angelfire76
02-13 05:06 PM
You honestly believe that our problems are comprable to the suffering that the real victims of ethnic cleansing go through?
2 different kinds of torture. The mental and the physical. Even though the extent to which we are being made to suffer (voluntary though) is not even close to the ethnic cleansing, all this anxiety about one's future is sure to send us to an early grave.
You cannot treat people like doormats, removing them when not needed as much. Business is a 2-way street.
2 different kinds of torture. The mental and the physical. Even though the extent to which we are being made to suffer (voluntary though) is not even close to the ethnic cleansing, all this anxiety about one's future is sure to send us to an early grave.
You cannot treat people like doormats, removing them when not needed as much. Business is a 2-way street.
wallpaper ranks in sf. ranks in sf.
PresidentO
02-11 01:23 PM
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV.pdf
Family based visa used for FY2009 = 215,343
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = 10,567
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2010.
*********
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY08-AR-TableV.pdf
Family based visa used for FY2008 = 226,105
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = ZERO
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2009.
Always go by the facts.
___________________
Not a legal advice.
You rock dude! Am I the only one to remember how visa numbers spill between FB and EB every other year? (or) Am I hallucinating?
Family based visa used for FY2009 = 215,343
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = 10,567
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2010.
*********
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY08-AR-TableV.pdf
Family based visa used for FY2008 = 226,105
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = ZERO
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2009.
Always go by the facts.
___________________
Not a legal advice.
You rock dude! Am I the only one to remember how visa numbers spill between FB and EB every other year? (or) Am I hallucinating?
nomi
12-11 03:03 PM
When we file I485 its with Department of States and not USCIS which is part of Department of Home Land Security. In my opinion it is DOS who has to agree filing I 485 even if visa number not available.
How can we contact with Department of State about this rule. Can we meet with rule making department or its officers and see what they say about it ??
There should be someway or they are enough rights to change or make new rule. Like they decide everymonth visa numbers ?? what do you guys think ??
thx.
How can we contact with Department of State about this rule. Can we meet with rule making department or its officers and see what they say about it ??
There should be someway or they are enough rights to change or make new rule. Like they decide everymonth visa numbers ?? what do you guys think ??
thx.
2011 ranks in sf.
anurakt
01-17 02:08 PM
Well Said Pappu, if you ask for people to ask IV for updates 20 times a day, we will get thousands of contributions ...but when it comes to money to support the cause .....all these beggers (yes beggers ! ) don't show the faces. These people call themselves high skilled , I call them high skilled beggers ...they want everything without contributing a cent .... shame on you beggers ... Please go back to your country , you won't get GC.....:mad: :mad:
Shameless creatures, not even a single guy came and blasted me out for such comments ..! This means that I am telling the truth. You guys don't even have any self dignity left to come and face off with me.
:mad: :mad:
Shameless creatures, not even a single guy came and blasted me out for such comments ..! This means that I am telling the truth. You guys don't even have any self dignity left to come and face off with me.
:mad: :mad:
more...
485InDreams
09-26 10:19 AM
Thanks all and to the blogger who found this.... This thread make me believe...
Revolution - People of common interest meet...
Collusion - People of different interest meet
Revolution - People of common interest meet...
Collusion - People of different interest meet
grinch
02-16 07:36 AM
this is why you shouldnt post images before the due time, people dont give up, its an all level 3d battle, dosent matter how good or bad your skills are, this is so you can develop your skills, i m sure thirdworldman wasnt good straight off the bat, he had to start somewhere too and now his skills are pretty good but im sure he could even tell you when he started people wiped the floor with him, his image is great but its not impossible, the texturing and lighting is what sets it off the rest is some simple modelled geometry.
everyone keep at it, and find a angle to your image which will make yours original.
:thumb:
I definetly agree with soulty...
Dont give up just becuase some showed a nice render. I just decided to show a basic wireframe for people on where to start. It doesn't matter guys, just keep at it!
Definetly nice work thirdworldman!
everyone keep at it, and find a angle to your image which will make yours original.
:thumb:
I definetly agree with soulty...
Dont give up just becuase some showed a nice render. I just decided to show a basic wireframe for people on where to start. It doesn't matter guys, just keep at it!
Definetly nice work thirdworldman!
more...
ilikekilo
01-18 07:54 PM
traffiic cop....i am not sure about that....you always have the right to remain silent ans ask whether u r free to go...period...
2010 Marco - Dolores Park, SF
mmk123
06-10 04:06 PM
done. thanks!
more...
masouds
02-15 04:52 PM
Well, I do have a vested interest in maintaining status quo, at least with regard to the per country caps.
