second that were held, but it doesn�t explain what will happen to the cases received earlier. We hope USCIS will issue special instructions to issue July 2nd receipt dates to those who are able to document they attempted to file. We presume some folks are still waiting on their July 2nd cases to be returned and are debating refiling new cases rather than waiting. Unfortunately, there is a risk of not getting the package back before August 17th and some people will need to refile without proof of the earlier filing. Hopefully, again, USCIS will institute a process for such individuals to avoid being penalized.
USCIS has not announced any details yet on how it will determine which cases get 2007 visa numbers that might still be available. We also don�t know yet how cases will be processed that are not in the batch of cases that get green card numbers this year. For those who will have to get numbers in future years, applications should be worked by the order of the priority date. So applicants with labor certifications approved some time back, for example, should go before people in the same category with later priority dates.
For individuals filing cases not requiring a labor certification (such as Schedule A cases and national interest waivers), the priority date is the date of filing. Because there may be hundreds of thousands of applications received between July 2nd and August 17th with many of these cases not requiring a labor certification, the date during this six week period a case is filed could make a big difference in terms of when a case will complete processing. And, again, getting that July 2nd priority date for those who filed early and were rejected could make a big difference in when their cases are ultimately processed through to completion.
This would be interesting as well as cause for concern for many of us. Do we have to go through the whole process one more time and file again?
wallpaper hair Bar Refaeli Si Swimsuit
delax
07-13 10:34 AM
Why didnt the EB2 ROW number trickle to ROW EB3 first?
Think about this for a minute. By doing so EB3-ROW is given precedence over EB2-Retro country after the ROW within EB2 has been satisfied. I cant see how that can make sense - not that anything in the GC sojourn makes sense. The categorization across employment categories is due to a difference in skill, training and experience level. Once the ROW demand within a category has been satisified, the retro country within the same category needs to get a preference over any lower category - sounds very harsh and heirarchical but thats how it is.
Think about this for a minute. By doing so EB3-ROW is given precedence over EB2-Retro country after the ROW within EB2 has been satisfied. I cant see how that can make sense - not that anything in the GC sojourn makes sense. The categorization across employment categories is due to a difference in skill, training and experience level. Once the ROW demand within a category has been satisified, the retro country within the same category needs to get a preference over any lower category - sounds very harsh and heirarchical but thats how it is.
skd
09-17 04:33 PM
If you have been following the news this week, the economy is really in trouble. Specifically financial and insurance sector. Dow plunged around 900 + points in last 2 days.
2011 Model Bar Refaeli – 2010
meera_godse
01-31 02:48 PM
My brother had horror stories when he was working in CA. His close friend cousin owns a company and he blindely trusted him. They forced my brother to sign a contract in the amount of $10000 if he leaves the company. He spent there for 6 months and found it horrible.
Thanks.
if its not a problem, can you please share the name of this contrator. it can help people like me stay away from them.
also can someone respond to the travel query i posted. thnx
Thanks.
if its not a problem, can you please share the name of this contrator. it can help people like me stay away from them.
also can someone respond to the travel query i posted. thnx
more...
Jaime
09-10 12:37 PM
You have been stuck in the Labor backlog centers or name check for years - It's not our fault that USCIS is a totally broken agency and the immigration process discriminatory and arcane. We contribute billions to the economy and love the U.S. The least we can ask for is for a fair immigration process (let alone a good one) just plain old FAIR will do!
chanduv23
04-09 10:40 PM
We are not saying that they are not doing their job well. We just want better visibility to plan our future. I want to buy Hose which has substancial investment, can I buy during this uncertainity, may be.
Buying a hose is not substantial investment. It may cost $20 to $50 based on the length you need
Buying a hose is not substantial investment. It may cost $20 to $50 based on the length you need
more...
shukla77
01-02 08:03 PM
I have posted about immigrationvoice.org in following yahoo groups
IIT- Global (2526 members)
IIT-midwest(317 members)
IITK-westcoast(766 members)
Inter IIT (4654 members)
I hope this helps.
Good Luck to All
-Shukla
IIT- Global (2526 members)
IIT-midwest(317 members)
IITK-westcoast(766 members)
Inter IIT (4654 members)
I hope this helps.
