gc28262
07-29 01:44 PM
asylum - you are very funny
lottery - acctualy they have a country limit
green card - :confused:
undocumented - we are talking about legal immigration (for gk_2000 also)
explain your logic please...........the limits are not based on Asian, African, Indian,etc........please check the dictionary to find out what it means racism.
Thanks
Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965)
Please look back at this country's immigration laws over the years. When Europeans were immigrating to in large numbers, they didn't have any issues with that. They never felt the need of country cap. When non-Europeans started immigrating in large numbers, america suddenly realizes she has to be "fair" to all countries in the world and fairer to whites in particular.
It is such a shame that this country covers up racism with "diversity" in this 21st century.
Moreover skill has nothing to do with country of birth(EB category).
Diversity:
Diversity has to be reflected in the population already in US. Do you think Indians/Chinese are a majority in this country ?
lottery - acctualy they have a country limit
green card - :confused:
undocumented - we are talking about legal immigration (for gk_2000 also)
explain your logic please...........the limits are not based on Asian, African, Indian,etc........please check the dictionary to find out what it means racism.
Thanks
Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965)
Please look back at this country's immigration laws over the years. When Europeans were immigrating to in large numbers, they didn't have any issues with that. They never felt the need of country cap. When non-Europeans started immigrating in large numbers, america suddenly realizes she has to be "fair" to all countries in the world and fairer to whites in particular.
It is such a shame that this country covers up racism with "diversity" in this 21st century.
Moreover skill has nothing to do with country of birth(EB category).
Diversity:
Diversity has to be reflected in the population already in US. Do you think Indians/Chinese are a majority in this country ?
wallpaper shoes items dgs106 79 99 in
scorpion00
06-16 11:40 PM
It does not fall in that category
Thanks for the quick response.
Thanks for the quick response.
nkhari
07-19 10:22 AM
trust me..you can get the report in 2 hours.
chicago/pittsburg.
HIV test, the result is you already know..
you pay by cash!!
chicago/pittsburg.
HIV test, the result is you already know..
you pay by cash!!
2011 Dolce amp; Gabbana Shoes
vbkris77
11-30 10:42 PM
Following is Ron`s observation
.
There is an error in the initial explanation of the quota. As I read this analysis, they are suggesting that the single state limit is 25,620 - irrespective of whether the visas are issued in family or employment based. This suggests that a country with heavy family based demand, but light employment based demand, could use more than 7% of the EB or FB quota as long as they remained under 25,620 overall. This is wrong. The 7% limit applies independently to FB and EB. A country could have no demand in one area, and enormous demand in the other and the side with the excessive demand would still be limited to 7% of that quota - not 7% of the combined quota.
Also, I think that their estimates for China and India EB2 are too pessimistic.
__________________
USCIS - I-Link Reference (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.f6da51a2342135be7e9d7a10e0dc91a0/?vgnextoid=fa7e539dc4bed010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=fa7e539dc4bed010VgnVCM1000000ecd190a RCRD&CH=act)
(1) Nondiscrimination. -
(A) Except as specifically provided in paragraph (2) and in sections 101(a)(27) , 201(b)(2)(A)(i) , and 203, no person shall receive any preference or priority or be discriminated against in the issuance of an immigrant visa because of the person's race, sex, nationality, place of birth, or place of residence.
(B) 1/ Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to limit the authority of the Secretary of State to determine the procedures for the processing of immigrant visa applications or the locations where such applications will be processed.
(2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. - Subject to 1a/ paragraphs (3), (4), and (5) the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed 7 percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or 2 percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.
This to my understanding gives 7% total immigrant visas. Also the next para doesn't mean anything if this is not different for FB and EB.
(e) Special Rules for Countries at Ceiling. - If it is determined that the total number of immigrant visas made available under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area will exceed the numerical limitation specified in subsection (a)(2) in any fiscal year, in determining the allotment of immigrant visa numbers to natives under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203, visa numbers with respect to natives of that state or area shall be allocated (to the extent practicable and otherwise consistent with this section and section 203) in a manner so that
.
