vagish
07-16 06:16 PM
Following up on the NYTimes article about the NumbersUSA group, I visited their website and saw that they have a free FAX program where they can easily send faxes to their senators.
One of their fax letters is below, which is a complete mis-representation of truth - look at point #2.
================================
Dear [This fax will go to Your U.S. Senators and U.S. Representative ]
I oppose any increase in the annual H-1B visa cap, including those in the SKIL Act. I am counting on you to oppose it.
Here are just a few reasons why I hope you will oppose the SKIL Act:
(1) The six-year visas allow foreign workers to bring in their families, and guarantee thousands of anchor babies.
(2) H-1B salaries are tax-exempt - no FICA, no federal or state income taxes. They can live at the same level as tax-paying Americans at a lower cost. Therefore, Congress allows foreigners to "low-ball" American workers.
(3) H-1Bs can leave the job they came to fill and seek other jobs, not necessarily in the "hard to fill" category.
(4) Most H-1Bs are of a "protected" ethnic group, so H-1Bs have an affirmative action preference when competing with Americans for the same jobs.
The result of the SKIL Act would be to further depress the wages of Americans working in high-tech and scientific fields and to cause additional job displacement for those workers.
Sincerely, [Your Name Will Appear Here]
==============================================
Is there any way we could let the senators know that this is complete lie, misinformation and mis-representation of facts?. We should also let the senators know that the credibility of these organizations are questionable and following the news/faxes from these organizations would in turn put the credibility of these senators at a BIG RISK. We also should let the senators know that these groups are artificially "hiking" up the count by sending in duplicate faxes.
Also, I recommend creating a similar page in IV website, where we can have an automated 1-2-3 STEP fax facility where we can automatically fax a letter to senators. It should be as simple as selecting the state and pressing the Send Fax button. Please let me know if you need any programming help from me.
Thanks,
Sanjay.
IT IS A SCREWED UP ORGANIZATION !!!!!!!!!
One of their fax letters is below, which is a complete mis-representation of truth - look at point #2.
================================
Dear [This fax will go to Your U.S. Senators and U.S. Representative ]
I oppose any increase in the annual H-1B visa cap, including those in the SKIL Act. I am counting on you to oppose it.
Here are just a few reasons why I hope you will oppose the SKIL Act:
(1) The six-year visas allow foreign workers to bring in their families, and guarantee thousands of anchor babies.
(2) H-1B salaries are tax-exempt - no FICA, no federal or state income taxes. They can live at the same level as tax-paying Americans at a lower cost. Therefore, Congress allows foreigners to "low-ball" American workers.
(3) H-1Bs can leave the job they came to fill and seek other jobs, not necessarily in the "hard to fill" category.
(4) Most H-1Bs are of a "protected" ethnic group, so H-1Bs have an affirmative action preference when competing with Americans for the same jobs.
The result of the SKIL Act would be to further depress the wages of Americans working in high-tech and scientific fields and to cause additional job displacement for those workers.
Sincerely, [Your Name Will Appear Here]
==============================================
Is there any way we could let the senators know that this is complete lie, misinformation and mis-representation of facts?. We should also let the senators know that the credibility of these organizations are questionable and following the news/faxes from these organizations would in turn put the credibility of these senators at a BIG RISK. We also should let the senators know that these groups are artificially "hiking" up the count by sending in duplicate faxes.
Also, I recommend creating a similar page in IV website, where we can have an automated 1-2-3 STEP fax facility where we can automatically fax a letter to senators. It should be as simple as selecting the state and pressing the Send Fax button. Please let me know if you need any programming help from me.
Thanks,
Sanjay.
IT IS A SCREWED UP ORGANIZATION !!!!!!!!!
wallpaper Rihanna Tour Dates and
chanduv23
09-10 12:09 PM
Are you saying that whoever is happy in their job without a GC is in a closet or jail?
Having dealt with a lot of people, I have noticed that - most people are not happy but put up with it. They pretend to show a happy face whereas they want to jump jobs at the first possible instance.
They are in closets due to some kind of fear or stigma. If they are all happy with their h1b and jobs why did they all cry and crib during July visa bulletin fiasco and start pounding the IV website?
This is for those who have taken a stance against the rally for no reason. They are working against a cause that would help them.
Having dealt with a lot of people, I have noticed that - most people are not happy but put up with it. They pretend to show a happy face whereas they want to jump jobs at the first possible instance.
They are in closets due to some kind of fear or stigma. If they are all happy with their h1b and jobs why did they all cry and crib during July visa bulletin fiasco and start pounding the IV website?
This is for those who have taken a stance against the rally for no reason. They are working against a cause that would help them.
wait4ever
09-26 10:16 AM
Enough Said - correction required.
