waitforevergc
05-09 08:35 PM
Thomas:
There is no point preaching things to lunatics like Hunter. Let us just ignore him.
There are a lot of people like him on internet. We cant educate everyone.
Moderators, please block such people in their initial comments in the future.
There is no point preaching things to lunatics like Hunter. Let us just ignore him.
There are a lot of people like him on internet. We cant educate everyone.
Moderators, please block such people in their initial comments in the future.
wallpaper #42Bethenny Frankel
singhsa3
10-02 04:14 PM
I am a july 2nd filer and filed my second application on Aug 15th.
Now that I have got receipts for July 2nd applications, I have put stop payments on the checks on Aug 15th application.
My hope is that my 2nd application will not be processed.
I am seeing people getting multiple #A numbers and delays.
If you have filed multiple I485s, pls share your expiences here.
Now that I have got receipts for July 2nd applications, I have put stop payments on the checks on Aug 15th application.
My hope is that my 2nd application will not be processed.
I am seeing people getting multiple #A numbers and delays.
If you have filed multiple I485s, pls share your expiences here.
kumarc123
01-09 03:20 PM
I am surprised to see this thread active this long. Earlier I have with help of Saralayar and other members have bring this point to attention. But at that time no one was supporting Idea.
I see increasing support for the Idea as GC journey become longer and longer.
Earlier I have pointed following points that I want to bring to remind if we want to get real support for this idea of early CITIZENSHIP AFTER GREEN CARD
(1) I-140 and I-485 must be approved.
(@) Time should be considered only after getting GC
(3) For getting closer for political support our proposal should be close to Existing laws for FAMILY BASED and MARRIAGE BASED CITIZENSHIPS
So we should argur that if YOU HAVE MASTER AND ABOVE IN STEM FILEDS YOu can get CITIZEN SHIP 5 yrs from date of Approval of I-140 ( which make it closer to fmaily based) and THREE YEARS from Date of Approval of I-485 (closer to marriage based citizens). You can get earlier of two . But when you get Citizenship your I-485 must be approved for ATLEAST 1 year.
The above requirements can get closer to Marriage and family based and also help 90% of IV members.
Adding the clause for the EDUCATIONAL THING might be able to get more political support also
Thanks
Thanks for all your input, but I have one question you specified citizenship for immigrants with approved I40 & 485, but how about the poeple like me, who have I40 approved, OD 2007 , could not apply for for 485 because case was stuck in labor process?
I value your input, but my 2 cents lets not mix t0o many spices in the dish or the dish will be tasteless,
The point is lets stick with recapture of visas. One smart effort is better than 100 efforts, lets not confuse them with all that we want, we want only one thing, escape from misery of wait for a green card.
Thank you
I see increasing support for the Idea as GC journey become longer and longer.
Earlier I have pointed following points that I want to bring to remind if we want to get real support for this idea of early CITIZENSHIP AFTER GREEN CARD
(1) I-140 and I-485 must be approved.
(@) Time should be considered only after getting GC
(3) For getting closer for political support our proposal should be close to Existing laws for FAMILY BASED and MARRIAGE BASED CITIZENSHIPS
So we should argur that if YOU HAVE MASTER AND ABOVE IN STEM FILEDS YOu can get CITIZEN SHIP 5 yrs from date of Approval of I-140 ( which make it closer to fmaily based) and THREE YEARS from Date of Approval of I-485 (closer to marriage based citizens). You can get earlier of two . But when you get Citizenship your I-485 must be approved for ATLEAST 1 year.
The above requirements can get closer to Marriage and family based and also help 90% of IV members.
Adding the clause for the EDUCATIONAL THING might be able to get more political support also
Thanks
Thanks for all your input, but I have one question you specified citizenship for immigrants with approved I40 & 485, but how about the poeple like me, who have I40 approved, OD 2007 , could not apply for for 485 because case was stuck in labor process?