There is an error in the initial explanation of the quota. As I read this analysis, they are suggesting that the single state limit is 25,620 - irrespective of whether the visas are issued in family or employment based. This suggests that a country with heavy family based demand, but light employment based demand, could use more than 7% of the EB or FB quota as long as they remained under 25,620 overall. This is wrong. The 7% limit applies independently to FB and EB. A country could have no demand in one area, and enormous demand in the other and the side with the excessive demand would still be limited to 7% of that quota - not 7% of the combined quota.
Also, I think that their estimates for China and India EB2 are too pessimistic.
__________________
USCIS - I-Link Reference (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.f6da51a2342135be7e9d7a10e0dc91a0/?vgnextoid=fa7e539dc4bed010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=fa7e539dc4bed010VgnVCM1000000ecd190a RCRD&CH=act)
(1) Nondiscrimination. -
(A) Except as specifically provided in paragraph (2) and in sections 101(a)(27) , 201(b)(2)(A)(i) , and 203, no person shall receive any preference or priority or be discriminated against in the issuance of an immigrant visa because of the person's race, sex, nationality, place of birth, or place of residence.
(B) 1/ Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to limit the authority of the Secretary of State to determine the procedures for the processing of immigrant visa applications or the locations where such applications will be processed.
(2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. - Subject to 1a/ paragraphs (3), (4), and (5) the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed 7 percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or 2 percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.
This to my understanding gives 7% total immigrant visas. Also the next para doesn't mean anything if this is not different for FB and EB.
(e) Special Rules for Countries at Ceiling. - If it is determined that the total number of immigrant visas made available under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area will exceed the numerical limitation specified in subsection (a)(2) in any fiscal year, in determining the allotment of immigrant visa numbers to natives under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203, visa numbers with respect to natives of that state or area shall be allocated (to the extent practicable and otherwise consistent with this section and section 203) in a manner so that
more...
485InDreams
09-19 03:19 PM
I believe, This will create some pressure on Strive Act.....
krcreddy
07-08 12:02 AM
Here is the link to NBC site:
http://video.msn.com/v/us/msnbc.htm?g=7074a9b5-daf9-4a79-934f-cce39dbeb3ac&f=00&fg=copy
http://video.msn.com/v/us/msnbc.htm?g=7074a9b5-daf9-4a79-934f-cce39dbeb3ac&f=00&fg=copy
more...
PresidentO
04-01 06:35 PM
This is clearly crap.
Either USCIS or your attorney screwed up.
In either case, ask your former attorney to provide the letter he wrote to USCIS to withdraw his representation. If he did what you asked, good forward the same to USCIS with a MTR and then file a DHS7001 form (google if you dont know the form) with USCIS Ombudsman.
if your attorney screwed up, hire another one first to file an MTR along with your communication to your attorney (also file DHS7001) showing that its the attorney who screwed up and not you. Next hire a good litigation attorney and beat the crap out of this slimy attorney and get him to pay some good $$$.
I sincerely hope its the former and not the latter. Even if its the latter, stay positive and engage a good attorney and litigate. You sure will win some $$$. :)
Either USCIS or your attorney screwed up.
In either case, ask your former attorney to provide the letter he wrote to USCIS to withdraw his representation. If he did what you asked, good forward the same to USCIS with a MTR and then file a DHS7001 form (google if you dont know the form) with USCIS Ombudsman.
if your attorney screwed up, hire another one first to file an MTR along with your communication to your attorney (also file DHS7001) showing that its the attorney who screwed up and not you. Next hire a good litigation attorney and beat the crap out of this slimy attorney and get him to pay some good $$$.
I sincerely hope its the former and not the latter. Even if its the latter, stay positive and engage a good attorney and litigate. You sure will win some $$$. :)
2010 Dolce amp; Gabbana Shoes - Dolce
bastati
07-04 04:22 PM
$6,200
more...
smisachu
08-08 12:44 PM
I am not sure you have to stick around for 6months or even 1 month. It is not specified anywhere. If the employer does not inform USCIS you are pretty much off the hook. Since we have GC now we dont have to tell USCIS or any one what we do. We can switch jobs/career paths and if the employer dosen't inform USCIS how will they know?
As far as people who used AC21, you are not with the original employer anyway so how does it matter if you switch jobs.
