madhuthomas
08-20 09:49 AM
I applied my EAD renewal on June 19th and AP on August 1st. Both are approved today(august 20th). The Ead status is Card Production ordered.
PD- June 2003 EB3-I
PD- June 2003 EB3-I
wallpaper We designed this cake to look
maximus777
09-09 10:04 PM
Are you saying illegals are smart? Or smart poeple are here illegally?
Think its more along the lines of its smart to be illegal under current circumstances :cool:
Think its more along the lines of its smart to be illegal under current circumstances :cool:
makemygc
05-23 08:20 AM
Sent to all..keep sending email guys...dont get into argument right now.
2011 zebra print birthday cakes
.jpg "Birthday Cake: Zebra.")
newu77
08-17 04:57 PM
I-485 delivered at 10:25 on July 2, 2007 in LINCOLN, NE (NSC)
Signed by J BARRET.
I-140 approved from TSC
I-140 LUD on 07/28/2007
No receipts Yet.
Signed by J BARRET.
I-140 approved from TSC
I-140 LUD on 07/28/2007
No receipts Yet.
more...
sanprabhu
07-20 10:31 AM
$100 from me.
Recurrent contribution $ 50.
Recurrent contribution $ 50.
pappu
06-28 04:47 PM
Hello LCtank,
Thanks for the excellent suggestion. Do you know Dr. Woo or do you know someone who would know Dr. Woo? That would help a lot. Will initiate the contact with 80-20 initiative right away.
If anybody has more of such suggestions/leads please send them across and help this effort.
Thanks again,
WaldenPond
This is a good idea.
http://www.80-20initiative.net/intouch.htm
http://www.80-20initiative.net/BoDSC.html
There is also one Rajen Anand as its director.
Rajen Anand (Southern California)
Currently serving as a Professor of Physiology at the California State University, Long Beach, Dr. Anand was head of the USDA Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion in Washington DC, 1995-2001.
Long involved in public policy issues and community affairs, Dr. Anand has served as an officer / Board member of: 80-20 Initiative, Asian and Pacific Americans in Higher Education (vice president); National Federation of Indian American Associations (president-elect); Indo-American Political Association (chair); Asian American and Pacific Islander Caucus (vice chair and chair) in California, and many others.
Dr. Anand was appointed in 1994, and reappointed in 1997 and 2000, to serve on the 11-member National Committee on Foreign Medical Education and Accreditation.
Thanks for the excellent suggestion. Do you know Dr. Woo or do you know someone who would know Dr. Woo? That would help a lot. Will initiate the contact with 80-20 initiative right away.
If anybody has more of such suggestions/leads please send them across and help this effort.
Thanks again,
WaldenPond
This is a good idea.
http://www.80-20initiative.net/intouch.htm
http://www.80-20initiative.net/BoDSC.html
There is also one Rajen Anand as its director.
Rajen Anand (Southern California)
Currently serving as a Professor of Physiology at the California State University, Long Beach, Dr. Anand was head of the USDA Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion in Washington DC, 1995-2001.
Long involved in public policy issues and community affairs, Dr. Anand has served as an officer / Board member of: 80-20 Initiative, Asian and Pacific Americans in Higher Education (vice president); National Federation of Indian American Associations (president-elect); Indo-American Political Association (chair); Asian American and Pacific Islander Caucus (vice chair and chair) in California, and many others.
Dr. Anand was appointed in 1994, and reappointed in 1997 and 2000, to serve on the 11-member National Committee on Foreign Medical Education and Accreditation.
more...
GKBest
10-02 11:27 AM
Hi everyone,
Iam a July 3rd filer and the moneyorders for me and my wife has been cashed on September 28th. We had send 2 moneyorders for $745. Waiting for the receipts to come. Hope all of you get your receipts very soon.
And what time? Hopefully, I will be in that box.
Iam a July 3rd filer and the moneyorders for me and my wife has been cashed on September 28th. We had send 2 moneyorders for $745. Waiting for the receipts to come. Hope all of you get your receipts very soon.
And what time? Hopefully, I will be in that box.
2010 Animal Print Birthday Cake
chmur
07-27 06:58 PM
It has been hinted that EB3 lobbying undermines recapture efforts . Could proponents of this theory explain how??
Why both cannot happen simultaneously??