But, working in one of the Valley companies, I see a lot of people from India and China who just don't mix with rest of the people, say, from Poland or Germany or France or Iran. US (the whole government, including USCIS) likes the idea of 'Melting pot' when it comes to immigration. When you melt a lot of metals with each other, you don't end up with a fragmented alloy, since you've capped the amount of each metal in your pot. That is how you get 'Little Italy's and 'China Town's and the latest one in San Jose, CA: 'Saigon Business district'
:mad:
Well, US government thinks otherwise about my (or USCIS') logic. If you think it is unfair, you can sue them. I won't stop you.
But, working in one of the Valley companies, I see a lot of people from India and China who just don't mix with rest of the people, say, from Poland or Germany or France or Iran. US (the whole government, including USCIS) likes the idea of 'Melting pot' when it comes to immigration. When you melt a lot of metals with each other, you don't end up with a fragmented alloy, since you've capped the amount of each metal in your pot. That is how you get 'Little Italy's and 'China Town's and the latest one in San Jose, CA: 'Saigon Business district'
:mad:
Well, US government thinks otherwise about my (or USCIS') logic. If you think it is unfair, you can sue them. I won't stop you.
hair SF ranks with real exp
gvenkat
10-10 12:57 PM
Just to avoid all this , You can say I'm a US citizen and move on. They cannot ask for any verification can they?
more...
abhathakur
03-08 11:30 PM
The last time I managed to ping an admin assistant level person at the Records and Information Dissemination Section at FBI that is responsible for NNCP, she said the analysts were looking at the 2002/2003 files and this was when I called in November 2005 (No amount of cajoling or pleading or trickery would make her say a word beyond that, very intimidating the female!!!). I am not sure if the 2002/2003 was a reference to the receipt date or the priority date, my guess is it must have been the receipt date of the I-485 application.
Considering the receipt date of my application is in Nov., 2004...it is going to be a wait and the India EB-2 Visa availability in the interim for my PD can pretty much oscillate from being available to not and back and I'll still be waiting!!!
Anyway, it was good to know through a privacy act request to the FOIA division of the FBI that the index check in their central name check database produced no hits for me.....now if their NNCP bretheren would come to the same conclusion SOON, that would be something!!! By the way, I spoke with the FOIA liasion at the FBI and he did say that the NNCP department was in the process of making status inquiry possible again...dunno how long thats gonna take though!
On a different note, have made my second contribution to IV and have inspired an impacted friend to do the same and have exhorted others to make a contribution as well....my reason for aligning with IV, I like to fight the right fight not just because it is my fight right now.
Considering the receipt date of my application is in Nov., 2004...it is going to be a wait and the India EB-2 Visa availability in the interim for my PD can pretty much oscillate from being available to not and back and I'll still be waiting!!!
Anyway, it was good to know through a privacy act request to the FOIA division of the FBI that the index check in their central name check database produced no hits for me.....now if their NNCP bretheren would come to the same conclusion SOON, that would be something!!! By the way, I spoke with the FOIA liasion at the FBI and he did say that the NNCP department was in the process of making status inquiry possible again...dunno how long thats gonna take though!
On a different note, have made my second contribution to IV and have inspired an impacted friend to do the same and have exhorted others to make a contribution as well....my reason for aligning with IV, I like to fight the right fight not just because it is my fight right now.
hot ranks in sf. ranks in sf. and
hara_patta_for_rico
07-09 07:28 PM
1. In the first 3 quarters they are supposed to use 81%(3*27%) of 140,000 = 113400. They used up 140,000(which is not according to their regulation A).
2. Regarding clause B, in June they could have used 14000(from June) + 47400(Remaining quota from previous months i.e 113400- 66000) = 61400. They used 74000 in June(which is not according to their regulation B).
2. Regarding clause B, in June they could have used 14000(from June) + 47400(Remaining quota from previous months i.e 113400- 66000) = 61400. They used 74000 in June(which is not according to their regulation B).
more...
house Confusion in the Ranks is
GCard_Dream
12-13 01:18 PM
I am sure this topic will come up again and again when new members join. We recently had quite a few (over a thousand) new members join IV and as the word gets around, there will be even more interest in IV and new members/non-members will visit the site and ask questions. I don't think we should expect everyone (new or old members) to know everything that was discussed in this forum from day one. That's not practical.
Every few days I see a new thread that is asking for information on how to change from EB3 to EB2. There are literally hundred or so threads that talks about this issue yet still new threads pop up regularly asking the same info. This is bound to happen and can't be stopped.
If you know that a topic has been covered somewhere, making a link available would be very helpful. If you think that a certain topic is brought up on a regular basis, may be we should make that thread sticky or have that information on homepage or somewhere where it's easily accessible.
We can always argue that members can do their own search on the forum. While that's true, if we know the answer and can quickly make that available to members, I think we'll be doing a service to our members. Just a thought.
All , this subject has been raised very often and every time new members join in they start a thread and start questioning it.
