Robert Kumar
04-19 05:59 AM
AFAIK, the GC job has to be a permanent full-time position and not a part-time position.
So much pain we are facing in this process. Hope all see their GCs come through fast.
My attoreny said GC is for full time position and it is very well supported if the employee is working full time with the sponsoring employer. I can easily imagine getting it filed in 3-4 places working part time or not even working. I guess we can run into problems if working part time. There is also a column somewhere in H1B visa application form where they ask "Did anyone sponsor you an immigrant visa". Not sure if that Question comes anywhere in the forms for GC, but if so, what does one write? A list of other employers.May not be a good idea, but its my personal opinion, and I dont have any observation on this
So much pain we are facing in this process. Hope all see their GCs come through fast.
My attoreny said GC is for full time position and it is very well supported if the employee is working full time with the sponsoring employer. I can easily imagine getting it filed in 3-4 places working part time or not even working. I guess we can run into problems if working part time. There is also a column somewhere in H1B visa application form where they ask "Did anyone sponsor you an immigrant visa". Not sure if that Question comes anywhere in the forms for GC, but if so, what does one write? A list of other employers.May not be a good idea, but its my personal opinion, and I dont have any observation on this
wallpaper designer wedding dresses vera
fasterthanlight�
06-16 12:00 PM
i dont know why we are debating this...... just do it if you want, and if you dont want to then dont. simple as that.
unitednations
03-30 10:21 PM
unitednations, you making this statement makes me scared. :eek:
Shouldn't they release some memo or something before making a drastic change like this???
They should...
What is confusing is that in the notice of intent to deny; uscis officer stated that person may be eligible for ac21 and to give a job letter.
The only thing I can think of is that there may have been something wrong with the I-140 (ie., too many cases file by the 140 company and company revoked it in response to an ability to pay query, etc.).
This particular company is pretty large staffing company. i do not have any interaction with them but from what I know; they have been cancelling a lot of people's h-1b's and telling them to find other employers to transfer to. Don't know if there is a story within a story.
Shouldn't they release some memo or something before making a drastic change like this???
They should...
What is confusing is that in the notice of intent to deny; uscis officer stated that person may be eligible for ac21 and to give a job letter.
The only thing I can think of is that there may have been something wrong with the I-140 (ie., too many cases file by the 140 company and company revoked it in response to an ability to pay query, etc.).
This particular company is pretty large staffing company. i do not have any interaction with them but from what I know; they have been cancelling a lot of people's h-1b's and telling them to find other employers to transfer to. Don't know if there is a story within a story.
2011 Category Wedding Dresses
petepatel
09-17 11:23 AM
It is on now
more...
bskrishna
06-19 05:39 PM
http://www.opencongress.org/person/sponsoredbills/400245_zoe_lofgren
Check out the above website. 6039 is the one relating to STEM and it has 26 co-sponsors
If you're looking for a "hot" bill or a controversial issue that's been in the news recently, but you're not sure of its exact title, our page of Hot Bills by issue area is a great starting point for your search. There you can find groups of the most newsworthy bills, and in some cases the most contentious bills in Congress, as compiled by the editors of OpenCongress. It's a handy cheat-sheet of buzzworthy bills and their official titles. The OpenCongress Blog might have written about it recently too and may offer a helpful plain-language summary
Check out the above website. 6039 is the one relating to STEM and it has 26 co-sponsors
If you're looking for a "hot" bill or a controversial issue that's been in the news recently, but you're not sure of its exact title, our page of Hot Bills by issue area is a great starting point for your search. There you can find groups of the most newsworthy bills, and in some cases the most contentious bills in Congress, as compiled by the editors of OpenCongress. It's a handy cheat-sheet of buzzworthy bills and their official titles. The OpenCongress Blog might have written about it recently too and may offer a helpful plain-language summary
chanduv23
02-01 12:21 PM
People want to bash consultancies for their practices. I am currently trying to recruit a c++ programmer to work with me, and I find resumes on dice from US citizens and GC holders, most of these resumes are bloated to a large extent.
Resume bloating is a common practice, there will be very few honest people, it is upto the employer to do strict scrutiny on resumes.
Let us not associate resume bloating or consultancies with retro situation.
Resume bloating is a common practice, there will be very few honest people, it is upto the employer to do strict scrutiny on resumes.
Let us not associate resume bloating or consultancies with retro situation.
more...
sirinme
06-24 05:08 PM
I would recommend comprehensive coverage plans for parents. As far as I could tell, there is only one website that sells coverage with pre-existing conditions rider (KV Rao's India Health Network), but that is a limited coverage plan. They have daily limits on most of the hospital charges, but the hospitals usually bill you 3,4 times those daily limits, so you end up paying for the difference out of your pocket. I know this, because I have had first hand experience for my father not too long ago.