I have only seen implications to this effect but nobody has come forward and said it plainly - You EB3 folks don't spoil the EB2 party because you had it good previous years and we are afraid if you make too loud a noise, our party might come crashing down.
Everybody seems to imply it but nobody wants to call it as plainly as I stated it above.
I might have exaggerated the fear factor but I am unable to find any other reason as to they would discourage EB3-I lobby under the pretext of recapture efforts.
Why both cannot happen simultaneously??
I have only seen implications to this effect but nobody has come forward and said it plainly - You EB3 folks don't spoil the EB2 party because you had it good previous years and we are afraid if you make too loud a noise, our party might come crashing down.
Everybody seems to imply it but nobody wants to call it as plainly as I stated it above.
I might have exaggerated the fear factor but I am unable to find any other reason as to they would discourage EB3-I lobby under the pretext of recapture efforts.
more...
srikondoji
07-08 11:24 AM
Well said.
Such intricate details won't come out in interviews or even personally talking to them. Only lawyers can do it as part of a fight with lawsuits.
1)Why they have to make everybody current?
2)Why they were working weekends (actually heard that govt employees working during weekends is illegal) to clear 60,000 visa numbers?
3) Why did they pick july 2nd to revise the bulletin and did not pre-warn potential applicants?
4)Why no one from DOS or USCIS is talking about exceptions and or remedies for those july applicants who wasted thousands in 2 weeks?
5) What was that urge, which compelled DOS to make everybody current?
6) What will happen to those applicantions reached early morning on july 2nd before revised bulletin became public or those who mailed on june 29/30 for July 2nd delivery?
7) Why did USCIS clear so many applicants by-passing security checks and clearances?
8) Why was there a mad rush in the last 2 weeks of june when in reality visa numbers would go waste on sept end?
9) Why USCIS always talks about under staffed when they are in a possition to clear 60,000 applicantions in a matter of days?
Any more?
--sri
H1bmajdoor -- the blunder I am talking about here is making the dates all current (the original July bulletin) -- who the hell asked them to do that?? Why not move them another year forward? Had they done that I doubt USCIS would have panicked and gone crazy approving people without security checks, approving people whose dates were not current in June or even on July 2.
That had nothing to do with the law, or the ceiling set by law -- it was an arbitrary roll of the dice by DOS, a decision made WITHOUT consulting USCIS.
Such intricate details won't come out in interviews or even personally talking to them. Only lawyers can do it as part of a fight with lawsuits.
1)Why they have to make everybody current?
2)Why they were working weekends (actually heard that govt employees working during weekends is illegal) to clear 60,000 visa numbers?
3) Why did they pick july 2nd to revise the bulletin and did not pre-warn potential applicants?
4)Why no one from DOS or USCIS is talking about exceptions and or remedies for those july applicants who wasted thousands in 2 weeks?
5) What was that urge, which compelled DOS to make everybody current?
6) What will happen to those applicantions reached early morning on july 2nd before revised bulletin became public or those who mailed on june 29/30 for July 2nd delivery?
7) Why did USCIS clear so many applicants by-passing security checks and clearances?
8) Why was there a mad rush in the last 2 weeks of june when in reality visa numbers would go waste on sept end?
9) Why USCIS always talks about under staffed when they are in a possition to clear 60,000 applicantions in a matter of days?
Any more?
--sri
H1bmajdoor -- the blunder I am talking about here is making the dates all current (the original July bulletin) -- who the hell asked them to do that?? Why not move them another year forward? Had they done that I doubt USCIS would have panicked and gone crazy approving people without security checks, approving people whose dates were not current in June or even on July 2.
That had nothing to do with the law, or the ceiling set by law -- it was an arbitrary roll of the dice by DOS, a decision made WITHOUT consulting USCIS.
hair Birthday Cake: Zebra.
gjoe
10-08 05:32 PM
All EB categories will be current all the time. As soon as a I485 EB case is filed the visa number should be allocated to the first 8000 odd cases for that category based on the PD of application. If a new case is filed tomorrow with a old PD he will get the visa number and the last guys application will move to waiting list. At the beginning of the year all visa numbers are allocated and nothing is wasted, even if the case is having issues like RFE, FBI check, etc the applicant knows that once cleared he will get his GC.
Can you explain why you think the lawyers will laugh it off? Or is it just that you say it because someone is saying something which you don't agree with?
