jayleno
10-15 03:21 PM
I propose Non Co-operation Movement for another flower campaign. I know art imitates life and life imitates art etc. But imitates again and again irritates.
I dont understand how sending flowers is Gandhigiri. Yes, I did watch the movie you are going to refer to, but still its just Munna Bhai Giri.
I dont understand how sending flowers is Gandhigiri. Yes, I did watch the movie you are going to refer to, but still its just Munna Bhai Giri.
wallpaper Ray-Ban Sunglasses, Two Tone
brawn81
11-06 11:50 AM
Hi,
Can somebody paste the sample letter that needed to be sent because I cant open in office.
Thanks,
brawn.
Can somebody paste the sample letter that needed to be sent because I cant open in office.
Thanks,
brawn.
vaishnavilakshmi
06-30 07:10 PM
Sounds like a plan - let us know what's the next step.
I got little demoralized last evening but then worked from 11 thru 3 AM to double check everything and i mailed today by USPS Express Mail ( it should reach July 2nd )
Thanks again for your leadership.
Diptam
Good Job Diptam !!,
Rumuors are rumors most of the times.Whatver be the situation u drove positively and finally made it to reach on time whatever the sitution would b on monday!
Though these announcements,rumours tensed u up,u really did a great job in finishing and submitting it !Thats the spirit!
-vaishu
I got little demoralized last evening but then worked from 11 thru 3 AM to double check everything and i mailed today by USPS Express Mail ( it should reach July 2nd )
Thanks again for your leadership.
Diptam
Good Job Diptam !!,
Rumuors are rumors most of the times.Whatver be the situation u drove positively and finally made it to reach on time whatever the sitution would b on monday!
Though these announcements,rumours tensed u up,u really did a great job in finishing and submitting it !Thats the spirit!
-vaishu
2011 Ray-Ban Sunglasses Frame
alisa
01-27 09:25 AM
I am glad you posted this.
I will put the numbers in the excel spreadsheet and see what comes out.
But these might give more sensible results than the preposterous wait times that we were getting.
If the average depletion rate for India is 34K per annum, then the wait times would look a lot better I think.
I am assuming that these numbers include the dependents. So, if 34K adjustment of status were awareded, then, roughly speaking, there were 17K primary applicants, and 17K dependents? Am I correct?
Also, for the accumulation rate, when we say that 65K H-1 visas are given out annually, I am assuming that does not include the dependents. Am I right??
FISCAL ------ Employment ------- EB3
YEAR ----- Total ---- INDIA | Total --- India
2000 ----- 111,024 | 15888 | 51,711 | -5567 :IV FY 2000 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2000%20table%20V.pdf)
2001 ----- 186,536 | 41720 | 90,274 | 16405 :IV FY 2001 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2001%20table%20V.pdf)
2002 ----- 171,583 | 41919 | 87,574 | 17428 :IV FY 2002 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2002%20table%20V.pdf)
2003 ----- -83,020 | 20818 | 47,354 | 10680 :IV FY 2003 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2003%20table%20V.pdf)
2004 ----- 157,107 | 39496 | 88,114 | 19962 :IV FY 2004 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY04tableV.pdf)
2005 ----- 242,335 | 47160 |122,130 | 23399 :IV FY 2005 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY05tableV.pdf)
6 yr total - 951,605| 207001| 487,157| 93441
Annual Avg --------- 34500 | -------- 15574
If this trend would have continued. There should not be any MAJOR retrogression problem, but if you remember from the Nov 05 VB. The warning was very clear:
During FY due to anticipated heavy demand, the AC21 provisions are not expected to apply, and the amount of Employment numbers available to any single country will be subject to the 7% cap. It is anticipated that the addition of unused FY-2005 Family numbers and the remaining AC21 numbers to the 140,000 annual minimum will result in an FY-2006 annual Employment limit of 152,000. This will mean an Employment per-country limit for FY-2006 of approximately 10,650.
To illustrate the effect of the reduced per-county limitation during FY-2006 on the oversubscribed countries, it should be noted that during FY-2005 India used approximately 47,175 Employment numbers.
