GCStatus
09-14 04:05 AM
Thanks for starting the thread. I share your grief and agree that we gotta do something. As much as I agree that we have to fight for our rights, I am not too sure if suing is the best option.
Again, if you all decide too, I will be more than glad to contribute my 100 but do we have enough ground to ask the questions in such 'blunt' manner? As much as you and I believe that our lives are completely topsy-turvied by these arcane policies, would some one arguing against our claim say that we are still entitled to do what we were allowed here to do. The employment visa allows us to work in a certain kind of job and nothing is hampering that aspect. Yes, it screws up promotions, displaces your plans to stay and has ill-effects both at a personal as well as professional levels but still..
If we have to sue, I think the ground work one has to do is immense. Find significant amounts of data from USCIS in terms of how random their approvals are and how it affects you after we all paid monies expecting a totally different pattern. If this can be accomplished, we could sue them probably for their lack of customer service, by-passing their guidelines on a consistent basis and thus hampering the lives of several people who were here for example in 2001, etc. I strongly believe data is our best friend (worst too, as it is personal data that we probably might not be entitled to even enquire..)
Again, I am no lawyer. I am sort of playing devil's advocate and just thinking through the obvious rebuttals. If we were too get enough data, combining that with active media publicity and some innovative ideas (flowers/clocks/watches whatever) or getting the businesses to acknowledge, then we may see certain changes.
I don't mean to damper your spirits by any sort. I certainly like the 'return my money if you fail to live by your own guidelines'.
Just the fact that, they keep going back from Current to Unavailable to 2006 to 2003 to etc, we have right to sue. Reasons below.
Financial loss.
Loss of business opportunity
Mental stress
Lack of moblility
List can go on.
Again, if you all decide too, I will be more than glad to contribute my 100 but do we have enough ground to ask the questions in such 'blunt' manner? As much as you and I believe that our lives are completely topsy-turvied by these arcane policies, would some one arguing against our claim say that we are still entitled to do what we were allowed here to do. The employment visa allows us to work in a certain kind of job and nothing is hampering that aspect. Yes, it screws up promotions, displaces your plans to stay and has ill-effects both at a personal as well as professional levels but still..
If we have to sue, I think the ground work one has to do is immense. Find significant amounts of data from USCIS in terms of how random their approvals are and how it affects you after we all paid monies expecting a totally different pattern. If this can be accomplished, we could sue them probably for their lack of customer service, by-passing their guidelines on a consistent basis and thus hampering the lives of several people who were here for example in 2001, etc. I strongly believe data is our best friend (worst too, as it is personal data that we probably might not be entitled to even enquire..)
Again, I am no lawyer. I am sort of playing devil's advocate and just thinking through the obvious rebuttals. If we were too get enough data, combining that with active media publicity and some innovative ideas (flowers/clocks/watches whatever) or getting the businesses to acknowledge, then we may see certain changes.
I don't mean to damper your spirits by any sort. I certainly like the 'return my money if you fail to live by your own guidelines'.
Just the fact that, they keep going back from Current to Unavailable to 2006 to 2003 to etc, we have right to sue. Reasons below.
Financial loss.
Loss of business opportunity
Mental stress
Lack of moblility
List can go on.
wallpaper A Five-Pound Box of Money
qasleuth
02-28 12:13 PM
ok suri, while you work 30 hours and make money for yourself, let me take your burden and share my research with you. Here is what you have to do to see the result -
Goto -
http://soprweb.senate.gov/index.cfm?event=selectfields
- check box for client name
- click 'submit' button
- enter 'Immigration Voice' in the client name
- click 'submit' button
Now you see the amount spent by IV for lobbying in the Senate documents. Please do the total and let me know how much is that amount. I am not "highly skilled" like you, so I can't calculate?
Do you know anyone who spent 1/2 million on lobbying for our issues. Maybe your friends have spent that money.
.