A clarification regarding the flower campaign. I said the AILA law suit and the congresswomen letter to the chief also had lot of weight. It is just not the flower campaign for your information, if you beleive so it is your opinion just like I have mine.
So what's your suggestion to fix the issue?
Since you consider that IV did nothing to reverse July 2 VB, why are you hanging around here? If you credit AILA/AILF why don't you write to them to file Class Action against USCIS to process case FIFO? They might do it or they might just laugh it off
Can you explain why you think the lawyers will laugh it off? Or is it just that you say it because someone is saying something which you don't agree with?
A clarification regarding the flower campaign. I said the AILA law suit and the congresswomen letter to the chief also had lot of weight. It is just not the flower campaign for your information, if you beleive so it is your opinion just like I have mine.
So what's your suggestion to fix the issue?
Since you consider that IV did nothing to reverse July 2 VB, why are you hanging around here? If you credit AILA/AILF why don't you write to them to file Class Action against USCIS to process case FIFO? They might do it or they might just laugh it off
more...
va_dude
06-26 09:43 AM
The way i understand this, not all companies are bound by the EOE laws.
Certain conditions have to be met to be considered an EOE.
Not every employer is an equal opp employer, so those guys can hire whoever they want.
Besides hiring folks on h1b, etc could add to costs for employers. So they choose not to employ such folks.
Certain conditions have to be met to be considered an EOE.
Not every employer is an equal opp employer, so those guys can hire whoever they want.
Besides hiring folks on h1b, etc could add to costs for employers. So they choose not to employ such folks.
hot Childrens irthday cakes with
.jpg "2011 lt;bgt;leopardlt;gt; print")
JAYASURESH
05-05 04:46 PM
what is prediction on eb3 PD: 2nd Feb 08?
more...
house Zebra Print Birthday Cake
willwin
07-28 01:09 PM
What exactly is the point of this rambling debate? Does anybody really thinks he/she can make an EB2 see the point of view of EB3 or vice-a-versa? No amount of legal/moral/philosophical arguments is going to convince the other party and we all know it.
All this debate has done is to bring out the ugliest side of all of us to the surface. There are EB2s claiming every EB2 is by definition superior than EB3 which is insane. And there is an EB3 who is itching to take help of none other than Ron Hira to shot down somebody's GC application as a retribution and couple of people applauding him for the brilliant idea! Really? Do we really thinks this is such a grand idea?
Just accept that everyone's only guiding principle here is self interest and move along. No need to jump through hoops to interpret the immigration law in 101 different ways and no need to call attention to personal suffering and plight. If we do really believe personal suffering should take precedence over everything else on humanitarian grounds then lets all first fight for illegal immigrants since their suffering is much worse than anyone here!
EB3s, go run your campaign and stop trying to appeal to EB2's sense of justice. That will never happen.
EB2s, stop trying to expect EB3s will accept higher EB preference categories should in fact get preference over the lower ones. That will never happen.
The only thing we all can hopefully agree on is, if there is anyone here - doesn't matter EB2 or EB3- who is fiercely debating this but has never contributed to IV and has never participated in any of the previous IV action items in the past that person should just shut up! If you were never active in IV you shouldn't really be talking at this point!!
Is that a new division? Active IVians and inactive IVians? LOL
BTW, sorry to say that the active IVians are minority here.
All this debate has done is to bring out the ugliest side of all of us to the surface. There are EB2s claiming every EB2 is by definition superior than EB3 which is insane. And there is an EB3 who is itching to take help of none other than Ron Hira to shot down somebody's GC application as a retribution and couple of people applauding him for the brilliant idea! Really? Do we really thinks this is such a grand idea?
Just accept that everyone's only guiding principle here is self interest and move along. No need to jump through hoops to interpret the immigration law in 101 different ways and no need to call attention to personal suffering and plight. If we do really believe personal suffering should take precedence over everything else on humanitarian grounds then lets all first fight for illegal immigrants since their suffering is much worse than anyone here!
EB3s, go run your campaign and stop trying to appeal to EB2's sense of justice. That will never happen.
EB2s, stop trying to expect EB3s will accept higher EB preference categories should in fact get preference over the lower ones. That will never happen.
The only thing we all can hopefully agree on is, if there is anyone here - doesn't matter EB2 or EB3- who is fiercely debating this but has never contributed to IV and has never participated in any of the previous IV action items in the past that person should just shut up! If you were never active in IV you shouldn't really be talking at this point!!