If you plug this number into your analysis the result might be a couple of years of advance for your predictions.
andy
I will put the numbers in the excel spreadsheet and see what comes out.
But these might give more sensible results than the preposterous wait times that we were getting.
If the average depletion rate for India is 34K per annum, then the wait times would look a lot better I think.
I am assuming that these numbers include the dependents. So, if 34K adjustment of status were awareded, then, roughly speaking, there were 17K primary applicants, and 17K dependents? Am I correct?
Also, for the accumulation rate, when we say that 65K H-1 visas are given out annually, I am assuming that does not include the dependents. Am I right??
FISCAL ------ Employment ------- EB3
YEAR ----- Total ---- INDIA | Total --- India
2000 ----- 111,024 | 15888 | 51,711 | -5567 :IV FY 2000 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2000%20table%20V.pdf)
2001 ----- 186,536 | 41720 | 90,274 | 16405 :IV FY 2001 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2001%20table%20V.pdf)
2002 ----- 171,583 | 41919 | 87,574 | 17428 :IV FY 2002 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2002%20table%20V.pdf)
2003 ----- -83,020 | 20818 | 47,354 | 10680 :IV FY 2003 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2003%20table%20V.pdf)
2004 ----- 157,107 | 39496 | 88,114 | 19962 :IV FY 2004 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY04tableV.pdf)
2005 ----- 242,335 | 47160 |122,130 | 23399 :IV FY 2005 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY05tableV.pdf)
6 yr total - 951,605| 207001| 487,157| 93441
Annual Avg --------- 34500 | -------- 15574
If this trend would have continued. There should not be any MAJOR retrogression problem, but if you remember from the Nov 05 VB. The warning was very clear:
During FY due to anticipated heavy demand, the AC21 provisions are not expected to apply, and the amount of Employment numbers available to any single country will be subject to the 7% cap. It is anticipated that the addition of unused FY-2005 Family numbers and the remaining AC21 numbers to the 140,000 annual minimum will result in an FY-2006 annual Employment limit of 152,000. This will mean an Employment per-country limit for FY-2006 of approximately 10,650.
To illustrate the effect of the reduced per-county limitation during FY-2006 on the oversubscribed countries, it should be noted that during FY-2005 India used approximately 47,175 Employment numbers.
If you plug this number into your analysis the result might be a couple of years of advance for your predictions.
andy
more...
gk_2000
08-10 03:32 PM
I think it will be a lot easier to focus out energies to port ourselves to EB2/EB1.
Most of us would have bachelors + 5 years. So EB2 shouldn't be any problem as long as you are willing to change jobs and the employer is willing to file for GC.
Personally, the next time I'm in a position to drive a hard bergain for a job negotiation (still difficult in the current economic environment) - I will try to shoot for a 1 year foreign assignment -> EB1 route. I still curse myself for letting go of one such opportunity in 2006 becuase I did not want to go to London.
So if anybody knows companies that have started filing for GCs again after the freeze of last year - please let us know.
I think that discussion will be far more productive than any wishful reinterpretation of the law.
Could you elaborate on how this is a "wishful" reinterpretation of the law?
Most of us would have bachelors + 5 years. So EB2 shouldn't be any problem as long as you are willing to change jobs and the employer is willing to file for GC.
Personally, the next time I'm in a position to drive a hard bergain for a job negotiation (still difficult in the current economic environment) - I will try to shoot for a 1 year foreign assignment -> EB1 route. I still curse myself for letting go of one such opportunity in 2006 becuase I did not want to go to London.
So if anybody knows companies that have started filing for GCs again after the freeze of last year - please let us know.
I think that discussion will be far more productive than any wishful reinterpretation of the law.
Could you elaborate on how this is a "wishful" reinterpretation of the law?
sanju
11-11 05:48 PM
Wise words from a Senior Member!
But people here are not ready for new ideas. They are dreaming that Obama will install a GC card printer and start printing once he sworn in.
I presented an idea recently, as a temprory fix in these tough times. All I got was couple funny replys that has nothing to do with my plan. Also I got few red dots as a bonus.