Sanju my friend, why sarcasm ? This is such wonderful information, why can't this be made more public, posted in a prominent position on IV ? Why should members do research to get this info when it can be relatively easily acquired by Quinn Gillespie & Assoc and given to core ? Come on man, a little bit of information like this goes a long way with members.
Goto -
http://soprweb.senate.gov/index.cfm?event=selectfields
- check box for client name
- click 'submit' button
- enter 'Immigration Voice' in the client name
- click 'submit' button
Now you see the amount spent by IV for lobbying in the Senate documents. Please do the total and let me know how much is that amount. I am not "highly skilled" like you, so I can't calculate?
Do you know anyone who spent 1/2 million on lobbying for our issues. Maybe your friends have spent that money.
.
Sanju my friend, why sarcasm ? This is such wonderful information, why can't this be made more public, posted in a prominent position on IV ? Why should members do research to get this info when it can be relatively easily acquired by Quinn Gillespie & Assoc and given to core ? Come on man, a little bit of information like this goes a long way with members.
485Mbe4001
12-12 05:44 PM
good call, i hope he replies. Please post the response you receive from the senator on this thread.
[QUOTE=GCwaitforever]
Coming to the SKIL bill and Sen. Sessions, I am mailing my story to him at http://sessions.senate.gov/email/contact.cfm. Hopefully, he will come around and support immigration reform.
Dear Senator Sessions,
I am a legal immigrant living in this country from 1995. I have been paying ...
[QUOTE=GCwaitforever]
Coming to the SKIL bill and Sen. Sessions, I am mailing my story to him at http://sessions.senate.gov/email/contact.cfm. Hopefully, he will come around and support immigration reform.
Dear Senator Sessions,
I am a legal immigrant living in this country from 1995. I have been paying ...
2011 Girls Money Box
desi3933
07-10 03:52 PM
Folks, here is what I am able to gather by self employment
(1) One can be self employed
(2) 1099 or w2 - kinda tricky - most people I talked to do w2 and any profits they get after they take their salary are bonuses
(3) The job has to be legitimate - in the same or similar category - you must be doing duties that are similar in nature to your 140 petition
(4) What is meant by legitimate is - you must simply not be doing "nothing" - there must be income and you must be doing your duties.
Correct me if I am wrong
I agree with above and would like add one more
5. Job duties must match with original labor/I-140 conditions.
.
(1) One can be self employed
(2) 1099 or w2 - kinda tricky - most people I talked to do w2 and any profits they get after they take their salary are bonuses
(3) The job has to be legitimate - in the same or similar category - you must be doing duties that are similar in nature to your 140 petition
(4) What is meant by legitimate is - you must simply not be doing "nothing" - there must be income and you must be doing your duties.
Correct me if I am wrong
I agree with above and would like add one more
5. Job duties must match with original labor/I-140 conditions.
.
more...
maverick_joe
05-02 10:49 AM
:D shhhhhhhh, ppl who got into IV after Apr 2007..please dont express your views...
Who did not even know about IV till Apr 2007 are talking here.
Who did not even know about IV till Apr 2007 are talking here.
reedandbamboo
09-13 09:30 PM
And to be honest, I don't know what happens if they simply choose to ignore us !! But I'm done with doing NOTHING. I need to let them know what I think.
On another note, it appears that the US has chosen to PRETEND to deal with immigration (legal and illegal) by endlessly proposing and killing legislation in Congress. This way they're throwing a bone to us (immigrants) while safeguarding their re-election (since they're not approving any kind of pro-immigration legislation, they aren't incurring the wrath of the almighty electorate).
On another note, it appears that the US has chosen to PRETEND to deal with immigration (legal and illegal) by endlessly proposing and killing legislation in Congress. This way they're throwing a bone to us (immigrants) while safeguarding their re-election (since they're not approving any kind of pro-immigration legislation, they aren't incurring the wrath of the almighty electorate).
more...
tonyHK12
02-17 11:24 AM
What is the difference between the two? IMO, two words "Effective Marketing". Come on, where are the MBA's among us who can offer strategy? Actually I feel we are so backward that we don't even need MBA's to improve from here, just any simple ideas
I respectfully disagree. It has nothing to do with marketing, fraud desi companies put up free ads on sulekha, its the mindset of a large number of our audience we are missing and need to account for. maybe it has to do with jugaad/kludge - the goal defines the means (loosely).