- IV has indepth explored and studied this option and have found that this change is not possible administratively.
- we have not just met a lawyer. we have met few lawyers. we also have communicated with USCIS in the past.
- In the past some administrative changes have been done by USCIS, but this change cannot be done by them. All, we already had this idea long long ago and we also thought that why dont we do it if it so simple and then we dont have to go through all the legislative hurdles. But NO it cannot be done by USCIS.
- Faxing USCIS will not work. USCIS does not take policy decisions. We need to approach policy makers to get it done and that is what we are doing. By coming up with ideas, endlessly discussing despite explaination by IV and not working with IV action items we will all go in divergent directions and lose focus on the main action items we want each every member should focus. If you really feel for some idea and want to help, instead of asking IV to give explanation to every question on the forum, contact any of the active IV core members on the forum and bounce ideas. We need people with ideas and also same people willing to work on them too.
- If it was possible to get it done administratively, then in the current Skil bill push we would have/ and lawmakers would also have just asked USCIS to implement it.
Hope this explains this topic. Thanks
Every few days I see a new thread that is asking for information on how to change from EB3 to EB2. There are literally hundred or so threads that talks about this issue yet still new threads pop up regularly asking the same info. This is bound to happen and can't be stopped.
If you know that a topic has been covered somewhere, making a link available would be very helpful. If you think that a certain topic is brought up on a regular basis, may be we should make that thread sticky or have that information on homepage or somewhere where it's easily accessible.
We can always argue that members can do their own search on the forum. While that's true, if we know the answer and can quickly make that available to members, I think we'll be doing a service to our members. Just a thought.
All , this subject has been raised very often and every time new members join in they start a thread and start questioning it.
- IV has indepth explored and studied this option and have found that this change is not possible administratively.
- we have not just met a lawyer. we have met few lawyers. we also have communicated with USCIS in the past.
- In the past some administrative changes have been done by USCIS, but this change cannot be done by them. All, we already had this idea long long ago and we also thought that why dont we do it if it so simple and then we dont have to go through all the legislative hurdles. But NO it cannot be done by USCIS.
- Faxing USCIS will not work. USCIS does not take policy decisions. We need to approach policy makers to get it done and that is what we are doing. By coming up with ideas, endlessly discussing despite explaination by IV and not working with IV action items we will all go in divergent directions and lose focus on the main action items we want each every member should focus. If you really feel for some idea and want to help, instead of asking IV to give explanation to every question on the forum, contact any of the active IV core members on the forum and bounce ideas. We need people with ideas and also same people willing to work on them too.
- If it was possible to get it done administratively, then in the current Skil bill push we would have/ and lawmakers would also have just asked USCIS to implement it.
Hope this explains this topic. Thanks
tattoo ranks in sf. ranks in sf.
knacath
10-31 09:14 PM
Nrc2008063641
more...
pictures ranks in sf. ranks in sf.
Jaime
09-10 12:23 PM
You pay your taxes, abide by the law, follow all rules - And yet you are discriminated against with per country caps and with most immigrant visas going to the unlimited family members joining former illegal aliens in the U.S.
dresses Airport Ranks as Nation#39;s
caydee
04-23 12:55 PM
Great to hear that the event was a success. I was one of the volunteers who had the oppurtunity to call CA members and I just have one suggestion. Please update your profiles with your latest email and phone numbers. Of the 25 people I called, atleast 5 or 6 had incorrect phone numbers. One even went to a fax number. The intent for IV is to reach you quickly in such case but looks like the intent for such members is 'do-not-disturb'.
I had the same problem with phone numbers. About 8 numbers turned out to be incorrect. Update your profile, please. And if you do not want to be contacted by phone, please leave the phone # box in the profile blank.
I had the same problem with phone numbers. About 8 numbers turned out to be incorrect. Update your profile, please. And if you do not want to be contacted by phone, please leave the phone # box in the profile blank.
more...
makeup Jane Rate ranks the wines
Hassan11
07-17 11:04 AM
Numbers USA changed their web fax from H-1 are tax exempt to this (see below):
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) The H-1B program does not require most employers to give hiring priority to qualified U.S. citizens and permanent residents. If the employer is also sponsoring the foreign worker for a green card, there is such a requirement, but again loopholes render the rule meaningless. As prominent immigration attorney Joel Stewart has said, "Employers who favor aliens have an arsenal of legal means to reject all U.S. workers who apply."
(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]
see link http://www.numbersusa.com/faxcenter?action=preview&ID=8306
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) The H-1B program does not require most employers to give hiring priority to qualified U.S. citizens and permanent residents. If the employer is also sponsoring the foreign worker for a green card, there is such a requirement, but again loopholes render the rule meaningless. As prominent immigration attorney Joel Stewart has said, "Employers who favor aliens have an arsenal of legal means to reject all U.S. workers who apply."