Many gave up hope I believe.
Don't worry about the comments and the dots. I agree, things are going to get very tough in coming years.
And, the work of every president in the modern history has been diagonally opposite to the expectation. Example, conservatives voted for Bush to ban abortion, stop illegal immigration, balance budget etc. On all these issues, he was a major upset to his supporters. Based on what I know (and don't know), I think that the expectations of most people from Obama administration are likely to dash against the rock. Specifically, people on immigration forums like this one, who feels being in the proximity of a miracle will soon realize the dangerously flawed situation. The apathy of this community will consume it. Live and learn....
.
But people here are not ready for new ideas. They are dreaming that Obama will install a GC card printer and start printing once he sworn in.
I presented an idea recently, as a temprory fix in these tough times. All I got was couple funny replys that has nothing to do with my plan. Also I got few red dots as a bonus.
Many gave up hope I believe.
Don't worry about the comments and the dots. I agree, things are going to get very tough in coming years.
And, the work of every president in the modern history has been diagonally opposite to the expectation. Example, conservatives voted for Bush to ban abortion, stop illegal immigration, balance budget etc. On all these issues, he was a major upset to his supporters. Based on what I know (and don't know), I think that the expectations of most people from Obama administration are likely to dash against the rock. Specifically, people on immigration forums like this one, who feels being in the proximity of a miracle will soon realize the dangerously flawed situation. The apathy of this community will consume it. Live and learn....
.
more...
paskal
07-16 06:18 PM
only the media can do this for us
they like exposes' don't they?
now how can we get them interested
would the nyt reporter that wrote a story on Numbers USA be interested in a follwo up on their tactics?
they like exposes' don't they?
now how can we get them interested
would the nyt reporter that wrote a story on Numbers USA be interested in a follwo up on their tactics?
2010 2011 New Ray Ban Men Women#39;s
desi3933
02-02 02:32 PM
Thanks for your inputs Desi.
.....
one must be employed at all times on EAD
......
Not Correct. One must have a LC job offer and it must be available at all times since PD to the date of I-485 approval.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
.....
one must be employed at all times on EAD
......
Not Correct. One must have a LC job offer and it must be available at all times since PD to the date of I-485 approval.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
more...
10dulkar
08-15 05:18 PM
Expected news for EB3 folks
hair Ray-Ban Sunglasses
rajuram
11-14 09:33 AM
Totally agree, very nicely put. They will hear - listen if we present ideas that are pertinent to the existing situation. Nothing more pertinent than the housing mess. No one cares about old jaded ideas like "high talent" etc.
Can people in California approach Zoe Lofergens office with the idea?
On my part I will start sending letters and emails to the law makers.
Some one in the core has to take the lead and give some direction to this effort......
Do not regret if six months from now the housing crisis has cooled a little, no one will listen to us then. We would have wasted another chance. Do not take it for granted that now Obama is in office, he will do smoething about our problems.
all I can say is that now most economists say that housing is key to rescuing the economy and faster immigration is key to faster recovery. this is the key point in the present scenario ..people will give scant respect if we try to use other issues -namely by saying that legal immigrants are suffering or US is losing high talent ..they will just say the whole US is suffering - why should we care about yr problems.
but if we push faster immigration of people who are already here legally as a small way to solve the housing crisis then it will definitely stand a chance -
(please note - no distinction between those who are renting and who have a house already - this makes most sense. this is helpful to those who have purchased a house - since getting gC faster means that they have additional peace of mind)
Can people in California approach Zoe Lofergens office with the idea?
On my part I will start sending letters and emails to the law makers.
Some one in the core has to take the lead and give some direction to this effort......
Do not regret if six months from now the housing crisis has cooled a little, no one will listen to us then. We would have wasted another chance. Do not take it for granted that now Obama is in office, he will do smoething about our problems.
all I can say is that now most economists say that housing is key to rescuing the economy and faster immigration is key to faster recovery. this is the key point in the present scenario ..people will give scant respect if we try to use other issues -namely by saying that legal immigrants are suffering or US is losing high talent ..they will just say the whole US is suffering - why should we care about yr problems.
but if we push faster immigration of people who are already here legally as a small way to solve the housing crisis then it will definitely stand a chance -
(please note - no distinction between those who are renting and who have a house already - this makes most sense. this is helpful to those who have purchased a house - since getting gC faster means that they have additional peace of mind)
more...