Of course many of these expectations cannot be satisfied in a honest non profit.
I respectfully disagree. It has nothing to do with marketing, fraud desi companies put up free ads on sulekha, its the mindset of a large number of our audience we are missing and need to account for. maybe it has to do with jugaad/kludge - the goal defines the means (loosely).
Of course many of these expectations cannot be satisfied in a honest non profit.
2010 Boys Money Box
chi_shark
07-10 11:28 AM
so this case has some merrit, however, the very core of this case is based on the employment being annually renewable. which means that the petitioner had to take periodic active action to be employed with the university employer... thats where the argument broke down for the petitioner... further, it is VERY GOOD to know that USCIS actually made an attempt to consider this emloyment for I-140 approval. it is good to know that they deliberated and then decided to reject instead of summarily rejecting on prima facie facts. one more very good thing to know (and avoid for ourselves) is that the petitioner in this case represented himself (no lawyer). its possible that if there was a laywer involved, they could have brought up some more documentation or at least shown the light to the university's staff as far as requirements are concerned. further still: no talk was engaged into as far as ability to pay is concerned. FURTHER FURTHER still: this case is about I-140... and we are all talking primarily about I-485 and AC21 cases within....
looks like this case actually tells me that maybe we could do self-employment easily...
Link to EB-1 case where I-140 was denied because job offered was not "permanent".
Link
http://www.uscis.gov/err/B3%20-%20Outstanding%20Professors%20and%20Researchers/Decisions_Issued_in_2004/MAR232004_01B3203.pdf
As per this document
.
looks like this case actually tells me that maybe we could do self-employment easily...
Link to EB-1 case where I-140 was denied because job offered was not "permanent".
Link
http://www.uscis.gov/err/B3%20-%20Outstanding%20Professors%20and%20Researchers/Decisions_Issued_in_2004/MAR232004_01B3203.pdf
As per this document
.
more...
dontcareanymore
07-28 12:48 AM
1) First of all this is not the response to just the quoted post, but many on the same lines, especially from delax and others.
2)I believe that that whole process is so screwed up that it is never fair and never will be. Irrespective of what Eb3s hope for and try , Eb2 folks are going to get their GCs and Eb3s will have to wait until stars align for them.
3) I don't really care one way or other , because what you wish,hope or try to do will have no bearing on the outcome.
<Those who think 2 year EADs are because of your letters , stay in the dreamland - ignorance is bliss >
4) I am really happy for Eb2 folks (No way jealous) , just pissed by some attitude here.
Now that I have the disclaimers out of the way, Here is what I have to say:
Why the heck you never made the argument that "law is law" and "There is no compassion" before law crap when you were retrogressed ?
What happened to what law says , when attempts were made to grab visas from ROW with the same "It is not fair" argument ?
What is the yardstick for EB2 ? It is just what your employer says it is. I know so many in body shops with Eb2 apps while others languish in Eb3 queue.
You can't extend the logic to all EB1 categories. At least in some of the EB categories one has to have published research work in peer reviewed journals.
Will give you an example :
Know some one who came here as postdoc with PHD in life sciences (zoology) and self filed for GC EB1and now runs an Indian grocery just after being in job for less than a year. How do you justify that GC is in the interest of US than a person who is working in a company for 10 years ?
It is true that the original number is broken up equally among all categories but the INA clearly states that if the demand within a category is not sufficient to use up all the visas in that category then the excess should be made available without any regard to country limit in that category. Here's a fact from the July bulletin - not an opinion:
There have been questions raised regarding the way numbers have been provided to the China and India in the Employment Second preference categories beginning in April. Section 202(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act states that if total demand for visas in an Employment preference category is insufficient to use all available visa numbers in that category in a calendar quarter, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limit. (For example: If the second preference annual limit were 40,000, number use by “All Other Countries” were estimated to be only 25,000, and the China/India combined number use based on their per-country limits were 6,000, then there would be 9,000 numbers unused. Those 9,000 numbers could then be made available to China and India applicants without regard to their per-country limits.)