2011 The first concert kicks off
chanduv23
07-01 11:58 AM
fyi
http://judiciary.house.gov/media/pdfs/Oppenheim070606.pdf
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim, Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division, Visa Services Office, U.S. Department of State, June 6, 2007.
Any indepth on what is the bigger picture here? Something is happening in the background on the immigration side.
Looks like lot of politics and blame game among agencies.
I think immigration lawyers or AILA etc.. may also not have any say here though they all put up on their website that we will file lawsuit etc.....
http://judiciary.house.gov/media/pdfs/Oppenheim070606.pdf
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim, Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division, Visa Services Office, U.S. Department of State, June 6, 2007.
Any indepth on what is the bigger picture here? Something is happening in the background on the immigration side.
Looks like lot of politics and blame game among agencies.
I think immigration lawyers or AILA etc.. may also not have any say here though they all put up on their website that we will file lawsuit etc.....
more...
feedfront
10-07 02:53 PM
My packet delivered to mailroom today morning at 9:07 by UPS. And just now at 2:48 got page and checked online status and its says they issued RFE again?
�On October 7, 2010, we mailed a notice requesting additional evidence or information in this case�
Not sure whether it�s their system glitch or it�s my luck... :confused:
Is it happen to anyone else or it�s me?
I hope it is just system/human glitch.
�On October 7, 2010, we mailed a notice requesting additional evidence or information in this case�
Not sure whether it�s their system glitch or it�s my luck... :confused:
Is it happen to anyone else or it�s me?
I hope it is just system/human glitch.
nixstor
07-04 09:44 PM
Please stop posting this on every thread. In one line you are just spamming. We all visit Attorney Oh's website often. He does not need any publicity
immigration-law.com
07/04/2007: Status and Issues Involving July 2007 485 Fiasco
* The AILF work on the lawsuit appears to be in progress without any hurdles. It has reported that enough candidates have come forward to participate in the lawsuit as the plaintiffs and it does not need any more candidates to move forward for the lawsuit. Some of other people are likely to be covered as members of the class action regardless of their actual participation in the lawsuit. People should send "THANK YOU" to the AILF Legal Action Center leaders and the attorneys who are actually working on this case. Some contribution to the AILF may be more than appropriate. Please visit the AILF site to learn how they can send in contribution.
#
# We have been asked by the readers to report the alleged conspiracy theory. We declined to do it. However, people may want to know potential issues that should be answered and explored. We will discuss these issues on following hypotehtical premises:
* Presumption of Facts: (1) The I-485 applications have been experiencing a tremendous backlog lately. (2) The causes for the backlog have been known to be delays in the security checks. Some of these applicants have sought a relief in federal courts in the form of mandamus actions. (3) Allegedly, the USCIS pull together local and Service Center employees and pull out pending I-485 cases which were older than six months in backlog, working overtime and during the weekend right before July 1, 2007. This is an assumption at this point. (4) As evidenced by the revised Visa Bulletin, apparently these employees contacted "en mass" the DOS to request the visa numbers for these pending I-485 cases, which the DOS reported in the release of the revised VB turned out exceeding 60,000. (5) The rule requires that the USCIS approves I-485 cases "prior to" to contacting and requesting a visa number. (6) The current USCIS policy and procedure also require that I-485 applications be adjudicated and approved "only after" the completion of clearance of the security checks.
* Issue I: Hypothetically, what happens if the USCIS takes out the visa number before they obtain the security clearace?
o Answer I: Obviously it would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: It will constitue a serious security lapse, compromising the homeland security.
* Issue II: Hypothetically, what hppens if the USCIS requests and takes out the visa numbers prior to adjudication and approval of the pending I-485 applications?
o Answer I: It is evident that the USCIS would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: There could be two probable consequences affecting the backlog I-485 applicants and the new July Visa Bulletin eligible I-485 applicants, shoud the hypothetical facts develop. (1) The backlog I-485 applicants who have been issued I-485 approval notices should not be affected by the fiasco, albeit the potential revocation of the I-485 approvals. In most cases, revocation of the approved I-485 requires the time-consuming immigration court proceedings, assuming that the USCIS has a sufficient cause of action which may be questionable in this case. (2) The backlog I-485 applicants who have yet to receive the approval notice and the USCIS has yet to adjudicate and approve the application might be vulnerable in that the USCIS might be required to return the visa numbers for these cases as there was an error. Hypothetically, these numbers could be returned to the State Department and based on these returned number, the State Department might be required to revise the July Visa Bulletin again.
immigration-law.com
07/04/2007: Status and Issues Involving July 2007 485 Fiasco
* The AILF work on the lawsuit appears to be in progress without any hurdles. It has reported that enough candidates have come forward to participate in the lawsuit as the plaintiffs and it does not need any more candidates to move forward for the lawsuit. Some of other people are likely to be covered as members of the class action regardless of their actual participation in the lawsuit. People should send "THANK YOU" to the AILF Legal Action Center leaders and the attorneys who are actually working on this case. Some contribution to the AILF may be more than appropriate. Please visit the AILF site to learn how they can send in contribution.