I value your input, but my 2 cents lets not mix t0o many spices in the dish or the dish will be tasteless,
The point is lets stick with recapture of visas. One smart effort is better than 100 efforts, lets not confuse them with all that we want, we want only one thing, escape from misery of wait for a green card.
Thank you
2011 Bethenny Frankel Forbes Images
ash27
06-12 07:40 PM
Ganguteli, why do you keep on questioning everybody's intentions all the time. the other day, I had posted about L1 exploiting the loop to file GC in EB1 and your answer was plainly stupid and irritating - "I would have done the same thing if I had a chance"....
There is nothing wrong in exposing any kind of visa fraud...I came here on F1 10 years back and still in line for GC after getting masters from a decent school and working with major employers. What is wrong in making sure that it is FIFO....
There is nothing wrong in exposing any kind of visa fraud...I came here on F1 10 years back and still in line for GC after getting masters from a decent school and working with major employers. What is wrong in making sure that it is FIFO....
more...
gccovet
09-09 02:47 PM
Hello,
Called most of them, will call the remaining in next break. Responses were good from most of them. Couple of them asked for full address and some were just interested in name, (and or phone number) and zip code.
Will continue calling.
Regards,
GCCovet
Called most of them, will call the remaining in next break. Responses were good from most of them. Couple of them asked for full address and some were just interested in name, (and or phone number) and zip code.
Will continue calling.
Regards,
GCCovet
mojito_blender
06-21 03:18 PM
Go to USCIS and read the instructions; these 2 are also supposed to be self filed by the immigrant himself. So instructions are clear.
So, ask him why he needs these. Most likely, he will demur and say OK.
They don't know what they are doing, just packing the file for the money sucked ILs
thanks factoryman! I read through the requirement on I-485 pages, and only thing found for this purpose is just employment verification. I was just not sure if I missed anything. so, thank you very much, which really made me feel much easy now.
So, ask him why he needs these. Most likely, he will demur and say OK.
They don't know what they are doing, just packing the file for the money sucked ILs
thanks factoryman! I read through the requirement on I-485 pages, and only thing found for this purpose is just employment verification. I was just not sure if I missed anything. so, thank you very much, which really made me feel much easy now.
more...
vdlrao
04-05 03:50 PM
I am posting this from Ron Gotcher's forum-
"Cite as "AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 11040563 (posted Apr. 5, 2011)"
Following-up ----------------------------------------are used. However, a rapid advance could spur a surge in demand that could impact the cut-off dates later in the year. The May Visa Bulletin, --------------of the year.
Is that mean they are going to move the PDs much further and again move back during the end of the year!!
So isn't this implying that the PDs will advance very very further than the available visa numbers!!!!!!!!!!
.
"Cite as "AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 11040563 (posted Apr. 5, 2011)"
Following-up ----------------------------------------are used. However, a rapid advance could spur a surge in demand that could impact the cut-off dates later in the year. The May Visa Bulletin, --------------of the year.
Is that mean they are going to move the PDs much further and again move back during the end of the year!!
So isn't this implying that the PDs will advance very very further than the available visa numbers!!!!!!!!!!
.
2010 The Bethenny Boom
GCwaitforever
03-26 11:05 AM
Always complain, even if there is no hard proof. The companies may not tell you on your face that they do not hire EADs. But the hiring manager or recruiter must be acting on a policy made elsewhere in the company, directed by some higher-up officials. It will be written somewhere. In that case, OSC can ask for archived e-mails, and phone conversations for a record of discrimination. If discrimination is proved, company is liable for fines, and the higher-up official is sacked. If there is no official communication, the company can claim that the hiring manager or recruiter is acting on his/her own and it is not the company policy. Then the hiring manager or recruiter is fired and the company pledges to enforce the rules strictly. Always a positive outcome for us.
Complain to EEOC also in addition to OSC. Double the pressure on the erring company and you would see quick results.
Complain to EEOC also in addition to OSC. Double the pressure on the erring company and you would see quick results.
more...
sumagiri
09-23 07:25 PM
I thought each EB category could get upto 28.6% of 140000 = 40000 visas every fiscal year. So if EB1 uses up 5000 and EB2 takes the remaining 35000 and its annual allotment of 40000, EB3 does not get any spillover.