I dont buy the argument that length of wait (as implied in the letter) should determine eligibility for approval disregarding the clear categorization established by law AFTER the initial handout is made on an equal basis. I have always maintained that any logic used to justify shifting visas between EB2 and EB3 purely based on the length of wait can also easily be used between EB2 and EB1. The fact that EB1 has never retrogressed does not matter. Unfortunately LAW is an absolute entity - there is no compassionate interpretation in civil and common law.
If a EB3-2002 is approved before EB2-2004 purely based on length of wait and ignoring the categorization after the initial handout then the same logic or rationale can be used to approve EB2-2004 before EB1-2007 by 'holding back' the visa from the EB1 candidate and giving it to EB2.
I dont think either of us is interested in going down the path of EB2 versus EB3 but to the extent this letter implies/attempts to do that, it is detrimental to the functioning of this group. Cheers
2)I believe that that whole process is so screwed up that it is never fair and never will be. Irrespective of what Eb3s hope for and try , Eb2 folks are going to get their GCs and Eb3s will have to wait until stars align for them.
3) I don't really care one way or other , because what you wish,hope or try to do will have no bearing on the outcome.
<Those who think 2 year EADs are because of your letters , stay in the dreamland - ignorance is bliss >
4) I am really happy for Eb2 folks (No way jealous) , just pissed by some attitude here.
Now that I have the disclaimers out of the way, Here is what I have to say:
Why the heck you never made the argument that "law is law" and "There is no compassion" before law crap when you were retrogressed ?
What happened to what law says , when attempts were made to grab visas from ROW with the same "It is not fair" argument ?
What is the yardstick for EB2 ? It is just what your employer says it is. I know so many in body shops with Eb2 apps while others languish in Eb3 queue.
You can't extend the logic to all EB1 categories. At least in some of the EB categories one has to have published research work in peer reviewed journals.
Will give you an example :
Know some one who came here as postdoc with PHD in life sciences (zoology) and self filed for GC EB1and now runs an Indian grocery just after being in job for less than a year. How do you justify that GC is in the interest of US than a person who is working in a company for 10 years ?
It is true that the original number is broken up equally among all categories but the INA clearly states that if the demand within a category is not sufficient to use up all the visas in that category then the excess should be made available without any regard to country limit in that category. Here's a fact from the July bulletin - not an opinion:
There have been questions raised regarding the way numbers have been provided to the China and India in the Employment Second preference categories beginning in April. Section 202(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act states that if total demand for visas in an Employment preference category is insufficient to use all available visa numbers in that category in a calendar quarter, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limit. (For example: If the second preference annual limit were 40,000, number use by “All Other Countries” were estimated to be only 25,000, and the China/India combined number use based on their per-country limits were 6,000, then there would be 9,000 numbers unused. Those 9,000 numbers could then be made available to China and India applicants without regard to their per-country limits.)
I dont buy the argument that length of wait (as implied in the letter) should determine eligibility for approval disregarding the clear categorization established by law AFTER the initial handout is made on an equal basis. I have always maintained that any logic used to justify shifting visas between EB2 and EB3 purely based on the length of wait can also easily be used between EB2 and EB1. The fact that EB1 has never retrogressed does not matter. Unfortunately LAW is an absolute entity - there is no compassionate interpretation in civil and common law.
If a EB3-2002 is approved before EB2-2004 purely based on length of wait and ignoring the categorization after the initial handout then the same logic or rationale can be used to approve EB2-2004 before EB1-2007 by 'holding back' the visa from the EB1 candidate and giving it to EB2.