Is that a new division? Active IVians and inactive IVians? LOL
BTW, sorry to say that the active IVians are minority here.
tattoo animal print birthday
sankap
07-10 03:05 PM
I agree--make your own decision for your peace of mind. Under W2, you're an employee and your employer does the taxes. On 1099, you're self-employed and you do the taxes, and also deduct business expenses. However, being on W2 does *not* mean that you've a job for unlimited period of time. A lot of recruiters for contract jobs (e.g., a 3-month contract) give you the option of joining under W2 or 1099.--e.g., $70/hr on 1099 or $60/hr or W2. Being on W2 should *not* be construed as being on a "permanent" job.
At the end of the day, it's all a question of your peace of mind. You can take this 6-month contract on W2 and take comfort in your (wrong) thinking that you're on a "permanent" job, or you can take that contract on 1099 and (wrongly) worry that you're on a "temporary thing."
you got to make your decision dude, however, in my case, i would opt for W2. 1099 is a temporary thing... thats my opinion... you did not ask me specifically to share this, but hey, this is a public forum... :-)
At the end of the day, it's all a question of your peace of mind. You can take this 6-month contract on W2 and take comfort in your (wrong) thinking that you're on a "permanent" job, or you can take that contract on 1099 and (wrongly) worry that you're on a "temporary thing."
you got to make your decision dude, however, in my case, i would opt for W2. 1099 is a temporary thing... thats my opinion... you did not ask me specifically to share this, but hey, this is a public forum... :-)
more...
pictures Sweet 16 Zebra Birthday Cakes
DallasBlue
08-25 12:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by unitednations
If companies used h-1b the way it is supposed to be written then really the only people who would get one would be OPT candidates who joined while they are on OPT.
That is not true - those who are qualified and for whom a job is available in the US will eventually make it here. If the requirement is genuine, then the company will go to India and get that skilled labor. Big companies have been known to hire talent internationally.
No way; would an H-1b get filed for a person who is outside the country. Consulting companies would like to adhere to the laws. However; when their existing employees keep referring friends or friends of friends then as a protective measure they are forced to file the H-1b; or they risk losing the existing employee to someone else.
Your argument that some consulting companies would like to adhere to laws, but are forced not to because they fear the employee will leave is sufficient reason for those companies to be shut down. There is no excuse for breaking the law, and that too intentionally. It is obvious from your argument these companies are greedy and give the rest of the H-1B visa holders a bad name.
Keep in mind; the big problem currently is "transfers" and "extensions". Not so much quota cases. USCIS is not keeping up with the business norms. Many of the consulting companies do not have agreements with end clients and end clients will generally not give letters to consulatants to verify that they are actually working there.
The only time I have seen a consulting company file an H-1b for a person (transfer) and they are not on project; is that the employee has lost the current job or their company wants them to go back home and they do not want to go back home. Employee will do everything possible not to go back.
It is understandable that an individual will do whatever he can to better his social and economic situation. But it has to be done within the limits of the law. In your example, the consulting company should just say no. However, the company is greedy and wants to make money from the unfortunate situation of the poor guy who just lost his job.
I always go back through an example I used to see in the work place. Two people at the same level and one has a bigger cubicle. Other person with smaller cubicle complains. End result is that they don't make his cubicle bigger but make the other persons smaller.
Complaining or pointing fingers at one subsection of people using h-1b or greencards and getting uscis/lawmakers to fix it; it doesn't stop there. Eventually; it will come onto you. Many people on these forums/threads don't care about h-1b but only greencards. Do all of you think that it will only stop at H-1b's and won't spill over to greencards?
Are you are asking the immigrant community to condone the abusive/illegal practice of a subsection of people because the USCIS will come after everybody? On the contrary, I would rather they looked at every case closely to ensure that there is a valid job offer and no abuse. And it seems that they are now doing just that. This would ensure a smooth process those who follow the law - so there is nothing to fear whether it is H-1B or Green card application.
Having said that, the immigrant community should try to request the USCIS with some administrative fixes where the H-1B visa holder is not immediately out of status when he loses his job. If they give a grace period of three months or so, then one cae join either look for a new job, or wrap things up and go home. In the absence of such pressure, H-1B visa holders are less likely to find themselves in the hands of abusive consulting companies. The changes to H-1B proposed by Dick Durban and Co. only focussed on protecting american workers (which is all good). BUT, there was nothing in there that would protect the foreign worker's interest if he lost his job. We need to impress upon the congress or USCIS to give some grace period (which to my mind should be an easy administrative fix).