Thoughts?
knacath, I am hoping that EB2 will be current this year and EB3 begins to get spillover though very little this year.
Some more specifics
Annual Quota ------------------------------------------------------------------------> 140,000
Pending EB1, EB4, EB5----------------------------------------------------------------> 7,653
Estimate of all categories current applied this year and approved this year -----> 10,000
Remaining visas -----------------------------------------------------------------------> 122,347
All pending EB2s (includes retrogressed) -------------------------------------------> 74932
Remaining visas available to EB3(includes retrogressed) --------------------------> 47415
The only flaw in above is ignoring CP and assuming all 140K Quota to AOS. The majority of EB1, EB2 and EB3 are AOS. So I am safely ignoring CP. Even if CP is 15% of annual quota as some one put it, EB3 gets its allocated 40K quota and around 65K pending EB2s get out of queue.
Thoughts?
knacath, I am hoping that EB2 will be current this year and EB3 begins to get spillover though very little this year.
Some more specifics
Annual Quota ------------------------------------------------------------------------> 140,000
Pending EB1, EB4, EB5----------------------------------------------------------------> 7,653
Estimate of all categories current applied this year and approved this year -----> 10,000
Remaining visas -----------------------------------------------------------------------> 122,347
All pending EB2s (includes retrogressed) -------------------------------------------> 74932
Remaining visas available to EB3(includes retrogressed) --------------------------> 47415
The only flaw in above is ignoring CP and assuming all 140K Quota to AOS. The majority of EB1, EB2 and EB3 are AOS. So I am safely ignoring CP. Even if CP is 15% of annual quota as some one put it, EB3 gets its allocated 40K quota and around 65K pending EB2s get out of queue.
hair Skinny Girl Bethenny Frankel
abhijitp
07-31 03:04 PM
1. If a Receipt Number is issued for a I-485, does it necessarily mean that the case won't outright be rejected for a missing document/ evidence, but instead an RFE will be issued?
2. When a receipt number is issued for a I-485, and if we send out the missing document/initial evidence using the allocated A#, is there a good likelihood that the evidence/document will make it to the appropriate file?
Answers to these will help make a decision on filing multiple I-485's where the first I-485 missed some initial evidence.
Thanks!
One more thing: I was about to make another private consultation call today. I pledge contributing $200 if I find a concrete answer to this issue without having to consult one more lawyer.
2. When a receipt number is issued for a I-485, and if we send out the missing document/initial evidence using the allocated A#, is there a good likelihood that the evidence/document will make it to the appropriate file?
Answers to these will help make a decision on filing multiple I-485's where the first I-485 missed some initial evidence.
Thanks!
One more thing: I was about to make another private consultation call today. I pledge contributing $200 if I find a concrete answer to this issue without having to consult one more lawyer.
more...
gccovet
09-09 02:47 PM
Hello,
Called most of them, will call the remaining in next break. Responses were good from most of them. Couple of them asked for full address and some were just interested in name, (and or phone number) and zip code.
Will continue calling.
Regards,
GCCovet
Called most of them, will call the remaining in next break. Responses were good from most of them. Couple of them asked for full address and some were just interested in name, (and or phone number) and zip code.
Will continue calling.
Regards,
GCCovet
hot quot;Skinny Girlquot; Bethenny Frankel
sush
07-09 11:56 PM
SMITHA:
You said
"Do you think that by sending flower to USCIS will force them to make EB2/EB3 current for 2005/2006/2007 guys??"
My answer:
This is not about forcing USCIS into doing anything. The sole purpose of this is to bring awareness in mainstream media(and in doing so the american public) to the need of reform in american immigration system for skilled migrants. Immigration reform is not just reforming illegal immigration but this is one of our chances to put focus on legal employment-based immigration.
You also said
"My sincere request, please don't do rally, you might be arrested......you never know what they can do..... Don't you think that, it is better to go back to India rather than being embarrassed here in US???"