So always go for comprehensive plans even though they are more expensive if the parents have any kind of health issues (given their age, who wouldn't !?). Comprehensive plans do not have daily limits - you are only limited by the policy maximum. You are looking at at least 60-80k bill if the patient is in the hospital for 3,4 days; so go for at least 100k coverage.
The way I would look at it is, visitor medical insurance is a lot like auto insurance here. We all pay for auto insurance every few months, and we are very happy if there are no claims against that policy, right? Same thing with visitors insurance too -- buy good coverage, and be happy if you didn't have to use it. That's a small price we have to pay for the pleasure of having our parents around. :-)
So always go for comprehensive plans even though they are more expensive if the parents have any kind of health issues (given their age, who wouldn't !?). Comprehensive plans do not have daily limits - you are only limited by the policy maximum. You are looking at at least 60-80k bill if the patient is in the hospital for 3,4 days; so go for at least 100k coverage.
The way I would look at it is, visitor medical insurance is a lot like auto insurance here. We all pay for auto insurance every few months, and we are very happy if there are no claims against that policy, right? Same thing with visitors insurance too -- buy good coverage, and be happy if you didn't have to use it. That's a small price we have to pay for the pleasure of having our parents around. :-)
2010 Vera Wang Wedding Dresses:
Chiwere
08-11 02:41 PM
Done
EB3I Jul 2003
EB3I Jul 2003
more...
gjoe
06-13 11:27 AM
It is very easy to prove that USCIS did injustice to those with EB3 dates prior to 2004 or 2005 if they stick to the rule of FIFO.
If the first criteria is met, everyone with a PD older than the lastest EB3 ( I know some who got approved with EB3 PD Jan2007)approved so far should also be approved. Or USCIS should go and revoke the GC's to newer PD and allocate them to older PD in the EB category ( I don't like this option).
So let us dream and someday it will come true. If we scream soon our throat will go dry.
Peace...
If the first criteria is met, everyone with a PD older than the lastest EB3 ( I know some who got approved with EB3 PD Jan2007)approved so far should also be approved. Or USCIS should go and revoke the GC's to newer PD and allocate them to older PD in the EB category ( I don't like this option).
So let us dream and someday it will come true. If we scream soon our throat will go dry.
Peace...
hair vera wang wedding dresses 2009. vera wang wedding dresses fall
B3NKobe
06-01 08:06 PM
@musicwithcolours: that is AWSOM!! Love the skin all the way!! Greatjob!!
more...
fasterthanlight�
06-22 01:50 PM
Alright, I was going to start the poll, but upon looking through the entries, a lot of them did go against Ben's rules, so I'm going to leave it to him and his discretion. I guess we will just have to wait.
hot Vera Wang 2009 Collection
ras
07-03 03:25 AM
Yes. That member and probably other such members are now on other site posting anti-IV posts.....
It is shameful to have such members among us.
Anyways, good thread. This site should help people fix the broken system rather than abuse each other or track all day. I hope due to the discussion, people can get some ideas and take action against such employers. IV will be willing to help as needed.
Wish discussions on this thread leads to some concrete suggestions/steps that one take to counter an abusive employer. and ofcourse IV should take steps to make these employers visible to the whole community so that others will not fall pray to them. Exposing abusive employers to the whole community is the most important thing that could thwart efforts of exploitation by such employers. This sounds some times more effective than than even going legal or to DOL.
It is shameful to have such members among us.
Anyways, good thread. This site should help people fix the broken system rather than abuse each other or track all day. I hope due to the discussion, people can get some ideas and take action against such employers. IV will be willing to help as needed.
Wish discussions on this thread leads to some concrete suggestions/steps that one take to counter an abusive employer. and ofcourse IV should take steps to make these employers visible to the whole community so that others will not fall pray to them. Exposing abusive employers to the whole community is the most important thing that could thwart efforts of exploitation by such employers. This sounds some times more effective than than even going legal or to DOL.
more...
house Dress Hunt – Vera Wang Maid to
AabTuAgaGC
06-14 12:15 PM
This is how it works. If you file for your 485 now, the next thing that is expected from you is to wait for the receipt, that would take 3 to 4 weeks. Then you will get finger print notice, that might come in three months time. Once you are done with all this then check the processing date of the respective service centre where you have filed your 485 application.