Good Luck to All
-Shukla
2010 Bar Refaeli the father I want
prioritydate
12-20 07:42 PM
<If anything like out of status or unauthorized employed happened before your last legal entry into USA (whether is more than 180 days or less than 180 days) IT DOES NOT MATTER and you can adjust status. You are fine. What's important is that "out of status" and "unauthorized stay" periods must not happen after you last entered USA and after you filed your 485 - and if it does happen, then it should be less than 180 days.>
So, logiclife, going with your above statement, I don't have any problem with my adustment of status? My last legal entry to the U.S was Mar, 2006. I applied for AOS in July, 2007. Can you point to any USCIS memo/documents stating the above facts? I was out of status in the year 2001 (more than 180 days).
So, logiclife, going with your above statement, I don't have any problem with my adustment of status? My last legal entry to the U.S was Mar, 2006. I applied for AOS in July, 2007. Can you point to any USCIS memo/documents stating the above facts? I was out of status in the year 2001 (more than 180 days).
more...
delhirocks
07-01 10:00 PM
When prominent business houses like Microsoft, Google, Cisco, Oracle and organizations like AILA seem powerless when it comes to influencing senators, lawmakers and government organizations like USCIS and DOS, what can IV team do to change the policies. Sorry I did not mean to criticize, but that's the truth, unfortunately!
What is the alternative?
We all resign to our fate�or try to do whatever little we can
What is the alternative?
We all resign to our fate�or try to do whatever little we can
hair ar refaeli 2011 sports
nojoke
03-01 03:57 AM
What a lovely change. Every time Obama and his press Secy opens their mouth, markets dive into red. In this country Main Street and Wall Street are in bed with each other :-)
Obama with his sense-less economic policies, trying to separate Main Street from Wall street. Government needs to seriously lure the investors to the market , cut capital gains and taxes, take off protectionist hats and recover the economy. Then Obama can go with his socialist/populist agenda but certainly this is not the right time.:D
Stop watching faux news.
Bush has done tax cuts to the investor class and look where it has taken this country.
Obama with his sense-less economic policies, trying to separate Main Street from Wall street. Government needs to seriously lure the investors to the market , cut capital gains and taxes, take off protectionist hats and recover the economy. Then Obama can go with his socialist/populist agenda but certainly this is not the right time.:D
Stop watching faux news.
Bush has done tax cuts to the investor class and look where it has taken this country.
more...
feedfront
05-18 12:26 PM
It was for medical form:
1) As X-Ray report was missing (and my medical report had +ve in TB test),
2) My physician was no longer in USCIS's current list of doctors.
All the best.
1) As X-Ray report was missing (and my medical report had +ve in TB test),
2) My physician was no longer in USCIS's current list of doctors.
All the best.
hot Bar Refaeli
immigal
09-26 12:44 PM
No. Please attach copy of the affidavit. If you are called for interview, carry the original affidavit with you. This is what my attorney did..send the copy.
more...
house ar refaeli swimsuit 2011
alisa
01-20 02:15 AM
Man....
You guys (from India) are in a really really terrible situation.
First column shows the year. Second one estimates applicants for GC from India. Third (Years to Clear) one divides backlog by 10000 to estimate the number of years needed too clear that backlog, assuming 10000 visa numbers released per year. Fourth (Year cleared) adds that number to the Year column to give the year you can get your GC. Finally, assuming that AC21 added a year's worth of supply of visa numbers, a year is taken out from the final estimate.
Also dependents are not included in the calculations. Send them back.
Here is how I estimated backlogs. Backlogs for 2001 and 2002 are taken from jungalee43 posting.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=1265#post1265
For years 2003 and forward,
a) 65000 applicants for H-1 assumed
b) 40 percent of these assumed to be Indians (26000)
c) 75 % of these 26000 assumed to have applied for and made it past the I-140 stage, i.e. 19500 added annually since 2003.
d) Each year, 10000 visa numbers allotted to Indians. (Assumption: Indians don't have any dependents. If you want to include dependents, 2001 backlog clears in 2023, and 2006 backlog clears in 2055)
Here are the results.
Year Backlog YTC YC AC21
2001 123194 12.3194 2012 2011
2002 160274 16.0274 2016 2015
2003 169774 16.9774 2016 2015
2004 179274 17.9274 2020 2019
2005 188774 18.8774 2020 2019
2006 198274 19.8274 2024 2023
2007 207774 20.7774 2024 2023
2008 217274 21.7274 2028 2027
2009 226774 22.6774 2028 2027
2010 236274 23.6274 2032 2031
Feel free to improve on this.