I dont think either of us is interested in going down the path of EB2 versus EB3 but to the extent this letter implies/attempts to do that, it is detrimental to the functioning of this group. Cheers
hair Novelty Themed Money Boxes
subba
07-07 09:40 PM
This is what my lawyer mailed us today (I have always had good service from him):
In my very initial thoughts, on July 2 and July 3, I believed the lawsuit had no chance; but in following this more closely and doing my own research, I think increasingly that the lawsuit has merit. USCIS and DOS appear to have violated various of its internal rules and arguably actual statutes and regulations in handling all this.
Not that I am holding my breath, but just wanted pass it on....
In my very initial thoughts, on July 2 and July 3, I believed the lawsuit had no chance; but in following this more closely and doing my own research, I think increasingly that the lawsuit has merit. USCIS and DOS appear to have violated various of its internal rules and arguably actual statutes and regulations in handling all this.
Not that I am holding my breath, but just wanted pass it on....
more...
Ramba
07-28 12:08 PM
I dont think he 'threatened' EB2. He challenged. But if you were frightened, it is not his problem. who should go where?!
Sorry to read blaming debates between eb3 and eb2. Insted of blaming, it is better to take some action. Based on current practice by DOS, EB3-I will be like this for ever, unless more number opens up by any legislative changes. As per law, each EB catagories are allowed to have 40K visas. As demand for EB2 is more, (paricularly by In,Ch) one can not expect any flow from EB2 to EB3 . This is law one can not change it.
Now I am coming to important point to take some action by EB3-I. The law says, 7% country quota will be applied in each prefrence catagory if worldwide demand for visas is more than supply in that catagory. But the law does not set any time frame. Therefore, the real threat for EB3-I is EB3-ROW. As per current practice, untill EB3-ROW become "current" EB3-I will get only 3000 visas per year. What happen if EB3-ROW never become "current" for next 50 years? EB3-I will be stuck in 2001 or 2002 for ever. To add my point, let us imagine a hypothetical case. Lets say in 2010 about 1 million ROW guys neend EB3 visa number. All has PD 2010. EB3-In will be stuck in 2001 till one million EB-ROW with PD 2010 recives GC. In nut shell, a EB3-ROW with latest PD will be given more preference than EB3-In with PD 2001. As current practice does not set any time limit, new flow of applications keeps retrogressed countries stuck for ever. This point has to be conveyed to DOS and USCIS to change the practice. Applications receviced in one fiscal year has to be cleared (grant GC) to process the application from next year. This way new applications from ROW will not stuck the retrogreesd countries for ever.
Sorry to read blaming debates between eb3 and eb2. Insted of blaming, it is better to take some action. Based on current practice by DOS, EB3-I will be like this for ever, unless more number opens up by any legislative changes. As per law, each EB catagories are allowed to have 40K visas. As demand for EB2 is more, (paricularly by In,Ch) one can not expect any flow from EB2 to EB3 . This is law one can not change it.
Now I am coming to important point to take some action by EB3-I. The law says, 7% country quota will be applied in each prefrence catagory if worldwide demand for visas is more than supply in that catagory. But the law does not set any time frame. Therefore, the real threat for EB3-I is EB3-ROW. As per current practice, untill EB3-ROW become "current" EB3-I will get only 3000 visas per year. What happen if EB3-ROW never become "current" for next 50 years? EB3-I will be stuck in 2001 or 2002 for ever. To add my point, let us imagine a hypothetical case. Lets say in 2010 about 1 million ROW guys neend EB3 visa number. All has PD 2010. EB3-In will be stuck in 2001 till one million EB-ROW with PD 2010 recives GC. In nut shell, a EB3-ROW with latest PD will be given more preference than EB3-In with PD 2001. As current practice does not set any time limit, new flow of applications keeps retrogressed countries stuck for ever. This point has to be conveyed to DOS and USCIS to change the practice. Applications receviced in one fiscal year has to be cleared (grant GC) to process the application from next year. This way new applications from ROW will not stuck the retrogreesd countries for ever.
hot Peter Rabbit Money Box and
gc28262
06-26 08:44 AM
Law clearly states employer cannot discriminate based on immigration status.