Maybe we are getting off the topic.
USCIS is giving a hard time for h-1b's.
If vemont service center:
ensure LCA is for client location and company location.
ensure that you can get a legitimate letter/contract from place you are actually working. ensure letter/contract says that the terms (duration) is extendable (under the law; uscis only has to approve the h-1b until the PO finishes if it is less then three years).
For companies: Cancel h-1b for people who have left. Cancel h-1b's for people who have not joined (uscis in their rfe's are frequently quoting number of h-1b's filed and comparing to current head count).
for california service center:
companies need to analyze their DE-6 and look to see who hasn't been paid the lca wage for all four quarters. Give proper/proactive explanations for people where it is not obvious why they weren't paid proper lca wage.
get legitimate client letter/purchase order from end client. Ensure that when filing H-1b; the LCA covers the client location. USCIS will generally not accept a new LCA covering the location after the h-1b has been filed.
Ensure the numbrer of active h-1b's is close to your headcount. If people haven't joined or aren't going to join; cancel h-1b's immediately.
For consulate: do not ever give fake purchase order/client letter. Consulates are very smart that they know major companies do not give such letters. They are frequently referring cases to department of state in kentucky to contact clients who wrote the letters. If client doesn't confrm (ie., HR at client company) then it is a very, very big problem for all people concerned.
For extensions; file as early as possible so you don't have issues with your drivers license, etc.
USCIS relies on a lot of case precdece to deny cases. many times they are misapplying these cases and going outside the law what is really required. In motion to reopens; california is very quick in givingin another decision. However; vermont sits on it for many, many months and they very rarely change their decisions.
When changing client locations then as a minimum get a new LCA but if you really want to cover yourself then consider amending h-1b for new location.
UN,
am always puzzled how H1B is valid also for outsourcing the h1b-employee to another company (like sub-sub-.....sub-contracting) ?
wasnt h1b intended for a inhouse job rather than a job at a client company ?
Originally Posted by unitednations
If companies used h-1b the way it is supposed to be written then really the only people who would get one would be OPT candidates who joined while they are on OPT.
That is not true - those who are qualified and for whom a job is available in the US will eventually make it here. If the requirement is genuine, then the company will go to India and get that skilled labor. Big companies have been known to hire talent internationally.
No way; would an H-1b get filed for a person who is outside the country. Consulting companies would like to adhere to the laws. However; when their existing employees keep referring friends or friends of friends then as a protective measure they are forced to file the H-1b; or they risk losing the existing employee to someone else.
Your argument that some consulting companies would like to adhere to laws, but are forced not to because they fear the employee will leave is sufficient reason for those companies to be shut down. There is no excuse for breaking the law, and that too intentionally. It is obvious from your argument these companies are greedy and give the rest of the H-1B visa holders a bad name.
Keep in mind; the big problem currently is "transfers" and "extensions". Not so much quota cases. USCIS is not keeping up with the business norms. Many of the consulting companies do not have agreements with end clients and end clients will generally not give letters to consulatants to verify that they are actually working there.
The only time I have seen a consulting company file an H-1b for a person (transfer) and they are not on project; is that the employee has lost the current job or their company wants them to go back home and they do not want to go back home. Employee will do everything possible not to go back.
It is understandable that an individual will do whatever he can to better his social and economic situation. But it has to be done within the limits of the law. In your example, the consulting company should just say no. However, the company is greedy and wants to make money from the unfortunate situation of the poor guy who just lost his job.
I always go back through an example I used to see in the work place. Two people at the same level and one has a bigger cubicle. Other person with smaller cubicle complains. End result is that they don't make his cubicle bigger but make the other persons smaller.
Complaining or pointing fingers at one subsection of people using h-1b or greencards and getting uscis/lawmakers to fix it; it doesn't stop there. Eventually; it will come onto you. Many people on these forums/threads don't care about h-1b but only greencards. Do all of you think that it will only stop at H-1b's and won't spill over to greencards?