I had posted this statistics last year on IV. I had done good research to arrive at these figures. I hope the figures will open eyes of people who are bestowed with 'blissful ignorance'.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=1265#post1265
You guys (from India) are in a really really terrible situation.
First column shows the year. Second one estimates applicants for GC from India. Third (Years to Clear) one divides backlog by 10000 to estimate the number of years needed too clear that backlog, assuming 10000 visa numbers released per year. Fourth (Year cleared) adds that number to the Year column to give the year you can get your GC. Finally, assuming that AC21 added a year's worth of supply of visa numbers, a year is taken out from the final estimate.
Also dependents are not included in the calculations. Send them back.
Here is how I estimated backlogs. Backlogs for 2001 and 2002 are taken from jungalee43 posting.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=1265#post1265
For years 2003 and forward,
a) 65000 applicants for H-1 assumed
b) 40 percent of these assumed to be Indians (26000)
c) 75 % of these 26000 assumed to have applied for and made it past the I-140 stage, i.e. 19500 added annually since 2003.
d) Each year, 10000 visa numbers allotted to Indians. (Assumption: Indians don't have any dependents. If you want to include dependents, 2001 backlog clears in 2023, and 2006 backlog clears in 2055)
Here are the results.
Year Backlog YTC YC AC21
2001 123194 12.3194 2012 2011
2002 160274 16.0274 2016 2015
2003 169774 16.9774 2016 2015
2004 179274 17.9274 2020 2019
2005 188774 18.8774 2020 2019
2006 198274 19.8274 2024 2023
2007 207774 20.7774 2024 2023
2008 217274 21.7274 2028 2027
2009 226774 22.6774 2028 2027
2010 236274 23.6274 2032 2031
Feel free to improve on this.
I had posted this statistics last year on IV. I had done good research to arrive at these figures. I hope the figures will open eyes of people who are bestowed with 'blissful ignorance'.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=1265#post1265
tattoo Get acquainted with Bar after
singhsa3
03-04 12:41 PM
Already, spoken to couple of them. Anyways, the point is not that I get the mortgage, the point is that we get our GC or Admin fixes done.
shop around...talk to different lenders....there are many of them that understand that the ead is renewable. its up to u as a consumer how to make ur case.
shop around...talk to different lenders....there are many of them that understand that the ead is renewable. its up to u as a consumer how to make ur case.
more...
pictures ar refaeli swimsuit 2011
tushar123
02-13 05:26 PM
Its funny to see that people call this ethinic cleansing.... it is the right of America to punish people who disobey the law. reservation now in india is a better example which deprives people from certain community to persue higher education or employment in govt jobs.
dresses ar refaeli swimsuit 2011.
BharatPremi
09-26 10:08 AM
It is not about politics, it is about ignorance of the people (including reporters). It is explainable, though - what do you know about... I don't know, laws around transporting hazardous materials, something you have never been exposed or subject to? Next to nothing. That's what an average American knows about immigration - their closest brush with that law was when their co-worker adopted a child from abroad. Of course, they do not know the difference between worker visas, and employment based immigrant visas (don't they even sound alike?).
Hermione,
How confident are you to call them "Ignorant".... It could be very planned and calculative agenda. Writer writes in CNN. Never ever be ignorant about their tactful agenda, capacity and wilful application of the polity.
I belive, IV MUST talk to CNN and force them to accept the "error" in that article publicly by publishing at earliest.
Hermione,
How confident are you to call them "Ignorant".... It could be very planned and calculative agenda. Writer writes in CNN. Never ever be ignorant about their tactful agenda, capacity and wilful application of the polity.
I belive, IV MUST talk to CNN and force them to accept the "error" in that article publicly by publishing at earliest.
more...
makeup ar refaeli swimsuit 2011.
chanduv23
12-26 04:37 PM
If financial institutions are following govt regulations, does it mean that Govt mandated this against h1b? One of those gimmicks where a H1b is subject to difficulty like obtaining driver lisence etc...is this the same gimmick to legally give hardship to h1b?
girlfriend si swimsuit 2011 bar refaeli
johnwright03
07-01 09:38 AM
06/30/2007: Potential EB Visa Number Exhaution in July and Probable Actions of State Department or USCIS
* By now, people understand that the sources of potential action by the State Department or USCIS are predicated on the two important facts. One was the information from a government source that there were only about 40,000 numbers left for the entire EB visa numbers for the FY 2007 which ends on September 30, 2007. The second important fact was that reportedly the USCIS alone had far more than 40,000 I-485 applications in the backlog queue that were reportedly ready for approval. Considering the fact that the immigrant visa numbers are consumed by the approval of I-485 applications by the USCIS and the approval of immigant visa applications in the consular processing by visa posts througout the world, 40,000 visa numbers could be fairly quickly exhausted in early July 2007. This prediction was exacerbated by the information that the USCIS was apparently picking up the pace of I-485 adjudications lately.