Now coming to the question of unmarried filers, if the principal aplicant's date of marriage is beofe his or her 485 adjudication of adjustment of status, there are two ways principal applicant file for 485 for his or her spouse. The spouse can travel to US on H4 and file for 485 or the principal applicant can do consular processing. Now consular processing is good for those cases whosw w PD is current but since retrogression can kick in anytime it is better to travel to US on H4 and file for 485.
Another important aspect is if you file 485, EAD, Advance Parole and you use EAD, you loose your H1 status, hence on EAD you can not bring in your wife. So unmarried filersn it goes like thisn you go ahead and fileyour 485, then go to your home country brng in your wife on H4n as you have aleast s months of time if NSC, TSC or CSC 485 processing is not current and it is hown 1 month for receipt of 485, three months of time for getting the finger print notice and you can postpone by another month of FP by rescheduling it to another month. So literally you have 4 to 5 months to get married and by that time the dates will retrogress again. So dont worry, just go ahead file your 485 and start looking to get married. But try to bring in your spouse asap so that you can file for your spouses 485 also till the time PD is current. If you are not able to file for 485 for your spouse and you have filed for yourself and whenthe dates retrogresses again when your spouse comed to US you would not be able to use EAD as using EAD nullifies H1 and H4 status. So desi consulting companies will keep on sucking your blood as you cannot change job using EAD. If you need more info on this let me know I have gone through this and waited for almost three years to file for my spouse I resheduled my FP notice in 2004 to get married by the time my wife came retrogression kicked in and waited till June 2007 to file for my wife. My PD june 2002 still waiting
Thanks ajmalnasar, for your detailed reply! I am in the same boat. I am filing my i-485 this month and am hoping that I will at least get married on papers this Oct/Nov. The rest of the dhol dhamaka can be done later. I don't want to get married and then have to wait another 5 years to bring in my wifey. My PD is Dec 2003.
Now coming to the question of unmarried filers, if the principal aplicant's date of marriage is beofe his or her 485 adjudication of adjustment of status, there are two ways principal applicant file for 485 for his or her spouse. The spouse can travel to US on H4 and file for 485 or the principal applicant can do consular processing. Now consular processing is good for those cases whosw w PD is current but since retrogression can kick in anytime it is better to travel to US on H4 and file for 485.
Another important aspect is if you file 485, EAD, Advance Parole and you use EAD, you loose your H1 status, hence on EAD you can not bring in your wife. So unmarried filersn it goes like thisn you go ahead and fileyour 485, then go to your home country brng in your wife on H4n as you have aleast s months of time if NSC, TSC or CSC 485 processing is not current and it is hown 1 month for receipt of 485, three months of time for getting the finger print notice and you can postpone by another month of FP by rescheduling it to another month. So literally you have 4 to 5 months to get married and by that time the dates will retrogress again. So dont worry, just go ahead file your 485 and start looking to get married. But try to bring in your spouse asap so that you can file for your spouses 485 also till the time PD is current. If you are not able to file for 485 for your spouse and you have filed for yourself and whenthe dates retrogresses again when your spouse comed to US you would not be able to use EAD as using EAD nullifies H1 and H4 status. So desi consulting companies will keep on sucking your blood as you cannot change job using EAD. If you need more info on this let me know I have gone through this and waited for almost three years to file for my spouse I resheduled my FP notice in 2004 to get married by the time my wife came retrogression kicked in and waited till June 2007 to file for my wife. My PD june 2002 still waiting
Thanks ajmalnasar, for your detailed reply! I am in the same boat. I am filing my i-485 this month and am hoping that I will at least get married on papers this Oct/Nov. The rest of the dhol dhamaka can be done later. I don't want to get married and then have to wait another 5 years to bring in my wifey. My PD is Dec 2003.
tattoo vera wang wedding dress.
angelfire76
01-17 01:33 PM
Yes, I'm on H-1B but I prudently avoided having any significant financial or personal ties in this country, because I knew this day would come.
So if something happens, no qualms about returning to India after 10 yrs of studying and working in the US. A person with skills will get a position anywhere in the world and succeed.
So if something happens, no qualms about returning to India after 10 yrs of studying and working in the US. A person with skills will get a position anywhere in the world and succeed.
more...
pictures Vera Wang bridal gowl - photo
longwait4gc
04-22 07:19 PM
A lawsuit isnt the answer to everything. The chinese EB folks learnt that after spending thousands of dollars and few years on their lawsuit, the judgement they got back was that 'the law is being followed'.
.
Hey forever,
What is this lawsuit? Do you have info?
.