(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]
see link http://www.numbersusa.com/faxcenter?action=preview&ID=8306
girlfriend ranks in sf. ranks in sf.
senthil1
12-26 07:21 PM
If old employer revokes I140 then the result will be unpredictable. But it is upto INS to decide. Only those who had similar experience can tell clearly about this. Or a Lawyer can give better idea
Thanks for the reply, if old employer revokes I-140 while the other employer is still working on LC+I-140, Will this creates any problem for me?
-Thanks,
Thanks for the reply, if old employer revokes I-140 while the other employer is still working on LC+I-140, Will this creates any problem for me?
-Thanks,
hairstyles ranks in sf
ak_2006
06-10 12:36 PM
Thanks Pappu to bring this to every notice of IV Community. It looks like they want to send every body out except citizens or GC holders.
coolmanasip
03-07 09:45 AM
you are lucky man.....what you say makes sense.......but here is the reality.......
GC process is 3 step process and the lawyer is representing you (485 stage) as well as the employer (labor and 140 stage)........So, if you leave the employer, most lawyers will refuse to continue to represent you unless they authorized in written by the employer....it is a conflict of interest for them.......hence, I think I will go to some other lawyer for AC 21......and thats why the money.....
It is bit shocking to know that one will have to pay for just AC21 notification. I mean, if you already have lawyer associated with your GC file, which I believe, most of us should have either appointed by our employer OR hired by ourselves (Many companies give a choice to hire "your own" lawyer). I understand that since one change the employment, the general criteria is to assume that the lawyer (If paticularly appointed by past employer) is now no more attached to the case. But in truth it is not. Fulfilling AC21 notification is part of the whole end to end package since case remains same unless you notify USCIS to change your attorney. In my case I was given a choice to hire "My Own lawyer" and once I started to work on EAD, virtually now he is my lawyer not "my employer's lawyer" and hence he will be sending AC21 related paperwork to USCIS though he told me that he would not do it right now as he is busy with H1 filing load. And yes no extra cost involved..
GC process is 3 step process and the lawyer is representing you (485 stage) as well as the employer (labor and 140 stage)........So, if you leave the employer, most lawyers will refuse to continue to represent you unless they authorized in written by the employer....it is a conflict of interest for them.......hence, I think I will go to some other lawyer for AC 21......and thats why the money.....
It is bit shocking to know that one will have to pay for just AC21 notification. I mean, if you already have lawyer associated with your GC file, which I believe, most of us should have either appointed by our employer OR hired by ourselves (Many companies give a choice to hire "your own" lawyer). I understand that since one change the employment, the general criteria is to assume that the lawyer (If paticularly appointed by past employer) is now no more attached to the case. But in truth it is not. Fulfilling AC21 notification is part of the whole end to end package since case remains same unless you notify USCIS to change your attorney. In my case I was given a choice to hire "My Own lawyer" and once I started to work on EAD, virtually now he is my lawyer not "my employer's lawyer" and hence he will be sending AC21 related paperwork to USCIS though he told me that he would not do it right now as he is busy with H1 filing load. And yes no extra cost involved..
meridiani.planum
03-07 05:32 PM
Until last year, it was important to announce a job change via AC21 to USCIS. This was because many sponsoring employers would revoke the 140 (even after 180 days) so that they could reuse the Labor for someone else.
When that happened and there was no AC21 letter from the applicant, some IOs would deny the 485 even without a NOID. This would mean MTR and a lot of unnecessary work.
This problem no longer exists as Labot substitution has been removed. The employer has no incentive to revoke the 140 and so the chances of goofup from USCIS has been lowered.
Employer still has two incentives to revoke I-140:
* outstanding I-140s get counted in ability-to-pay issues of future I-140s. Better to clear out older ones.
* leaving an approved but unused I-140 is essentially leaving files open with USCIS as well as at your attorneys office. Expect the attorneys to revoke them (my own attorney of a big company asks the employer to close the files with USCIS by revoking the I-140). In addition to opened files, the attorneys get some fees atleast for doing this, so thats another motivation for them.
When that happened and there was no AC21 letter from the applicant, some IOs would deny the 485 even without a NOID. This would mean MTR and a lot of unnecessary work.
This problem no longer exists as Labot substitution has been removed. The employer has no incentive to revoke the 140 and so the chances of goofup from USCIS has been lowered.
Employer still has two incentives to revoke I-140:
* outstanding I-140s get counted in ability-to-pay issues of future I-140s. Better to clear out older ones.
* leaving an approved but unused I-140 is essentially leaving files open with USCIS as well as at your attorneys office. Expect the attorneys to revoke them (my own attorney of a big company asks the employer to close the files with USCIS by revoking the I-140). In addition to opened files, the attorneys get some fees atleast for doing this, so thats another motivation for them.