#
# We have been asked by the readers to report the alleged conspiracy theory. We declined to do it. However, people may want to know potential issues that should be answered and explored. We will discuss these issues on following hypotehtical premises:
* Presumption of Facts: (1) The I-485 applications have been experiencing a tremendous backlog lately. (2) The causes for the backlog have been known to be delays in the security checks. Some of these applicants have sought a relief in federal courts in the form of mandamus actions. (3) Allegedly, the USCIS pull together local and Service Center employees and pull out pending I-485 cases which were older than six months in backlog, working overtime and during the weekend right before July 1, 2007. This is an assumption at this point. (4) As evidenced by the revised Visa Bulletin, apparently these employees contacted "en mass" the DOS to request the visa numbers for these pending I-485 cases, which the DOS reported in the release of the revised VB turned out exceeding 60,000. (5) The rule requires that the USCIS approves I-485 cases "prior to" to contacting and requesting a visa number. (6) The current USCIS policy and procedure also require that I-485 applications be adjudicated and approved "only after" the completion of clearance of the security checks.
* Issue I: Hypothetically, what happens if the USCIS takes out the visa number before they obtain the security clearace?
o Answer I: Obviously it would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: It will constitue a serious security lapse, compromising the homeland security.
* Issue II: Hypothetically, what hppens if the USCIS requests and takes out the visa numbers prior to adjudication and approval of the pending I-485 applications?
o Answer I: It is evident that the USCIS would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: There could be two probable consequences affecting the backlog I-485 applicants and the new July Visa Bulletin eligible I-485 applicants, shoud the hypothetical facts develop. (1) The backlog I-485 applicants who have been issued I-485 approval notices should not be affected by the fiasco, albeit the potential revocation of the I-485 approvals. In most cases, revocation of the approved I-485 requires the time-consuming immigration court proceedings, assuming that the USCIS has a sufficient cause of action which may be questionable in this case. (2) The backlog I-485 applicants who have yet to receive the approval notice and the USCIS has yet to adjudicate and approve the application might be vulnerable in that the USCIS might be required to return the visa numbers for these cases as there was an error. Hypothetically, these numbers could be returned to the State Department and based on these returned number, the State Department might be required to revise the July Visa Bulletin again.
more...
bigboy007
07-18 12:34 PM
i think we need to wait till a week more and then give a call back to USCIS just to make sure , as per my understanding and my lawyers info none were rejected and they will be accepted.
2010 North American tour dates
ItIsNotFunny
03-10 04:04 PM
We keep doing feasibility discussions within the team and with our advisors before launching a campaign. We did work on some in your list above + more last year and got a couple of successes in return. Admin fix for 2 year EAD, visa recapture bill introduction are some.
I feel some admin fixes can be possible at this time and some advocacy effort with USCIS can help us get more efficient service. FOIA campaign is a step in that direction. Please support it to make it successful so that we have resources and participation to move forward.
I think we should take visa re-capture as high priority once we clear FOIA issue. Whats your opinion?
I feel some admin fixes can be possible at this time and some advocacy effort with USCIS can help us get more efficient service. FOIA campaign is a step in that direction. Please support it to make it successful so that we have resources and participation to move forward.
I think we should take visa re-capture as high priority once we clear FOIA issue. Whats your opinion?
more...
anurakt
12-27 02:14 PM
INFO PROVIDED FOR UK IS INCORRECT.
Last year my wife (who is on H4) but with a valid US visa stamp on her passport was NOT allowed to board a Continental Airlines flight at Houston airport on her way to India. She was sent home even though she had valid US visa in passport as she did not have UK Transit visa.
We tried pour level best to convince the ppl at the flight desk but they wouldnt let her check in because of transit visa issues. So please be very careful while transiting through London. We had to pay and reroute via Paris the next day.
I hope when you say valid visa , you are talking about non-expired visa.
I think you should sue continental airlines...here is the infor right from the UK consulate website
Next time take a print out....and go to airport and argue...many a times these airlines people are confused and do not know the current regulations...
http://www.ukvisas.gov.uk/servlet/UKVisasDoINeedAVisa?url=%2Fservlet%2FFront%3Fpagen ame%3DOpenMarket%2FXcelerate%2FShowPage%26c%3DPage %26cid%3D1006977149962&purpose=Transit&nationality=India&location=United+States
Info :
Do I Need A UK Visa
You asked if a national of India needs a visa to pass through the UK in transit.