* Obviously the State Department has been in communication with the USCIS and was well aware of the situation. Sources reported that the State Department might revise the July Visa Bulletin either Monday or Tuesday to reflect the situation. However, it is unclear at this point whether this will occur on Monday or Tuesday or, for that matter, some time soon, particulary considering the ongoing uproar in the nation. Assuming that the EB immigrant visa number will be exhausted before the end of July, from the government perspectives, they may have two options to handle this matter. One is the State Department revises the Visa Bulletin based on the newly developed facts and predictions. The other option is that the State Department does not take any action of revising the Visa Bulletin but just notify the USCIS when the visa numbers for certain categories are exhausted. The initial sources of rumor was the former possibility. However, as updated by the AILA afterwards, it might or might not happen.
* Whether the State Department revises the July visa bulletin or not, the fact will remain that 40,000 numbers could indeed be run out in a fairly short period of time in July. It is too obvious that under the statute, when the visa numbers are exhausted, the USCIS will not be able to approve any I-485 applications, and for that reason, the USCIS may wrongly reject the incoming I-485 applications or return I-485 applications which were received after the date when the visa number is exhausted. This happened for the "other worker" category in June when the priority date was current in June for certain other workers. The issue of legality of such action of the USCIS is rooted in the required distinction of the USCIS statutory mandates between its job of adjudication of 485 applications "already in the pipeline" and its job of "accepting new 485 applications." Arguably, when the visa number runs out, there is no question about that the USCIS should not and cannot adjudicate and approve any 485 applications. But there is no legal basis that the USCIS should not and cannot "accept" new 485 applications when the cases fall within the cut-off date of the monthly visa bulletin. If the State Department attempts to revise the July Visa Bulletin, probably they are doing it to overcome the predicament of the USCIS that will face in rejecting the new 485 applications. The problem is the State Department's own legal problem or authority to revise the published Visa Bulletin. Accordingly, either USCIS or State Department will be liable for either abuse of power or arbitrary act depending on who acts. The AILF is planning to sue the USCIS for rejecting "other worker" new 485 applications in June probably on ultra vires or other statutory authority grounds. Should the same thing happen in July, the AILF intends to extend its lawsuit to cover the July 2007 485 applicants, probably in the form of class action. What happens if the State Department revises the Visa Bulletin and the USCIS rejects the new applications based on the new Visa Bulletin? Strictly speaking, there may be no cause of action against the USCIS in that it followed the State Department's Visa Bulletin for the month of July. In this case, probably the lawsuit will have to be directed to the State Department for violation of law in revising the visa bulletin. We will soon find out.
* Where does this leave to the July 485 applicants? Fact remains that all likelihood, the annual limit may reach fairly early in July and they should file their cases before the visa posts and the USCIS exhaust all the numbers. They have to do this probably for the two reasons. One is that should the government take the second option of rejecting new cases after reaching the limit just as we experienced in the other worker cases, those who filed the I-485 application before that date will not be affected. Those who files the application after the date of exhaution and receive rejection of the 485 applications may be entitled to sue the USCIS either in a class action or individually. Secondly, if the government takes the first option of the State Department revising the July Visa Bulletin, they will have to sue the State Department and for that purpose, they should have filed I-485 applications within July 2007. Otherwise, they may have a standing to sue the State Department.
* For the foregoing reasons, we urge the July 485 filers to file the applications as soon as possible. At the same time, we urge the State Department and the USCIS not to take any actions to avoid the lawsuits. They should keep accepting I-485 applications even after the enhaution of the FY 2007 numbers, even though they will not be able to adjudicate these applications until the visa numbers become current again. Again, the agencies should distinguish the requirement for adjudication of 485 applications and the requirement for acceptance of new applications. These are two separate things.