ArunAntonio
08-17 05:33 PM
Please vote -- > http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=12441
hot ray ban glasses for women.
abhijitp
07-23 07:37 PM
When we emailed him about our concerns regarding this issue his response was the following:
I have won many cases without it. It�s not something we need to worry about at this point b/c we don�t have receipts yet. If immigration needs it they will likely request it.
To tell you the truth I'm still very worried.
The cited press releases do clearly say that they MAY deny an AOS application. What disturbs me is... why on earth should someone NOT obey the instructions which are clearly laid out on the front pages of the I-485 application forms? Is there a benefit to NOT submitting the employment letter?
I have won many cases without it. It�s not something we need to worry about at this point b/c we don�t have receipts yet. If immigration needs it they will likely request it.
To tell you the truth I'm still very worried.
The cited press releases do clearly say that they MAY deny an AOS application. What disturbs me is... why on earth should someone NOT obey the instructions which are clearly laid out on the front pages of the I-485 application forms? Is there a benefit to NOT submitting the employment letter?
more...
house Women#39;s Ray ban sunglasses
desi3933
02-11 07:03 PM
Dude,
Calm down, PresidenO gave you good comment and you got carried away thinking that President Obama praise you. Just vent your frustration somewhere else.
PresidentO,
I saw your past comment and it seems like you have an Attitude problem.
If something your are not agree or disagree that's fine but there is now way to go this far.
Great!!
Now you have come down to personal attacks while conveniently chosen not to reply to this. Did you read that pdf document and if so, show me where you see 13,000 unused numbers?
Go for facts, not for fictional stories.
Read this
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY08-AR-TableV.pdf
and tell us, where do you see 13,000 unused numbers?
Calm down, PresidenO gave you good comment and you got carried away thinking that President Obama praise you. Just vent your frustration somewhere else.
PresidentO,
I saw your past comment and it seems like you have an Attitude problem.
If something your are not agree or disagree that's fine but there is now way to go this far.
Great!!
Now you have come down to personal attacks while conveniently chosen not to reply to this. Did you read that pdf document and if so, show me where you see 13,000 unused numbers?
Go for facts, not for fictional stories.
Read this
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY08-AR-TableV.pdf
and tell us, where do you see 13,000 unused numbers?
tattoo ray ban glasses for women. ray
qasleuth
05-26 05:16 PM
Found this when I googled. Borderpatrol seems to have the authority to do whatever they did within 100 miles off any international border. It falls under 8 CFR 287.1. Entire state of NH is within 100 miles of Canada.
http://www.usborderpatrol.com/Border_Patrol608_2.htm
http://www.usborderpatrol.com/Border_Patrol608_2.htm
more...
pictures Ray+an+glasses+for+women
svr_76
02-19 01:28 PM
When/(and IF) this bill is passed....DHS/USCIS will be flooded with 12 million (some say 20 million) + all of the EB & FB applicant already in process.
So, it will further push the retrogression from 2015 AD (current backlogs) to 100 A.K. (After Kaliyug) :-)
So, it will further push the retrogression from 2015 AD (current backlogs) to 100 A.K. (After Kaliyug) :-)
dresses Ray-Ban Women#39;s Sunglasses
pappu
04-24 12:03 PM
Congrats and best wishes.
more...
makeup Ray-Ban Sunglasses Lastest
prioritydate
12-20 03:59 PM
Folks, I didn't worked for an year(2001) due to, you know what I am saying....