Walking dude has a point. I think we should take this up. We shouldn't be calling the employer and notifying them. We should notify the ad to appropriate authorities.
Walking dude has a point. I think we should take this up. We shouldn't be calling the employer and notifying them. We should notify the ad to appropriate authorities.
more...
house A range of money boxes,
mrsr
07-08 12:28 PM
may be by october we will have some visa numbers at that time they may let us file, rice donot mind loosing 2 or 3 billions to AILF because we are alreading loosing 3 to 4 billions in iraq every month and by now she is get used to it.
tattoo #100598499 Money Box
deepak
09-10 09:32 PM
Deepak,
You are very practical and have excellent points.
Sometimes, ppl do get carried away by their passion (height of desperation if one looks at it another angle). We have to accommodate folks that cannot have a nonchalant attitude towards Immigration. Just like health care, GC stirs up our deepest and strongest emotions. For many, GC is an all-or-nothing proposition (again let's not fret about why it might be so, because they might have their own good reasons). Regardless, i agree with you completely, civility should not be lost. We have a broken Immigration system - all i care is how to fix it.
I am becoming a donor for the following reasons -
1. It is better to be informed and be involved rather than be "out of the loop" or in the dark
2. It is not free to get anything done in the commercial capital of the planet
3. Selfish motivation - life is short. i would like to see the end of this struggle as soon as i can. personally, cannot be a mute spectator esp. when i see someone else fighting for MY cause and I being fortunate to lend a helping hand
4. Altruistic motivation - gives some meaning to life whether we get anything done or not at the end of the day. if successful, would have the satisfaction of being part of the solution - the intangible benefits of that feeling is unexplainable.
Wish us luck and my best to everyone in all their endeavors.
All the best to all of us. The only way we can make our way out of this mess is by sticking together and helping each other out. IV is doing a good job of rallying everyone around and I think all things considered we are doing a good job of doing the best we can.
You are very practical and have excellent points.
Sometimes, ppl do get carried away by their passion (height of desperation if one looks at it another angle). We have to accommodate folks that cannot have a nonchalant attitude towards Immigration. Just like health care, GC stirs up our deepest and strongest emotions. For many, GC is an all-or-nothing proposition (again let's not fret about why it might be so, because they might have their own good reasons). Regardless, i agree with you completely, civility should not be lost. We have a broken Immigration system - all i care is how to fix it.
I am becoming a donor for the following reasons -
1. It is better to be informed and be involved rather than be "out of the loop" or in the dark
2. It is not free to get anything done in the commercial capital of the planet
3. Selfish motivation - life is short. i would like to see the end of this struggle as soon as i can. personally, cannot be a mute spectator esp. when i see someone else fighting for MY cause and I being fortunate to lend a helping hand
4. Altruistic motivation - gives some meaning to life whether we get anything done or not at the end of the day. if successful, would have the satisfaction of being part of the solution - the intangible benefits of that feeling is unexplainable.
Wish us luck and my best to everyone in all their endeavors.
All the best to all of us. The only way we can make our way out of this mess is by sticking together and helping each other out. IV is doing a good job of rallying everyone around and I think all things considered we are doing a good job of doing the best we can.
more...
pictures Lots and lots of money.
amitjoey
07-09 04:52 PM
Sent the press release to local news stations in KY state. If they are interested in the story i will ask them to contact IV for more information.
There you go, that is what we need more, simply send the press release.
There you go, that is what we need more, simply send the press release.
dresses various shape of money box for
franklin
06-07 09:01 PM
740 - is that all?! I would have assumed there would be MANY more than that given the huge jumps in all categories.
more...
makeup in front of money box
zoooom
07-19 08:50 PM
$100 from me.
Rahul :)
Thanks!!
Rahul :)
Thanks!!
girlfriend Samp;P OINK ZEBRA MONEY BOX
GCcomesoon
11-06 02:51 PM
Hi
I have opened up 2 SR's & have taken 2 info-passes till now but I haven't received my FP yet.