* By now, people understand that the sources of potential action by the State Department or USCIS are predicated on the two important facts. One was the information from a government source that there were only about 40,000 numbers left for the entire EB visa numbers for the FY 2007 which ends on September 30, 2007. The second important fact was that reportedly the USCIS alone had far more than 40,000 I-485 applications in the backlog queue that were reportedly ready for approval. Considering the fact that the immigrant visa numbers are consumed by the approval of I-485 applications by the USCIS and the approval of immigant visa applications in the consular processing by visa posts througout the world, 40,000 visa numbers could be fairly quickly exhausted in early July 2007. This prediction was exacerbated by the information that the USCIS was apparently picking up the pace of I-485 adjudications lately.
* Obviously the State Department has been in communication with the USCIS and was well aware of the situation. Sources reported that the State Department might revise the July Visa Bulletin either Monday or Tuesday to reflect the situation. However, it is unclear at this point whether this will occur on Monday or Tuesday or, for that matter, some time soon, particulary considering the ongoing uproar in the nation. Assuming that the EB immigrant visa number will be exhausted before the end of July, from the government perspectives, they may have two options to handle this matter. One is the State Department revises the Visa Bulletin based on the newly developed facts and predictions. The other option is that the State Department does not take any action of revising the Visa Bulletin but just notify the USCIS when the visa numbers for certain categories are exhausted. The initial sources of rumor was the former possibility. However, as updated by the AILA afterwards, it might or might not happen.
* Whether the State Department revises the July visa bulletin or not, the fact will remain that 40,000 numbers could indeed be run out in a fairly short period of time in July. It is too obvious that under the statute, when the visa numbers are exhausted, the USCIS will not be able to approve any I-485 applications, and for that reason, the USCIS may wrongly reject the incoming I-485 applications or return I-485 applications which were received after the date when the visa number is exhausted. This happened for the "other worker" category in June when the priority date was current in June for certain other workers. The issue of legality of such action of the USCIS is rooted in the required distinction of the USCIS statutory mandates between its job of adjudication of 485 applications "already in the pipeline" and its job of "accepting new 485 applications." Arguably, when the visa number runs out, there is no question about that the USCIS should not and cannot adjudicate and approve any 485 applications. But there is no legal basis that the USCIS should not and cannot "accept" new 485 applications when the cases fall within the cut-off date of the monthly visa bulletin. If the State Department attempts to revise the July Visa Bulletin, probably they are doing it to overcome the predicament of the USCIS that will face in rejecting the new 485 applications. The problem is the State Department's own legal problem or authority to revise the published Visa Bulletin. Accordingly, either USCIS or State Department will be liable for either abuse of power or arbitrary act depending on who acts. The AILF is planning to sue the USCIS for rejecting "other worker" new 485 applications in June probably on ultra vires or other statutory authority grounds. Should the same thing happen in July, the AILF intends to extend its lawsuit to cover the July 2007 485 applicants, probably in the form of class action. What happens if the State Department revises the Visa Bulletin and the USCIS rejects the new applications based on the new Visa Bulletin? Strictly speaking, there may be no cause of action against the USCIS in that it followed the State Department's Visa Bulletin for the month of July. In this case, probably the lawsuit will have to be directed to the State Department for violation of law in revising the visa bulletin. We will soon find out.
* Where does this leave to the July 485 applicants? Fact remains that all likelihood, the annual limit may reach fairly early in July and they should file their cases before the visa posts and the USCIS exhaust all the numbers. They have to do this probably for the two reasons. One is that should the government take the second option of rejecting new cases after reaching the limit just as we experienced in the other worker cases, those who filed the I-485 application before that date will not be affected. Those who files the application after the date of exhaution and receive rejection of the 485 applications may be entitled to sue the USCIS either in a class action or individually. Secondly, if the government takes the first option of the State Department revising the July Visa Bulletin, they will have to sue the State Department and for that purpose, they should have filed I-485 applications within July 2007. Otherwise, they may have a standing to sue the State Department.
* For the foregoing reasons, we urge the July 485 filers to file the applications as soon as possible. At the same time, we urge the State Department and the USCIS not to take any actions to avoid the lawsuits. They should keep accepting I-485 applications even after the enhaution of the FY 2007 numbers, even though they will not be able to adjudicate these applications until the visa numbers become current again. Again, the agencies should distinguish the requirement for adjudication of 485 applications and the requirement for acceptance of new applications. These are two separate things.
hairstyles Bar Refaeli 2011 Si Swimsuit
Jaime
09-12 02:05 PM
Come on guys! We need thosands of us in DC! For those still debating, email us, we will help you with funds and logistics! LET'S GO GUYS!!! THIS IS OUR CHANCE!!!! WE HAVE GOVERNORS AND BUSINESS ON OUR SIDE, BUT ESPECIALLY WE HAVE TRUTH ON OUR SIDE!!!! LET'S GO TOGETHER TO DC!!!!
chanduv23
11-11 03:44 PM
I am not sure what lobbying efforts would do for us, haven't worked so far...In my opinion we need more media visibility which makes politicians to take notice of us. In these troubled times they are open to any kind of ideas that would help the housing market.