Yes, you need a Direct Airside Transit (DAT) visa, unless you qualify for exemption because you hold one of the following:
a valid visa for entry to Australia, Canada, New Zealand or the United States of America and a valid airline ticket for travel via the United Kingdom as part of a journey from another country or territory to the country in respect of which the visa is held;
a valid visa for entry to Australia, Canada, New Zealand or the United States of America and a valid airline ticket for travel via the United Kingdom as part of a journey from the country in respect of which the visa is held to another country or territory;
a valid airline ticket for travel via the United Kingdom as part of a journey from Australia, Canada, New Zealand or the United States of America to another country or territory, provided that the transit passenger does not seek to transit the United Kingdom on a date more than six months from the date on which he last entered Australia, Canada, New Zealand or the United States of America with a valid visa for entry to that country;
a valid USA I-551 Permanent Resident Card issued on or after 21st April 1998;
a valid Canadian Permanent Resident Card issued on or after 28th June 2002;
a valid common format Category D visa for entry to an EEA State;
a valid common format residence permit issued by an EEA State pursuant to Council Regulation (EC) No. 1030/2002;
a diplomatic or service passport issued by the People�s Republic of China; or
a diplomatic or official passport issued by India; or,
a diplomatic or official passport issued by Vietnam.
Notes:
A valid U.S. immigrant visa packet (form 155A/155B) is a 'valid visa' for DATV exemption purposes.
An expired I-551 Permanent Resident Card issued on or after 21 April 1998 when accompanied by an I-797 letter issued by the Bureau of Citizenship authorising its extension, exempts the holder from the DATV requirement.
Holding either an I-512 Parole letter or an I-797C (Notice of Action) instead of a valid U.S. visa; or a Transportation Letter instead of a valid U.S. Permanent Residence Card issued on or after 21 April 1998 does NOT qualify for exemption from the DAT visa requirement.
Holding a valid travel document with a U.S. ADIT stamp worded � �Processed for I-551. TEMPORARY EVIDENCE OF LAWFUL ADMISSION FOR PERMANENT RESIDENCE VALID UNTIL�. EMPLOYMENT AUTHORIZED� does NOT qualify for exemption from the DAT visa requirement.
Whether holders of non-national (including refugee travel documents) require a DATV depends on their nationality and whether they qualify for one of the exemptions listed above. So, for instance, the holder of a non-national travel document (e.g. a refugee travel document) who is a national or a citizen of one of the countries listed on the DATV list (e.g. Afghanistan) will require a direct airside transit visa if they are travelling to the UK to transit on to a third country.
Transiting to the Republic of Ireland
Passengers must pass through immigration control in order to take a flight to Ireland. Visa nationals (and passengers qualifying for DATV exemption above) may Transit without Visa providing they fulfil the TWOV conditions and are properly documented for entry into Ireland.
DATV nationals transiting to Ireland must obtain a visit visa - not a Visitor in Transit visa which is only for transit to a destination outside the Common Travel Area (Rules HC395 paragraph 47 refers).
All visa nationals wishing to transit the UK but spend longer doing so than the 24 hours permitted under the TWOV concession must obtain a visitor in transit visa for stays up to 48 hours or a visit visa.
Nationals of certain countries, which includes India - unless exempt as detailed above - must have a DAT visa to transit through the United Kingdom. The visa does not allow entry to the UK: other than to catch a connecting flight; leaving from the same airport on the same day; where you do not need to pass through immigration control to catch the flight. This is called Direct Airside Transit.
Please read Guidance - Visitors for more information.
Any dependants under 16 years old, included on your passport, can be included on the same form, but those older will need to fill in separate forms.
Please make your application to Chicago, Los Angeles, or New York.
If you are applying to our visa sections in the USA, you can now make your application and pay online though the visa4UK website.
Last year my wife (who is on H4) but with a valid US visa stamp on her passport was NOT allowed to board a Continental Airlines flight at Houston airport on her way to India. She was sent home even though she had valid US visa in passport as she did not have UK Transit visa.
We tried pour level best to convince the ppl at the flight desk but they wouldnt let her check in because of transit visa issues. So please be very careful while transiting through London. We had to pay and reroute via Paris the next day.
I hope when you say valid visa , you are talking about non-expired visa.