My answer:
Why should I be embarrassed about protesting how sheer incompenet USCIS/DOS decision making is on this visa bulletin fiasco? about how my tax dollars and my application fees are spent by these departments?
Infact for people to be coming out of thier little cubicles to protest on something they feel is injustice says something about how embarrassed the government bodies should be about thier failure in doing their job. I have no shame in expressing an injustice done to me.
You also said
"Exactly that is now 2006-2007 PD guys are expecting to happen a miracle, right? I mean, apply 485,EAD ASAP."
My answer:
My PD is Jan 2006(been living here since 99). When Visa bulletin became current, my only expectation from it is that my wife can start working on EAD. I don't think anyone who was planning to apply for 485/EAD/AP based on the old july bulletin realistically expected that they would get their greencard in few months. This outrage is only that USCIS/DOS couldn't keep their house clean in how to solve the unused visa numbers and insensitively moved the dates forward and then backward causing emotional strees and hole in our bank balances. They did us wrong and might do it again.
For your information
Smitha
EB2 India
PD-2005-May
I140 approved-Sept 2006
I have MS in EE from US and working since 2001,filed my GC in 2005 May(PERM).
However can you please tell me anyone who got GC in Eb2/Eb3(India) in 1-2 yr in the last 15 yrs?
Exactly that is now 2006-2007 PD guys are expecting to happen a miracle, right? I mean, apply 485,EAD ASAP.
If you guys really care about 2002-2003-2004 guys, then please please wait for OCT 07 bulletin and after that you can do anything you want. If they will retrogress the dates, then please fight but not before that.
This is just a suggestion. If you like follow it, otherwise ignore.
You said
"Do you think that by sending flower to USCIS will force them to make EB2/EB3 current for 2005/2006/2007 guys??"
My answer:
This is not about forcing USCIS into doing anything. The sole purpose of this is to bring awareness in mainstream media(and in doing so the american public) to the need of reform in american immigration system for skilled migrants. Immigration reform is not just reforming illegal immigration but this is one of our chances to put focus on legal employment-based immigration.
You also said
"My sincere request, please don't do rally, you might be arrested......you never know what they can do..... Don't you think that, it is better to go back to India rather than being embarrassed here in US???"
My answer:
Why should I be embarrassed about protesting how sheer incompenet USCIS/DOS decision making is on this visa bulletin fiasco? about how my tax dollars and my application fees are spent by these departments?
Infact for people to be coming out of thier little cubicles to protest on something they feel is injustice says something about how embarrassed the government bodies should be about thier failure in doing their job. I have no shame in expressing an injustice done to me.
You also said
"Exactly that is now 2006-2007 PD guys are expecting to happen a miracle, right? I mean, apply 485,EAD ASAP."
My answer:
My PD is Jan 2006(been living here since 99). When Visa bulletin became current, my only expectation from it is that my wife can start working on EAD. I don't think anyone who was planning to apply for 485/EAD/AP based on the old july bulletin realistically expected that they would get their greencard in few months. This outrage is only that USCIS/DOS couldn't keep their house clean in how to solve the unused visa numbers and insensitively moved the dates forward and then backward causing emotional strees and hole in our bank balances. They did us wrong and might do it again.
For your information
Smitha
EB2 India
PD-2005-May
I140 approved-Sept 2006
I have MS in EE from US and working since 2001,filed my GC in 2005 May(PERM).
However can you please tell me anyone who got GC in Eb2/Eb3(India) in 1-2 yr in the last 15 yrs?
Exactly that is now 2006-2007 PD guys are expecting to happen a miracle, right? I mean, apply 485,EAD ASAP.
If you guys really care about 2002-2003-2004 guys, then please please wait for OCT 07 bulletin and after that you can do anything you want. If they will retrogress the dates, then please fight but not before that.