Just show the real numbers to the media -
Approx 0.5 million people (well educated with decent earnings)
Atleast 50 to 60% of these people could potentially buy houses if immigration related uncertainities are gone
Potentially quarter of million buyers for houses, that is a lot!!
I leave it up to IV core to followup on these ideas. I repeat, as I have done so many times, it is all about marketing + media presence. We won the July 2007 visa bulletin battle because of adverse media reaction to the state department. Grass roots stuff is all good, but no one will ever notice it.
Please come up with ideas. Remember - IV core looks at all the posts and get ideas from the forums. You may want to start a thread saying - Lets all put our constructive thoughts about moving ahead with Obama administration here. People can posts their ideas, plans, implementations, strategies ...... and we can all discuss.
Rajuram - your concern is valid and basically what is happening is - IV now needs some dedicated new generation members who can make a difference. thats how IV has been working from the beginnibg, people come and go - so do admins.
You can help in this way by opening a thread to share new ideas and strategies.
Just show the real numbers to the media -
Approx 0.5 million people (well educated with decent earnings)
Atleast 50 to 60% of these people could potentially buy houses if immigration related uncertainities are gone
Potentially quarter of million buyers for houses, that is a lot!!
I leave it up to IV core to followup on these ideas. I repeat, as I have done so many times, it is all about marketing + media presence. We won the July 2007 visa bulletin battle because of adverse media reaction to the state department. Grass roots stuff is all good, but no one will ever notice it.
Please come up with ideas. Remember - IV core looks at all the posts and get ideas from the forums. You may want to start a thread saying - Lets all put our constructive thoughts about moving ahead with Obama administration here. People can posts their ideas, plans, implementations, strategies ...... and we can all discuss.
Rajuram - your concern is valid and basically what is happening is - IV now needs some dedicated new generation members who can make a difference. thats how IV has been working from the beginnibg, people come and go - so do admins.
You can help in this way by opening a thread to share new ideas and strategies.
abd
09-23 12:20 PM
Just when i was wondering that we will have to wait till OCt 1 when new visa are avialable... I saw your message... If i was you i will wait too for next 5/6 days you have till oct to respond.
Does that mean there is still hope that we may see some activity on the cases who have responsed to RFEs or we have to wait till OCt 1 Chewing our nails?
We got approval email for myself + spouse and daughter today. I had waited for this since 2002. :)
Your Case Status: Card/ Document Production
On September 23, 2010, we ordered production of your new card. Please allow 30 days for your card to be mailed to you. If we need something from you we will contact you. If you move before you receive the card, call customer service at 1-800-375-5283.
This step applies to applications that result in an applicant receiving a card (such as a "green card") or other document (such as a naturalization certificate, employment authorization document, travel document, or advance parole). Applications will be in this step from the time the order to produce the card/document is given until the card/document is produced and mailed to the applicant. You can expect to receive your card/document within 30 days of the approval of your application.
If you do not receive your document, please contact our National Customer Service Center at 1-800-375-5283.
Does that mean there is still hope that we may see some activity on the cases who have responsed to RFEs or we have to wait till OCt 1 Chewing our nails?
We got approval email for myself + spouse and daughter today. I had waited for this since 2002. :)
Your Case Status: Card/ Document Production
On September 23, 2010, we ordered production of your new card. Please allow 30 days for your card to be mailed to you. If we need something from you we will contact you. If you move before you receive the card, call customer service at 1-800-375-5283.
This step applies to applications that result in an applicant receiving a card (such as a "green card") or other document (such as a naturalization certificate, employment authorization document, travel document, or advance parole). Applications will be in this step from the time the order to produce the card/document is given until the card/document is produced and mailed to the applicant. You can expect to receive your card/document within 30 days of the approval of your application.
If you do not receive your document, please contact our National Customer Service Center at 1-800-375-5283.