I think you should sue continental airlines...here is the infor right from the UK consulate website
Next time take a print out....and go to airport and argue...many a times these airlines people are confused and do not know the current regulations...
http://www.ukvisas.gov.uk/servlet/UKVisasDoINeedAVisa?url=%2Fservlet%2FFront%3Fpagen ame%3DOpenMarket%2FXcelerate%2FShowPage%26c%3DPage %26cid%3D1006977149962&purpose=Transit&nationality=India&location=United+States
Info :
Do I Need A UK Visa
You asked if a national of India needs a visa to pass through the UK in transit.
Yes, you need a Direct Airside Transit (DAT) visa, unless you qualify for exemption because you hold one of the following:
a valid visa for entry to Australia, Canada, New Zealand or the United States of America and a valid airline ticket for travel via the United Kingdom as part of a journey from another country or territory to the country in respect of which the visa is held;
a valid visa for entry to Australia, Canada, New Zealand or the United States of America and a valid airline ticket for travel via the United Kingdom as part of a journey from the country in respect of which the visa is held to another country or territory;
a valid airline ticket for travel via the United Kingdom as part of a journey from Australia, Canada, New Zealand or the United States of America to another country or territory, provided that the transit passenger does not seek to transit the United Kingdom on a date more than six months from the date on which he last entered Australia, Canada, New Zealand or the United States of America with a valid visa for entry to that country;
a valid USA I-551 Permanent Resident Card issued on or after 21st April 1998;
a valid Canadian Permanent Resident Card issued on or after 28th June 2002;
a valid common format Category D visa for entry to an EEA State;
a valid common format residence permit issued by an EEA State pursuant to Council Regulation (EC) No. 1030/2002;
a diplomatic or service passport issued by the People�s Republic of China; or
a diplomatic or official passport issued by India; or,
a diplomatic or official passport issued by Vietnam.
Notes:
A valid U.S. immigrant visa packet (form 155A/155B) is a 'valid visa' for DATV exemption purposes.
An expired I-551 Permanent Resident Card issued on or after 21 April 1998 when accompanied by an I-797 letter issued by the Bureau of Citizenship authorising its extension, exempts the holder from the DATV requirement.
Holding either an I-512 Parole letter or an I-797C (Notice of Action) instead of a valid U.S. visa; or a Transportation Letter instead of a valid U.S. Permanent Residence Card issued on or after 21 April 1998 does NOT qualify for exemption from the DAT visa requirement.
Holding a valid travel document with a U.S. ADIT stamp worded � �Processed for I-551. TEMPORARY EVIDENCE OF LAWFUL ADMISSION FOR PERMANENT RESIDENCE VALID UNTIL�. EMPLOYMENT AUTHORIZED� does NOT qualify for exemption from the DAT visa requirement.
Whether holders of non-national (including refugee travel documents) require a DATV depends on their nationality and whether they qualify for one of the exemptions listed above. So, for instance, the holder of a non-national travel document (e.g. a refugee travel document) who is a national or a citizen of one of the countries listed on the DATV list (e.g. Afghanistan) will require a direct airside transit visa if they are travelling to the UK to transit on to a third country.
Transiting to the Republic of Ireland
Passengers must pass through immigration control in order to take a flight to Ireland. Visa nationals (and passengers qualifying for DATV exemption above) may Transit without Visa providing they fulfil the TWOV conditions and are properly documented for entry into Ireland.
DATV nationals transiting to Ireland must obtain a visit visa - not a Visitor in Transit visa which is only for transit to a destination outside the Common Travel Area (Rules HC395 paragraph 47 refers).
All visa nationals wishing to transit the UK but spend longer doing so than the 24 hours permitted under the TWOV concession must obtain a visitor in transit visa for stays up to 48 hours or a visit visa.
Nationals of certain countries, which includes India - unless exempt as detailed above - must have a DAT visa to transit through the United Kingdom. The visa does not allow entry to the UK: other than to catch a connecting flight; leaving from the same airport on the same day; where you do not need to pass through immigration control to catch the flight. This is called Direct Airside Transit.
Please read Guidance - Visitors for more information.
Any dependants under 16 years old, included on your passport, can be included on the same form, but those older will need to fill in separate forms.
Please make your application to Chicago, Los Angeles, or New York.
If you are applying to our visa sections in the USA, you can now make your application and pay online though the visa4UK website.
hair Rihanna #39;Loud#39; tour dates
eb3_nepa
07-28 05:22 PM
My Friends.
Please stop this discussion. Not only are we digressing from one pointless topic to another, but now we are also making these discussions VERY VERY INDIA specific.
IV is an organization for members from ALL countries. Things like the Nuclear deal and the beer bottles are NOT going to help anyone get their green cards quicker. If you want to discuss these issues, please use websites like Rediff or Times Of India or Mid-Day to post items on there.