Now I am afraid that I would get an RFE because of that. Do you think that I need to worry about it? :(
Now I am afraid that I would get an RFE because of that. Do you think that I need to worry about it? :(
girlfriend Handbags prada, eyeglasses
solraj
03-12 05:55 AM
Good to see some progress on Eb3. Something is moving atleast. I am pleased.
hairstyles Ray ban sunglasses for women -
pappu
06-14 08:50 AM
/\/\/\
GCard_Dream
12-13 01:18 PM
I am sure this topic will come up again and again when new members join. We recently had quite a few (over a thousand) new members join IV and as the word gets around, there will be even more interest in IV and new members/non-members will visit the site and ask questions. I don't think we should expect everyone (new or old members) to know everything that was discussed in this forum from day one. That's not practical.
Every few days I see a new thread that is asking for information on how to change from EB3 to EB2. There are literally hundred or so threads that talks about this issue yet still new threads pop up regularly asking the same info. This is bound to happen and can't be stopped.
If you know that a topic has been covered somewhere, making a link available would be very helpful. If you think that a certain topic is brought up on a regular basis, may be we should make that thread sticky or have that information on homepage or somewhere where it's easily accessible.
We can always argue that members can do their own search on the forum. While that's true, if we know the answer and can quickly make that available to members, I think we'll be doing a service to our members. Just a thought.
All , this subject has been raised very often and every time new members join in they start a thread and start questioning it.
- IV has indepth explored and studied this option and have found that this change is not possible administratively.
- we have not just met a lawyer. we have met few lawyers. we also have communicated with USCIS in the past.
- In the past some administrative changes have been done by USCIS, but this change cannot be done by them. All, we already had this idea long long ago and we also thought that why dont we do it if it so simple and then we dont have to go through all the legislative hurdles. But NO it cannot be done by USCIS.
- Faxing USCIS will not work. USCIS does not take policy decisions. We need to approach policy makers to get it done and that is what we are doing. By coming up with ideas, endlessly discussing despite explaination by IV and not working with IV action items we will all go in divergent directions and lose focus on the main action items we want each every member should focus. If you really feel for some idea and want to help, instead of asking IV to give explanation to every question on the forum, contact any of the active IV core members on the forum and bounce ideas. We need people with ideas and also same people willing to work on them too.
- If it was possible to get it done administratively, then in the current Skil bill push we would have/ and lawmakers would also have just asked USCIS to implement it.
Hope this explains this topic. Thanks
Every few days I see a new thread that is asking for information on how to change from EB3 to EB2. There are literally hundred or so threads that talks about this issue yet still new threads pop up regularly asking the same info. This is bound to happen and can't be stopped.
If you know that a topic has been covered somewhere, making a link available would be very helpful. If you think that a certain topic is brought up on a regular basis, may be we should make that thread sticky or have that information on homepage or somewhere where it's easily accessible.
We can always argue that members can do their own search on the forum. While that's true, if we know the answer and can quickly make that available to members, I think we'll be doing a service to our members. Just a thought.
All , this subject has been raised very often and every time new members join in they start a thread and start questioning it.
- IV has indepth explored and studied this option and have found that this change is not possible administratively.
- we have not just met a lawyer. we have met few lawyers. we also have communicated with USCIS in the past.
- In the past some administrative changes have been done by USCIS, but this change cannot be done by them. All, we already had this idea long long ago and we also thought that why dont we do it if it so simple and then we dont have to go through all the legislative hurdles. But NO it cannot be done by USCIS.
- Faxing USCIS will not work. USCIS does not take policy decisions. We need to approach policy makers to get it done and that is what we are doing. By coming up with ideas, endlessly discussing despite explaination by IV and not working with IV action items we will all go in divergent directions and lose focus on the main action items we want each every member should focus. If you really feel for some idea and want to help, instead of asking IV to give explanation to every question on the forum, contact any of the active IV core members on the forum and bounce ideas. We need people with ideas and also same people willing to work on them too.
- If it was possible to get it done administratively, then in the current Skil bill push we would have/ and lawmakers would also have just asked USCIS to implement it.
Hope this explains this topic. Thanks
goel_ar
03-21 12:29 PM
Send me I'm. My prev post was deleted by mod becos they won't allow other websites to be published here
wow -- why mods don't allow other websites to be published here?
wow -- why mods don't allow other websites to be published here?