This is just a suggestion. If you like follow it, otherwise ignore.
more...
house Forbes.com Video Network
gc_wow
09-24 11:27 PM
It looks like atleast 75% of EB2 I with priority dates 2004 seems to be approved, this should bring down the count of 2004 less than 1000 may be little more than 1000.
tattoo Lady Gaga tops Forbes#39; annual
gccovet
11-12 03:54 PM
I don't think thats a good idea. You collect all evidence and we represent at once.
Opinion?
I agree with you.
How about defining a deadline? We push to get all the info by the deadline and then send the whole bunch together.
All folks who were on conference calls, whose were willing to share their info, please do come forward and (scratch out your personal info.) send the documents to PD_recap.
PD_Recap, we can scan the documents to produce a tif.jpeg or pdf file. Let me know if you need help in that.
GCCovet
Opinion?
I agree with you.
How about defining a deadline? We push to get all the info by the deadline and then send the whole bunch together.
All folks who were on conference calls, whose were willing to share their info, please do come forward and (scratch out your personal info.) send the documents to PD_recap.
PD_Recap, we can scan the documents to produce a tif.jpeg or pdf file. Let me know if you need help in that.
GCCovet
more...
pictures In March Frankel sold
Ramba
08-21 12:46 PM
Yes, the same law can be interpreted like this:
EB1-ROW unused visa will go to EB2-ROW
EB2-ROW unused visa will go to EB3-ROW
Same for each country.
But its not happening. What actually is happening that they are giving unused visa from EB1-ROW to EB2-ROW to EB2-I/C. WHY?
So EB3-ROW is retrogressed bcoz it doesn't get any spillover and hence it affect EB3-I.
So where is the correct interpretation? Does any body know?
Don't take me wrong here. I don't favor EB3-ROW or any particular category. I am EB3-I with PD Nov 2002.
This was the law till 2000 (vertical spill over). After 2000, because of AC21, the INA got changed to horizontal spillover. This means each employment catagories are seperatly free from country quota if demand is less than supply in each catagory. If you analyze word by word in the language of the AC21 act, you will understand. Unfortunally (fortunatly for EB3) DOS has not interpreted the law correctly till 2006. Now they are interpreting correctly.
5) 2/ RULES FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS-
(A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) ]for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
EB1-ROW unused visa will go to EB2-ROW
EB2-ROW unused visa will go to EB3-ROW
Same for each country.
But its not happening. What actually is happening that they are giving unused visa from EB1-ROW to EB2-ROW to EB2-I/C. WHY?
So EB3-ROW is retrogressed bcoz it doesn't get any spillover and hence it affect EB3-I.
So where is the correct interpretation? Does any body know?
Don't take me wrong here. I don't favor EB3-ROW or any particular category. I am EB3-I with PD Nov 2002.
This was the law till 2000 (vertical spill over). After 2000, because of AC21, the INA got changed to horizontal spillover. This means each employment catagories are seperatly free from country quota if demand is less than supply in each catagory. If you analyze word by word in the language of the AC21 act, you will understand. Unfortunally (fortunatly for EB3) DOS has not interpreted the law correctly till 2006. Now they are interpreting correctly.
5) 2/ RULES FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS-
(A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) ]for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
dresses like Bethenny Frankel who
drona
07-09 07:29 PM
Please also mention the EB retrogression, backlogs and revised July visa bulletin issue here. We must mention WHY we sent the flowers
more...
makeup Subscribe to Bethenny Frankel
coopheal
08-08 09:21 AM
I am the later...
This is my last post in this regards.
Solution of frustration is not destructive thinking which you are doing. Grow up�.
May be you might have supported previous IV campaigns. I urge you to keep supporting them instead of going anything crazy like what you are planning.
Finally if you have reasons to believe some firms are gaming the system then report them. That is American way of doing things.
This is my last post in this regards.
Solution of frustration is not destructive thinking which you are doing. Grow up�.
May be you might have supported previous IV campaigns. I urge you to keep supporting them instead of going anything crazy like what you are planning.
Finally if you have reasons to believe some firms are gaming the system then report them. That is American way of doing things.
girlfriend Bethenny Frankel makes her way
suriajay12
03-09 06:57 PM
5 years in US legally and paid taxes: get a Greencard.