Please show some restraint while starting new threads, especially when TIME AND AGAIN the IV core/moderators/admins have reminded us that:
1) This is a forum for discussing Employment based LEGAL Immigration issues ONLY and
2) This is a MULTI-COUNTRY MULTI-CULTURAL forum with people of all cultures/races and religions.
(FYI: I am an Indian and a proud to be one btw.)
Please stop this discussion. Not only are we digressing from one pointless topic to another, but now we are also making these discussions VERY VERY INDIA specific.
IV is an organization for members from ALL countries. Things like the Nuclear deal and the beer bottles are NOT going to help anyone get their green cards quicker. If you want to discuss these issues, please use websites like Rediff or Times Of India or Mid-Day to post items on there.
Please show some restraint while starting new threads, especially when TIME AND AGAIN the IV core/moderators/admins have reminded us that:
1) This is a forum for discussing Employment based LEGAL Immigration issues ONLY and
2) This is a MULTI-COUNTRY MULTI-CULTURAL forum with people of all cultures/races and religions.
(FYI: I am an Indian and a proud to be one btw.)
more...
rustum
08-21 12:03 AM
Hi,
My company filed EAD for me and my wife along with 485 recently. I am on L1 and My wife is on L2. Is is possible to file one more EAD on L2 status. Looks like, we can get EAD on L2 faster than EAD with 485. My company attorney is suggesting me not to file one more EAD because one with 485 is pending with USCIS. Is it ok to file one more with L2? how long it will take to get EAD on 485 and EAD on L2.
My company filed EAD for me and my wife along with 485 recently. I am on L1 and My wife is on L2. Is is possible to file one more EAD on L2 status. Looks like, we can get EAD on L2 faster than EAD with 485. My company attorney is suggesting me not to file one more EAD because one with 485 is pending with USCIS. Is it ok to file one more with L2? how long it will take to get EAD on 485 and EAD on L2.
hot Rihanna#39;s Loud tour kicked off
senthil1
04-03 08:46 PM
What is the meaning of this?
The bill also includes a variety of other provisions, including one that would prohibit employers from hiring H-1B workers and then outsourcing them to other businesses and another that would require companies to pay prevailing wages to both H-1B and L-1 visa holders
Is that means Bodyshopping cannot be done by H1 or L1?
?? A new bill in senate to reform H1B ???
I was just watching LuDobb's show on CNN and saw a clip on a proposed bill (being prepared by Sen.Durbin and another whose name I forgot) to revamp/reform H1B program. From the brief discussion, got the impression that the bill is more concentrated on controlling the h1B program with more checks and rules etc. Obviously Dobbs liked it - not sure if there are any other measures in that bill. Also not sure why another bill if CIR/STRIVE act is in works which is supposed to cover all immigration issues. Anyone else saw any related news elsewhere?
Also saw this article (sorry if its already discussed somewhere):
http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/04/03/HNsenateh1bbill_1.html
The bill also includes a variety of other provisions, including one that would prohibit employers from hiring H-1B workers and then outsourcing them to other businesses and another that would require companies to pay prevailing wages to both H-1B and L-1 visa holders
Is that means Bodyshopping cannot be done by H1 or L1?
?? A new bill in senate to reform H1B ???
I was just watching LuDobb's show on CNN and saw a clip on a proposed bill (being prepared by Sen.Durbin and another whose name I forgot) to revamp/reform H1B program. From the brief discussion, got the impression that the bill is more concentrated on controlling the h1B program with more checks and rules etc. Obviously Dobbs liked it - not sure if there are any other measures in that bill. Also not sure why another bill if CIR/STRIVE act is in works which is supposed to cover all immigration issues. Anyone else saw any related news elsewhere?
Also saw this article (sorry if its already discussed somewhere):
http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/04/03/HNsenateh1bbill_1.html
more...
house Rihanna and Cee Lo Green
webm
04-29 09:00 AM
I opened the mailbox at home this evening and to my complete surprise -- the physical card! Sudden burst of efficiency at USCIs, 6 days from approval to actual delivery of card.
Good luck to everyone else!
Enjoy the Green on hand!!
Good luck to everyone else!
Enjoy the Green on hand!!
tattoo Rihanna#39;s “Loud” tour
Dhundhun
07-12 07:53 PM
USCIS and Consulates submitted a list of Documentarily Qualified applicants to DOS on July 8th. The latest PD of the applicants on that list was before 01-June therefore they have set the PD at 01-June-2006.
What is documentarily qualified?
This part is self-explanatory. It seems that USCIS made a list of all the applicants to Jul 08 by setting PD to Jun 01, 2006.
Documentarily Qualified might possibly imply:
.. Medically OK
.. FP and Name Check OK
.. Everything in application is consistent (e.g. DOB, Name, Kids, Spouse)
.. Requires No RFE
.. Requires no interview
.. Just requires GC (Visa) Number
My 2 cents input
What is documentarily qualified?