Hey forever,
What is this lawsuit? Do you have info?
dresses Vera Wang wedding dress
Hassan11
03-14 09:01 AM
You need to relax and change your tone. This tone is very inappropriate in this forum. We are here to ask questions. You have no right to talk to people like this. Just because we are trying to understand a very obvious change in policy from USCIS, it doesn�t mean that we are against you or anybody in the same position as you. I am happy that EB2 India has established a cutoff date, but I can still ASK questions on this forum. Stop patronizing people and CHANGE your tone.
since you seem to be completely unaware, let me rub some salt in....here, go read Act 202(a)(5) and educate yourself.....yeehaw !!!
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe
since you seem to be completely unaware, let me rub some salt in....here, go read Act 202(a)(5) and educate yourself.....yeehaw !!!
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe
more...
makeup vera wang wedding dress 2009. The Vera Wang 2009 Wedding
alisa
02-11 03:56 PM
By doing what you are suggesting
a) you take numbers away from EB-3 ROW and hurt them
b) you don't do any benefit whatsoever to EB-3 India/China
c) you only benefit EB-2 India/China (at the expense of EB-3 ROW)
So, you make no difference whatsoever to huge number of EB-applicants (b), and you benefit (c) at the expense of (a).
I hope you see that this is not a good solution for the majority of EB-applicants. With this kind of cannibalization, the only people who have any incentive to stay with IV would be EB-2 India/China.
We have to work to increase the size of the pie here, and not engage in a zero sum game.
It says "not required by other classes". In this case it is required but could not be applied to EB2 due to per country numerical limits. Therefore it should go to unused pool of visas followed by AC21. Also why will USCIS prefer EB3 instead of EB2 people? It does not make sense.
As far as suing the govt is concerned we all know what happened to doctors in the UK.. so this is will be a futile exercise.
a) you take numbers away from EB-3 ROW and hurt them
b) you don't do any benefit whatsoever to EB-3 India/China
c) you only benefit EB-2 India/China (at the expense of EB-3 ROW)
So, you make no difference whatsoever to huge number of EB-applicants (b), and you benefit (c) at the expense of (a).
I hope you see that this is not a good solution for the majority of EB-applicants. With this kind of cannibalization, the only people who have any incentive to stay with IV would be EB-2 India/China.
We have to work to increase the size of the pie here, and not engage in a zero sum game.
It says "not required by other classes". In this case it is required but could not be applied to EB2 due to per country numerical limits. Therefore it should go to unused pool of visas followed by AC21. Also why will USCIS prefer EB3 instead of EB2 people? It does not make sense.
As far as suing the govt is concerned we all know what happened to doctors in the UK.. so this is will be a futile exercise.
girlfriend Vera Wang wedding dress in
bikram_das_in
01-19 02:37 PM
The story of memorandums is like this. If present law does not have provisions for certain things, then the government departments can publish a memorandum to give some kind of legal basis for their actions. Publishing a memorandum itself is enough to conclude that current law does have provision as such.
Usually these kind of memorandums are made against people who are vulnerable and do not have avenues/options to challenge. There were several memorandums made against undocumented workers not long time back. None of them stand the judicial scrutiny when challenged. Example, there was court ruling in many states that police cannot ask people about their immigration status.
The intentions of this memorandum is clear not to give any more H1Bs to small consulting companies.
I do not understand why some people in the forum have so much anger against the small consulting companies? This is just playing into the hands of anti's . Consulting through multiple layers is perfectly legal and a successful business model. No company wants to hire a person for 6 months project. It's been the goal of anti's to make small consulting companies look bad and they have been successful because of us. If this business model is bad, why not make laws to stop this type of business practice? If you ban that type of business, there will be no need for small firms hiring H1Bs.
This memorandum is just a blatant attempt to marginalize already oppressed and unrepresented H1B community. This need to be challenged not only because it's wrong but also because it's part of a systematic plan to marginalize legal EB immigrants.
Usually these kind of memorandums are made against people who are vulnerable and do not have avenues/options to challenge. There were several memorandums made against undocumented workers not long time back. None of them stand the judicial scrutiny when challenged. Example, there was court ruling in many states that police cannot ask people about their immigration status.
The intentions of this memorandum is clear not to give any more H1Bs to small consulting companies.
I do not understand why some people in the forum have so much anger against the small consulting companies? This is just playing into the hands of anti's . Consulting through multiple layers is perfectly legal and a successful business model. No company wants to hire a person for 6 months project. It's been the goal of anti's to make small consulting companies look bad and they have been successful because of us. If this business model is bad, why not make laws to stop this type of business practice? If you ban that type of business, there will be no need for small firms hiring H1Bs.