10 years ,,,..,, Citizenship.
I do not get a benefit in this directy, but the queue will be reduced
Lets go for it .. LETS DO SOMETHING... what are we waiting for...???????
10 years ,,,..,, Citizenship.
I do not get a benefit in this directy, but the queue will be reduced
Lets go for it .. LETS DO SOMETHING... what are we waiting for...???????
hairstyles #42Bethenny Frankel
Sri_1975
06-17 11:58 AM
Keep posting updates once some one contacts ICE and how the process is going.
BharatPremi
09-27 12:47 AM
Its not that I think I am smarter or have any additional insight...but I take things at face value. Of course the total number of pending cases in the chart and in the PDF should match - they both are exactly what they say they are "PENDING EMPLOYMENT BASED I-485 cases" If that's what the report title says, that's exactly what it means. No point in over-analyzing if this is just for pre-adjudicated or only primary applications etc....
I say stupid questions because people still ask "Does the PDF report contain numbers for dependents or only for primary applicants" - so you are telling me that this is not clear from the PDF report??
I and many others do not see the definition of "Pending" what is in our minds matching the definition of "Pending" by USCIS. We believe that it is not yet concluded. Even USCIS itself is not clear. In trend chart under "All other pending" its total figure for national level is 279031 till July 2009. Where as in the Excel worksheet it is 233816 till July 2009( Worksheet is produced for the time period till the December 2009 but for July to Dec 2009 all visa categories have zero value thus data is till July 2009)
So I would request you to keep patience till we get "authentic" feedback from somebody. Many people are working on this in background. If you want to see the signs they are there in many other threads including recently declared FOIA and USCIS data comparison thread published by Pappu.
We can't be just "innocently simple minded" when USCIS itself publishes different data sets at different links and start believing the only data of a particular worksheet is correct just because USCIS declared it. If you try to compare both of these trend chart and excel worksheet with the April operating performance report declared by USCIS (needhelp! has posted it on this thread) then you get into more confusion and start seeing clear discrepency.
So choice is yours , patiently watching the input of others on this thread and start contributing in analysis OR keep on doing what you are doing unnecessarily.
I say stupid questions because people still ask "Does the PDF report contain numbers for dependents or only for primary applicants" - so you are telling me that this is not clear from the PDF report??
I and many others do not see the definition of "Pending" what is in our minds matching the definition of "Pending" by USCIS. We believe that it is not yet concluded. Even USCIS itself is not clear. In trend chart under "All other pending" its total figure for national level is 279031 till July 2009. Where as in the Excel worksheet it is 233816 till July 2009( Worksheet is produced for the time period till the December 2009 but for July to Dec 2009 all visa categories have zero value thus data is till July 2009)
So I would request you to keep patience till we get "authentic" feedback from somebody. Many people are working on this in background. If you want to see the signs they are there in many other threads including recently declared FOIA and USCIS data comparison thread published by Pappu.
We can't be just "innocently simple minded" when USCIS itself publishes different data sets at different links and start believing the only data of a particular worksheet is correct just because USCIS declared it. If you try to compare both of these trend chart and excel worksheet with the April operating performance report declared by USCIS (needhelp! has posted it on this thread) then you get into more confusion and start seeing clear discrepency.
So choice is yours , patiently watching the input of others on this thread and start contributing in analysis OR keep on doing what you are doing unnecessarily.
naushit
10-01 03:24 PM
Alright, Finally I got CPO email , Life is good.
Thanks,
-N
Finallly, my online status changed from "Initial review" -> "Document production" and also got email from Senator's office that my case is approved.
I think I got it....but not 100% sure yet...no approval emails yet... or no other proof.
Thanks,
-N
Thanks,
-N
Finallly, my online status changed from "Initial review" -> "Document production" and also got email from Senator's office that my case is approved.
I think I got it....but not 100% sure yet...no approval emails yet... or no other proof.
Thanks,
-N
No comments:
Post a Comment