GCcomesoon
Priority date - 05/2003
140 approved - 10/2006 from TSC
485,131,765 RD-6/04/2007 at TSC, notices received - 06/07/2007
CA, EB2
Wife's case returned due to some error,send it again & received on 06/17/2007 as per Fedex
Wife's case RD- 7/10/2007
LUD in my case - I131 - 7/10/07, approved - 7/24/07
LUD in my case - 1131,485,765, - 7/11/07
LUD in spouse's case - I131-7/11/07
EAD cleared for spouse - 08/20/07
FP for spouse - 08/08/07 , I rescheduled it.
FP scheduled - 10/03/07 - Done
AP approved for spouse - 09/12/07
EAD aproved - 10/25/2007 - for me
FP for me- ??????
Thanks
GCcomesoon
I have opened up 2 SR's & have taken 2 info-passes till now but I haven't received my FP yet.
GCcomesoon
Priority date - 05/2003
140 approved - 10/2006 from TSC
485,131,765 RD-6/04/2007 at TSC, notices received - 06/07/2007
CA, EB2
Wife's case returned due to some error,send it again & received on 06/17/2007 as per Fedex
Wife's case RD- 7/10/2007
LUD in my case - I131 - 7/10/07, approved - 7/24/07
LUD in my case - 1131,485,765, - 7/11/07
LUD in spouse's case - I131-7/11/07
EAD cleared for spouse - 08/20/07
FP for spouse - 08/08/07 , I rescheduled it.
FP scheduled - 10/03/07 - Done
AP approved for spouse - 09/12/07
EAD aproved - 10/25/2007 - for me
FP for me- ??????
Thanks
GCcomesoon
hairstyles Extinguisher Money Box
nandu_k_n
02-15 09:40 AM
Paid USD 50. Transaction id for the paypal payment is - 9PE56826U6585973L.
desi_scorpion
08-01 02:33 PM
Am in the same boat....485 submitted to NSC on July 2nd....140 pending in TSC. I called the Nebraska Service center at 1-800-375-5283, option 1-2-2-6-2-2-1 and the agent escalated my call ...then was told that if my I-140 was in Texas then the 485 will be tranaferred there. Its taking 6-8 weeks for receipt notices. On asking if transferring will take longer...she said no....will not take longer.
chmur
07-26 01:05 PM
If I am not wrong, it is more to do with a rule interpretation change by USCIS.
Insuppose the most feasible solution for the ones that are really bothered and have a chance is to do a EB2 porting. EB3 is like the slow lane. EB2 also used to be like that but benefited from the change in spillover.
EB3 best chance is to have the Visa Recapture which is already being pursued or have some other legislative fix.
----
Not a lawyer.
EB3 May 2006
Contributed $100
EB3-I 's best chance in the current context , in the order of faster results,
1. Port to EB2 , If possible
2. Lobby to change spill over distribution. USCIS has been inconsistent over the years. So we need to lobby hard and impress upon them that this year distribution algorithm is unfair .who knows it can change again next year , this time a more balanced one ..
3. Recapture effort: This is a big one and we need to support carry out the tasks assigned by IV and other biggies .
IMO, No genuinely concerned fellow mate should advise EB3-I's to support only recapture effort.
Insuppose the most feasible solution for the ones that are really bothered and have a chance is to do a EB2 porting. EB3 is like the slow lane. EB2 also used to be like that but benefited from the change in spillover.
EB3 best chance is to have the Visa Recapture which is already being pursued or have some other legislative fix.
----
Not a lawyer.
EB3 May 2006
Contributed $100
EB3-I 's best chance in the current context , in the order of faster results,
1. Port to EB2 , If possible
2. Lobby to change spill over distribution. USCIS has been inconsistent over the years. So we need to lobby hard and impress upon them that this year distribution algorithm is unfair .who knows it can change again next year , this time a more balanced one ..
3. Recapture effort: This is a big one and we need to support carry out the tasks assigned by IV and other biggies .
IMO, No genuinely concerned fellow mate should advise EB3-I's to support only recapture effort.
No comments:
Post a Comment