This memorandum is just a blatant attempt to marginalize already oppressed and unrepresented H1B community. This need to be challenged not only because it's wrong but also because it's part of a systematic plan to marginalize legal EB immigrants.
hairstyles in Vera Wang Wedding Dress
Macaca
12-09 08:11 AM
GcSoon-Ihope is from France. I thought that retrogression is mainly for India with some effects on China, Philipines and Mexico.
Please explain why bulletins are applicable to you. Thanks.
Merry Christmas!
Please explain why bulletins are applicable to you. Thanks.
Merry Christmas!
gk_2000
04-20 04:56 PM
In any case, why should someone be SO disturbed if some lawyer says "I will try to prove your degree equivalency for trying to get into EB2"?
Going by folks' behavior here, I am inclined to think, some simply hate such a lawyer for nothing more than personal interests
Going by folks' behavior here, I am inclined to think, some simply hate such a lawyer for nothing more than personal interests
gc28262
07-18 09:00 AM
Paskal, You are right - I do not understand. But mostly I cannot understand because as an organisation - you do not explain. Frankly, all I can do is register my disappointment at both your response and your attitude.While I get it that IV is actively involved in doing things over the years aimed at resolving this issue, I might feel that I could respect and maybe even understand these efforts better if IV kept its website up to date and all members who sign in updated on what's happening.
I have often seen threads on this site that have members complaining that IV is not doing anything - to which invariably the response is that one should join the donor forum. On the other hand we get newsletters from admin that ask up to tighten our belts etc. - and get more involved. Well, that cannot happen unless IV provides more updated information on what IV is actually doing, veiled references to behind the scenes activity and years of hard work are not enough to involve all those who have signed up here to become 'more involved'.
As for this discussion going nowhere I could not agree more - you see to have an open discussion or indeed debate - there must be at least 2 willing participants. And since you have already decided that you do not have time for the Qs of a mere non-paying member of this forum, I do not expect any better.
By the way, the way ahead is not to close doors, but to welcome questions and encourge those on this forum with curiosity to be more active. More often than not, I have seen that those who Q on this forum, are mocked, ignored, and treated as if they are wasting CORE's time. Sad for a forum that hopes to involve a wider audience in this issue.
Thanks!!
Raji
As a new user, I would try to understand what IV stands for, What political forces IV is against and have some political wisdom before I start asking IV to disclose everything in a public forum. There are valid reasons why IV is not revealing everything in a public forum. If you are interested in resolving your own GC issues and that of others on this forum, you should not ask IV to disclose all the strategies and thoughts in a public form.
There are many IV members who are old members of IV who trusts IV core leadership blindly even though we don't know IV strategies or thought process completely. One thing many of us can assure you is that IV core works with best of our interests in mind, they are a bunch of dedicated and smart people who understand how to plan our advocacy effort wisely.
I would suggest you trust IV core leadership with their advice and directions as it is better for our own interests.
I have often seen threads on this site that have members complaining that IV is not doing anything - to which invariably the response is that one should join the donor forum. On the other hand we get newsletters from admin that ask up to tighten our belts etc. - and get more involved. Well, that cannot happen unless IV provides more updated information on what IV is actually doing, veiled references to behind the scenes activity and years of hard work are not enough to involve all those who have signed up here to become 'more involved'.
As for this discussion going nowhere I could not agree more - you see to have an open discussion or indeed debate - there must be at least 2 willing participants. And since you have already decided that you do not have time for the Qs of a mere non-paying member of this forum, I do not expect any better.
By the way, the way ahead is not to close doors, but to welcome questions and encourge those on this forum with curiosity to be more active. More often than not, I have seen that those who Q on this forum, are mocked, ignored, and treated as if they are wasting CORE's time. Sad for a forum that hopes to involve a wider audience in this issue.
Thanks!!
Raji
As a new user, I would try to understand what IV stands for, What political forces IV is against and have some political wisdom before I start asking IV to disclose everything in a public forum. There are valid reasons why IV is not revealing everything in a public forum. If you are interested in resolving your own GC issues and that of others on this forum, you should not ask IV to disclose all the strategies and thoughts in a public form.
There are many IV members who are old members of IV who trusts IV core leadership blindly even though we don't know IV strategies or thought process completely. One thing many of us can assure you is that IV core works with best of our interests in mind, they are a bunch of dedicated and smart people who understand how to plan our advocacy effort wisely.
I would suggest you trust IV core leadership with their advice and directions as it is better for our own interests.