After being stuk on the career front for 10 years I am not waiting around anymore. I am going out and working on my career now that I finally have the freedom to do so..
As far as people who used AC21, you are not with the original employer anyway so how does it matter if you switch jobs.
After being stuk on the career front for 10 years I am not waiting around anymore. I am going out and working on my career now that I finally have the freedom to do so..
hair Men Dolce amp; Gabbana Damp;G Casual
vvr
05-20 02:21 AM
Way to shine guys ! Any more suggestions for a "brand new" quota ?
more...
songlan
06-19 04:09 PM
You would be little naive or new to say so. Look at my signature, 5 years with retrogress till recently. The waited period 5-7 years is very usual .
holy cow!!!!......its gonna take 4 years from here to get our
green cards?
holy cow!!!!......its gonna take 4 years from here to get our
green cards?
hot Dolce amp; Gabbana White Men#39;s
venkygct
09-07 11:35 PM
^^^^^
more...
house dolce and gabbana shoes
whoever
12-12 01:43 PM
I am of the opinion that EB3 India will be stuck at May 8 for a long time. The trend to follow will be that of Mexico's. By the way, only my opinion. I hope I am really really wrong. And god have mercy on us.
tattoo oxfords Dolce amp; Gabbana shoes
greensignal
11-09 12:30 PM
Still waiting for FP and no SR is filed
more...
pictures Men Dolce amp; Gabbana Damp;G Casual
ck_b2001
01-26 09:32 PM
Hi,
I am planning to accept an offer from a company that will also sponsor my H1. All the terms & conditions look fine to me and their seems to be no bond.
However, the offer letter has a clause that is a bit strange and raised some doubts in my mind. Experienced people please comment and let me know if it has a risky hidden meaning. Please note I am not going to take any trainings and would start to work immediately with one of their clients. The clause goes like this.
"Employee acknowledges that the Company may invest significant sums to train and educate Employee and the Company�s investment in Employee would be jeopardized if Employee were to leave the company�s employment prior to the Company�s receipt of the benefits of such training and education. Employee hereby agrees to refund to the Company all amounts expended by the Company in the immediately preceding 12 months for education or training of the Employee if Employee resigns from the employment with the Company or is terminated by the Company for gross neglect of duty, material breach of the Letter or this Agreement or conviction or plea of guilty or no contests to a felony. Employee authorizes the Company to deduct and withhold such payment in full from any compensation or other amounts otherwise owed or payable to Employee. The payments will be due within 30 days of
termination of the employment."
In my company if they transfer you with-in company and pay all moving which can total to 25-30 k, they say that if you leave with-in 12 month of moving you have to pay back moving expenses. If company terminate you before 12 months, they will move you back and pay for your expenses.
It may be a standard clause if it is only valid for first 12 month. May be they spend $$$$$ on training but i am pretty sure they'll have hard time enforcing it.
I am planning to accept an offer from a company that will also sponsor my H1. All the terms & conditions look fine to me and their seems to be no bond.
However, the offer letter has a clause that is a bit strange and raised some doubts in my mind. Experienced people please comment and let me know if it has a risky hidden meaning. Please note I am not going to take any trainings and would start to work immediately with one of their clients. The clause goes like this.
"Employee acknowledges that the Company may invest significant sums to train and educate Employee and the Company�s investment in Employee would be jeopardized if Employee were to leave the company�s employment prior to the Company�s receipt of the benefits of such training and education. Employee hereby agrees to refund to the Company all amounts expended by the Company in the immediately preceding 12 months for education or training of the Employee if Employee resigns from the employment with the Company or is terminated by the Company for gross neglect of duty, material breach of the Letter or this Agreement or conviction or plea of guilty or no contests to a felony. Employee authorizes the Company to deduct and withhold such payment in full from any compensation or other amounts otherwise owed or payable to Employee. The payments will be due within 30 days of
termination of the employment."
In my company if they transfer you with-in company and pay all moving which can total to 25-30 k, they say that if you leave with-in 12 month of moving you have to pay back moving expenses. If company terminate you before 12 months, they will move you back and pay for your expenses.