Are you are asking the immigrant community to condone the abusive/illegal practice of a subsection of people because the USCIS will come after everybody? On the contrary, I would rather they looked at every case closely to ensure that there is a valid job offer and no abuse. And it seems that they are now doing just that. This would ensure a smooth process those who follow the law - so there is nothing to fear whether it is H-1B or Green card application.
Having said that, the immigrant community should try to request the USCIS with some administrative fixes where the H-1B visa holder is not immediately out of status when he loses his job. If they give a grace period of three months or so, then one cae join either look for a new job, or wrap things up and go home. In the absence of such pressure, H-1B visa holders are less likely to find themselves in the hands of abusive consulting companies. The changes to H-1B proposed by Dick Durban and Co. only focussed on protecting american workers (which is all good). BUT, there was nothing in there that would protect the foreign worker's interest if he lost his job. We need to impress upon the congress or USCIS to give some grace period (which to my mind should be an easy administrative fix).
Maybe we are getting off the topic.
USCIS is giving a hard time for h-1b's.
If vemont service center:
ensure LCA is for client location and company location.
ensure that you can get a legitimate letter/contract from place you are actually working. ensure letter/contract says that the terms (duration) is extendable (under the law; uscis only has to approve the h-1b until the PO finishes if it is less then three years).
For companies: Cancel h-1b for people who have left. Cancel h-1b's for people who have not joined (uscis in their rfe's are frequently quoting number of h-1b's filed and comparing to current head count).
for california service center:
companies need to analyze their DE-6 and look to see who hasn't been paid the lca wage for all four quarters. Give proper/proactive explanations for people where it is not obvious why they weren't paid proper lca wage.
get legitimate client letter/purchase order from end client. Ensure that when filing H-1b; the LCA covers the client location. USCIS will generally not accept a new LCA covering the location after the h-1b has been filed.
Ensure the numbrer of active h-1b's is close to your headcount. If people haven't joined or aren't going to join; cancel h-1b's immediately.
For consulate: do not ever give fake purchase order/client letter. Consulates are very smart that they know major companies do not give such letters. They are frequently referring cases to department of state in kentucky to contact clients who wrote the letters. If client doesn't confrm (ie., HR at client company) then it is a very, very big problem for all people concerned.
For extensions; file as early as possible so you don't have issues with your drivers license, etc.
USCIS relies on a lot of case precdece to deny cases. many times they are misapplying these cases and going outside the law what is really required. In motion to reopens; california is very quick in givingin another decision. However; vermont sits on it for many, many months and they very rarely change their decisions.
When changing client locations then as a minimum get a new LCA but if you really want to cover yourself then consider amending h-1b for new location.
UN,
am always puzzled how H1B is valid also for outsourcing the h1b-employee to another company (like sub-sub-.....sub-contracting) ?
wasnt h1b intended for a inhouse job rather than a job at a client company ?
dresses 2011 lt;bgt;leopardlt;gt; print
tamil12
09-23 05:54 PM
"EB-2 India. This category is expected to remain unchanged or to move very slowly forward (by a week or so) in the short-term. This is mainly caused by the fact that many EB-3 India applicants (there are approximately 60,000 EB-3 India pending cases) are �porting� their priority dates into the EB-2 India category and are thus taking visa numbers.
EB2 India is slowwly becoming EB3 as thousands are porting from EB3 to EB2. Some of them are really worthy of EB2 and some of them are fradulent.
EB2 India applicants should wake up from their celebratio of a few months leap and get ready for slow movement or retro.
Guys wake up and fight to make the porting rules veryu strong if not stop porting. The rule should be if I140 for porting is denied then the applicatnt should loose his/her initial EB3 priority date also as he /she has indicated that he/she is no longer working in the position as described in EB3 labor. This will make sure that fradulent applicants cannot port from EB3 to EB2.
P.S: I know I will get thousands of REDs. I do not care... EB2 I guys wake up.. Time is running out.. EB2 I will very quickly become same as EB3I.
Don't worry brother....I started my Perm Eb2 ....I am eligible I have 9 + years of US experience itself...EB3 Who are eligible go for Porting....No other go for us.
EB2 India is slowwly becoming EB3 as thousands are porting from EB3 to EB2. Some of them are really worthy of EB2 and some of them are fradulent.
EB2 India applicants should wake up from their celebratio of a few months leap and get ready for slow movement or retro.