This part is self-explanatory. It seems that USCIS made a list of all the applicants to Jul 08 by setting PD to Jun 01, 2006.
Documentarily Qualified might possibly imply:
.. Medically OK
.. FP and Name Check OK
.. Everything in application is consistent (e.g. DOB, Name, Kids, Spouse)
.. Requires No RFE
.. Requires no interview
.. Just requires GC (Visa) Number
My 2 cents input
more...
pictures Visit RihannaNow.com for tour
anilsal
12-28 12:58 PM
Both of the flights were on the same itinerary and were booked through Thai. United was asking for money for international part of the travel because he said that Thai would charge United for the extra weight if United checked in the luggage all the way to Bangkok, which isn't really true because Thai did allow 70 LB then. I am not sure what the regulation is now.
I think you are right that the guy was probably ignorant and didn't really care becasue I wasn't flying United after LA anyways.
Then why did you not take the issue up with Thai after ur trip? You have the receipt for the extra charge from United? These are alliance partners and can sort it out. If you have the receipt and the itinerary, you can still contact Thai.
They will go extra lengths to retain you as a customer.
I think you are right that the guy was probably ignorant and didn't really care becasue I wasn't flying United after LA anyways.
Then why did you not take the issue up with Thai after ur trip? You have the receipt for the extra charge from United? These are alliance partners and can sort it out. If you have the receipt and the itinerary, you can still contact Thai.
They will go extra lengths to retain you as a customer.
dresses Seven dates rihanna loud tour
gc03
07-24 09:02 AM
I totally agree with you. Excellent point.
more...
makeup Rihanna Announces US Dates For
GreenLantern
02-21 05:09 PM
What is all this about LW. Everybody seems to think it's the bomb. Why? Maybe this needs to be it's own thread?
girlfriend Rihanna - Loud Tour with Guest
dummgelauft
08-21 12:51 PM
I did not marry the man I was engaged to. I came here initially for ONE month and was approved at the airport customs terminal to stay that long. When I got here, it was for a visit with my fiance only. Unfortunately, things did not work out and we broke it off. Thank God! However, I was staying with his uncle and aunt, and they had a disabled man in the house. HE turned out to be my sponsor when they asked me to care for him while they were doing long haul trucking. I agreed to do this and we immediately contacted USCIS to get instructions on what needed to be filed first. With that information in hand, we filed everything they requested. All the stuff on the RFE I received has never been mentioned before now and if it had, it would have been filed along with the rest. There are tons of applications, how is one supposed to know what to file and when if there are no specific instructions? I have gone through all the copies we have of all the required applications and I still do not see anything where all these other forms were to be filed along with the I-485.
Nothing was done illegally. He filed the application on my behalf, signed, sealed and delivered it himself. I did not do this on my own, I just signed whatever I was required to sign, he did the rest.
If all of this was illegal, then why was I not informed of this nearly 6 years ago when we filed the first application? Seems a bit odd that if I was illegal and they know where I am and who I live with that they wouldn't be quick to throw me out, but they have not done so.
My former fiance has nothing to do with this, I never intended to stay here when I first came, it was merely a visit but circumstances were such that I was needed at a moment's notice so we filed the necessary paperwork as quickly as possible and thought we were doing the right thing. No one has ever said otherwise until now and I think that is rather unfair to spring it all on me at this point and expect me to get it all done within 30 days. I know I am not the only applicant out there and I realize there is a huge backlog of other applications, I'm not that stupid to think that they will make me a priority, but one measly letter informing me that I was here illegally sometime over a 6 year period is not asking to much is it? Why would they send me all the other Notices of Action if I was here illegally and they knew it?
Something is terribly screwed up and I guess I have no choice but to find an attorney who can deal with this mess.
Okay, It is still a bit fuzzy, but lot clearer than your initial post. Almost all of us here on this forum are professionally qualified Employment Based applicants, with fairly straightforward, albeit extremently slow moving cases. Nearly all of us have been sponsored by our employers and we make sure that we are legal, in this country, every day of the year.
Now, coming to your case.
I am certain this "disabled man" you are caring for, had all good intentions, but he screwed up royally. You can not just "apply for a I-485". There has to be a basis from one of the following
(1) Family based
(2) Employment based
(3) Humanitarian / Refugee
(4) Diversity Based
It is still not clear, what CATEGORY he applied for you under.
(a) Can not be family based (you are not his spouse, child, sibling etc)
(b) You CERTAINLY DO NOT qualify under Employment based application.