It may be a standard clause if it is only valid for first 12 month. May be they spend $$$$$ on training but i am pretty sure they'll have hard time enforcing it.
dresses Dolce and Gabbana shoes.
singhsa3
01-04 01:30 PM
This is so funny. You made me laugh like anything.:D:D:D:D:D:D:D
You can bring UP TO 4 spouses on H4 visa. That's why it is called H4. Similarly on F2, you can only bring 2 spouses, Ah...students do not make that kind of money to support more than 2 spouses. USCIS thinks so much about us.
I am just talking out of my A**.
You can bring UP TO 4 spouses on H4 visa. That's why it is called H4. Similarly on F2, you can only bring 2 spouses, Ah...students do not make that kind of money to support more than 2 spouses. USCIS thinks so much about us.
I am just talking out of my A**.
more...
makeup Mens Dolce amp; Gabbana Shoes New
Karthikthiru
02-06 05:53 PM
Myself and my wife sent letters to President and ImmigrationVoice
Karthik
Karthik
girlfriend The Dolce amp; Gabbana shoes and
nag2007
02-08 04:06 PM
I dont see any light at the tunnel. PDs will not move until they allow 485 filing even PD is not current.
hairstyles Dolce-gabbana-shoes-_dg-casual
sc3
05-13 07:33 PM
Please check with both Immigration attorney (for 485 withdrawal), and a divorce lawyer in India.
I believe that if the marriage was conducted in India, but US court issues the divorce decree, such decree is not automatically recognized in India. You might have to file for such a decree in India too.
Personally, withdrawing now, and reapplying is a better option. You will be playing Russian roulette if you decide to wait for some time to "withdraw" -- as USCIS could suddenly make dates current (remember last year), and approve a bunch of application. Of course, consult an Immigration lawyer to see if you can withdraw and re-use the same application (140) later. If not, withdraw and start a new GC (using current 140 as basis for priority date) -- you could even get a EB2 classification.
I believe that if the marriage was conducted in India, but US court issues the divorce decree, such decree is not automatically recognized in India. You might have to file for such a decree in India too.
Personally, withdrawing now, and reapplying is a better option. You will be playing Russian roulette if you decide to wait for some time to "withdraw" -- as USCIS could suddenly make dates current (remember last year), and approve a bunch of application. Of course, consult an Immigration lawyer to see if you can withdraw and re-use the same application (140) later. If not, withdraw and start a new GC (using current 140 as basis for priority date) -- you could even get a EB2 classification.
Berkeleybee
02-04 09:07 PM
All,
I'm posting this here since the old volunteer forums are no longer available. Where all have you posted flyers, info in CA?
For those in the Bay Area: Have you contacted the new Indian Community Center in http://indiacc.org/Default.aspx (they have locations in Milpitas and Sunnyvale)? I don't live in the South Bay, but it seems like this is a pretty active space. Wonder if they would let us give a talk, and/or post flyers etc. If no one has been in touch with them, I could try.
Thanks,
Berkeleybee
I'm posting this here since the old volunteer forums are no longer available. Where all have you posted flyers, info in CA?
For those in the Bay Area: Have you contacted the new Indian Community Center in http://indiacc.org/Default.aspx (they have locations in Milpitas and Sunnyvale)? I don't live in the South Bay, but it seems like this is a pretty active space. Wonder if they would let us give a talk, and/or post flyers etc. If no one has been in touch with them, I could try.
Thanks,
Berkeleybee
ryan
07-13 02:07 PM
[QUOTE=dineshksharma;487749]"Long Journey. Finally GC
by J2GC
Hi Guys,
After a long journey of more than Sixteen years in this country, I finally received my GC.
In short, I came in 1993 on J-1 for my training which took six years, followed by one year on O-1 visa and then J-1 waiver for three and half years in underserved area.....QUOTE]
Inspirational stuff, indeed. Congratulations.
by J2GC
Hi Guys,
After a long journey of more than Sixteen years in this country, I finally received my GC.
In short, I came in 1993 on J-1 for my training which took six years, followed by one year on O-1 visa and then J-1 waiver for three and half years in underserved area.....QUOTE]
Inspirational stuff, indeed. Congratulations.