Guys wake up and fight to make the porting rules veryu strong if not stop porting. The rule should be if I140 for porting is denied then the applicatnt should loose his/her initial EB3 priority date also as he /she has indicated that he/she is no longer working in the position as described in EB3 labor. This will make sure that fradulent applicants cannot port from EB3 to EB2.
P.S: I know I will get thousands of REDs. I do not care... EB2 I guys wake up.. Time is running out.. EB2 I will very quickly become same as EB3I.
Don't worry brother....I started my Perm Eb2 ....I am eligible I have 9 + years of US experience itself...EB3 Who are eligible go for Porting....No other go for us.
more...
makeup Webkinz Leopard Print Birthday
vishwak
11-18 02:51 PM
Submitted. Got confirmation email too.
girlfriend irthday cake printable
apahilaj
11-25 08:20 AM
Hi,
Yesterday I got the response for my SR opened on 10/16 for still not receiving FP notice yet. The letter says that the processing on my case has been delayed since the background check on my application is still open. Please contact after 6 months if you still haven't heard back from us. My assumptions are:
1. Since they did not mention any where in the letter about biometrics, they are talking about my 485 petition and not my finger printing notice. Guess they misunderstood why I opened the SR with them. Does that make sense?
2.Is it possible that I haven't received FP notice since my background check is still in progress? I thought that these were two independent process...
Any suggestions would be appreciated!
Thanks.
Yesterday I got the response for my SR opened on 10/16 for still not receiving FP notice yet. The letter says that the processing on my case has been delayed since the background check on my application is still open. Please contact after 6 months if you still haven't heard back from us. My assumptions are:
1. Since they did not mention any where in the letter about biometrics, they are talking about my 485 petition and not my finger printing notice. Guess they misunderstood why I opened the SR with them. Does that make sense?
2.Is it possible that I haven't received FP notice since my background check is still in progress? I thought that these were two independent process...
Any suggestions would be appreciated!
Thanks.
hairstyles However one nice side of cake
hiUS
09-03 10:30 AM
Wait4ever,
I am the same boat, got the approval email and a week later received the approval notice in the mail. Did not get welcome or CPO email. My approval notice says I MAY have to do biometrics again to get my PR card
and they will notify me about appearing for biometrics if required.
Dose your approval notice have a similar message?
Thanks
Did you receive the physical cards by now?
My Case:
08/12/08 - Approval Notice Sent message (This is the only message I got)
08/18/08 - Received the Approval notice by post
No cards till now...:confused:
I am the same boat, got the approval email and a week later received the approval notice in the mail. Did not get welcome or CPO email. My approval notice says I MAY have to do biometrics again to get my PR card
and they will notify me about appearing for biometrics if required.
Dose your approval notice have a similar message?
Thanks
Did you receive the physical cards by now?
My Case:
08/12/08 - Approval Notice Sent message (This is the only message I got)
08/18/08 - Received the Approval notice by post
No cards till now...:confused:
vdlrao
09-10 02:18 AM
Hello,
Don't like EB-3 dates...but looking at EB-2 dates, does this mean that from now on we will see only forward movement in EB-2 I/C dates?
If the first month of the new year didn't retrogress, would every month see a movement of week or two? Or keeping in great USCIS tradition, this is just another 'fluke'? ;)
Ya I presume your assumption is right regarding EB-2 forward movement. But on a whole the EB-2 India/China dates havent forwarded up to my predictions. But we could expect a steady and consistent movement of EB-2 India/China ahead.
Don't like EB-3 dates...but looking at EB-2 dates, does this mean that from now on we will see only forward movement in EB-2 I/C dates?
If the first month of the new year didn't retrogress, would every month see a movement of week or two? Or keeping in great USCIS tradition, this is just another 'fluke'? ;)
Ya I presume your assumption is right regarding EB-2 forward movement. But on a whole the EB-2 India/China dates havent forwarded up to my predictions. But we could expect a steady and consistent movement of EB-2 India/China ahead.
bigboy007
08-13 03:29 PM
That's great, I guess Texas is moving now..:)
i see an LUD change for my case today with my I140 pending at TSC sent my 485 to NSC July 2 9:55 AM Fedex , LUD change date is 8/12/2007 , does it make any sense or what indication it is ?
i see an LUD change for my case today with my I140 pending at TSC sent my 485 to NSC July 2 9:55 AM Fedex , LUD change date is 8/12/2007 , does it make any sense or what indication it is ?
No comments:
Post a Comment