(c) You absolutey CAN NOT apply under Refugee or Diversity (Canadians are shut out of diversity visa quota)
So, it is now time to stop pretending that you "were needed here". Nobody is indispensible.
Get your self back in to Cananda and work towards building your life back up.
Bon fin semaine!!
Nothing was done illegally. He filed the application on my behalf, signed, sealed and delivered it himself. I did not do this on my own, I just signed whatever I was required to sign, he did the rest.
If all of this was illegal, then why was I not informed of this nearly 6 years ago when we filed the first application? Seems a bit odd that if I was illegal and they know where I am and who I live with that they wouldn't be quick to throw me out, but they have not done so.
My former fiance has nothing to do with this, I never intended to stay here when I first came, it was merely a visit but circumstances were such that I was needed at a moment's notice so we filed the necessary paperwork as quickly as possible and thought we were doing the right thing. No one has ever said otherwise until now and I think that is rather unfair to spring it all on me at this point and expect me to get it all done within 30 days. I know I am not the only applicant out there and I realize there is a huge backlog of other applications, I'm not that stupid to think that they will make me a priority, but one measly letter informing me that I was here illegally sometime over a 6 year period is not asking to much is it? Why would they send me all the other Notices of Action if I was here illegally and they knew it?
Something is terribly screwed up and I guess I have no choice but to find an attorney who can deal with this mess.
Okay, It is still a bit fuzzy, but lot clearer than your initial post. Almost all of us here on this forum are professionally qualified Employment Based applicants, with fairly straightforward, albeit extremently slow moving cases. Nearly all of us have been sponsored by our employers and we make sure that we are legal, in this country, every day of the year.
Now, coming to your case.
I am certain this "disabled man" you are caring for, had all good intentions, but he screwed up royally. You can not just "apply for a I-485". There has to be a basis from one of the following
(1) Family based
(2) Employment based
(3) Humanitarian / Refugee
(4) Diversity Based
It is still not clear, what CATEGORY he applied for you under.
(a) Can not be family based (you are not his spouse, child, sibling etc)
(b) You CERTAINLY DO NOT qualify under Employment based application.
(c) You absolutey CAN NOT apply under Refugee or Diversity (Canadians are shut out of diversity visa quota)
So, it is now time to stop pretending that you "were needed here". Nobody is indispensible.
Get your self back in to Cananda and work towards building your life back up.
Bon fin semaine!!
hairstyles Rihanna - rihanna-loud-uk-tour
kumar1
12-13 11:32 PM
someone gave me red dot with this message -
**motherfucker**
I answer to that person is -- thank you for telling me your real level.
**motherfucker**
I answer to that person is -- thank you for telling me your real level.
Dakota Newfie
07-03 11:27 AM
I admit, it seems discriminatory to say you can't get your GC now because you're from this country or that country but these "high volume" countries have created the current back log through their sheer numbers and sometimes multiple applications, not the system. The system is fair to ALL and for some group to say that it isn't fair because all of that group isn't getting what they want is unjust to the rest of us. I knew I would be pounced upon when I submitted my original post and it only proves my point of personal agendas; sometimes I wonder what the "I" in "IV" really stands for? Don't be so arrogant as to believe that your higher education should give you more rights than others - that doesn't fly with me! I am frustrated with this forum because of this arrogance and I may not visit too much longer!
I do have one question for all of you who are in favor of eliminating the per country limit; do you support an eventual road to citizenship for the large group of people who dominate the "other side" of immigration? If you don't, some may think you hipocritical to want the rules changed for yourselves!
I do have one question for all of you who are in favor of eliminating the per country limit; do you support an eventual road to citizenship for the large group of people who dominate the "other side" of immigration? If you don't, some may think you hipocritical to want the rules changed for yourselves!
GCBy3000
12-27 09:44 AM
I have been in different states and this drivers licence rule differ substantially. California / florida strictly goes with your H1b validity date. For H4, it is much more difficult and my wife did not get it in CA but somehow managed ot get it in FL. When I moved to wisconsin, they gave me 3+years over my H1b validity date and also for my wife. The entire DMV process took us 5 mins whereas in FL, we stood in line from morining 3 am till evening 5pm and eventually got appointment for next day. When I asked about this in WI DMV, they said Wisconsin does not follow this and they are not aware of this.
If financial institutions are following govt regulations, does it mean that Govt mandated this against h1b? One of those gimmicks where a H1b is subject to difficulty like obtaining driver lisence etc...is this the same gimmick to legally give hardship to h1b?
If financial institutions are following govt regulations, does it mean that Govt mandated this against h1b? One of those gimmicks where a H1b is subject to difficulty like obtaining driver lisence etc...is this the same gimmick to legally give hardship to h1b?
No comments:
Post a Comment