jsb
11-08 12:52 PM
When some one decides to apply AC21 by having an offer from another employer, it is not clear if one is required to inform USCIS about it. Some say one should, others say, not required. Has anyone seen any USCIS position on it? If not, perhaps we should make this as a question for next Ombudsman's conference call.
wallpaper Lady Gaga performs at
sands_14
08-13 02:01 PM
DId your checks get cashed and receipts issued.
I heard from a friend,he got a receipt but checks not cashed yet.
My attorney just emailed me, she received receipt notices for 485, EAD and AP for both me and my wife.
My application was received on July 2nd 9:01 AM, if it matters it was signed by R Mickels. Also, there is no LUD change on my I140 application, so I guess LUD changes on I-140 mean nothing.
I have not seen the notices yet so I dont know what the notice dates are.
I heard from a friend,he got a receipt but checks not cashed yet.
My attorney just emailed me, she received receipt notices for 485, EAD and AP for both me and my wife.
My application was received on July 2nd 9:01 AM, if it matters it was signed by R Mickels. Also, there is no LUD change on my I140 application, so I guess LUD changes on I-140 mean nothing.
I have not seen the notices yet so I dont know what the notice dates are.
shantak
05-21 06:11 PM
i had biometric yesterday but no Lud yet until today .
when i will see LUD?
what is soft LUD and hard LUD?
Soft meaning just the date changes and not the message. Hard meaning even the online status message changes
when i will see LUD?
what is soft LUD and hard LUD?
Soft meaning just the date changes and not the message. Hard meaning even the online status message changes
2011 Lady GaGa
Googler
07-09 12:36 AM
My analysis is minimally, if at all, dependent on India, China, ROW, ...
Offcourse I don't know all laws. I will believe DOS/USCIS URLs that explain how VB dates are set.
In general, it will be very useful to finds URLs that explain VB date setting and identify USCIS inconsistencies which they call LAW.
http://judiciary.house.gov/media/pdfs/Oppenheim070606.pdf
22 CFR Part 42:51
http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01apr20051500/edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2005/aprqtr/22cfr42.51.htm
In general read 22 CFR Part 42
http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_05/22cfr42_05.html
Offcourse I don't know all laws. I will believe DOS/USCIS URLs that explain how VB dates are set.
In general, it will be very useful to finds URLs that explain VB date setting and identify USCIS inconsistencies which they call LAW.
http://judiciary.house.gov/media/pdfs/Oppenheim070606.pdf
22 CFR Part 42:51
http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01apr20051500/edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2005/aprqtr/22cfr42.51.htm
In general read 22 CFR Part 42
http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_05/22cfr42_05.html
more...
sayonara
08-27 01:23 PM
it's not mine case. Clockwork reported some LUD for I140 some where. May be Aug 5? Not sure. But I think LUD of I140 doesn't matter. This is my personal opinion.
Oh ok...thanks anyways...
P.S I have also read that LUD is not an indication of anything related..but at this point, its been almost 2 months since the application was sent to attorney and absolutely no updates..so I am grasping at straws...:o
Oh ok...thanks anyways...
P.S I have also read that LUD is not an indication of anything related..but at this point, its been almost 2 months since the application was sent to attorney and absolutely no updates..so I am grasping at straws...:o
Jimi_Hendrix
10-27 02:00 PM
is going to be very short. Therefore we should not have high hopes of getting things through in this session. This is a long fight so keep persevering and keep up the hopes.
On a separate note, there is no point in engaging in any conversation with these gentlemen who continue to post nonsensical statements. I have reported them to the moderator.
On a separate note, there is no point in engaging in any conversation with these gentlemen who continue to post nonsensical statements. I have reported them to the moderator.
more...
vij
06-18 11:21 AM
Does 140 LUD change before they cash the checks
2010 lady gaga lollapalooza.jpg
maag
05-30 12:37 PM
http://www..com/discussion-forums/i485-1/122557139/page/1/
I was planning to land tomorrow and read this on , I guess, I might not be landing.
I was planning to land tomorrow and read this on , I guess, I might not be landing.
more...
anilsal
03-09 02:54 PM
Talk to your reps' office staff. Share your stories/struggles with them. Then sometimes you get to meet your congress rep. Go to nearest universities. Check out departments that are doing immigration research. Volunteer to share your story with them.
This way, you work for a cause as well as build your social network. Once you get your GC, you will see that you have all these new people you never knew them before.
A decision that I took few months back was to force IV core to agree to opening a state chapter in IL. Now I feel that initiative has reaped benefits as I am gaining contacts in local, state governments, immigration activists and also like minded people from neighboring states. This would not have happened if I had got a GC on a platter and did not have to struggle.
Now stop whining and do some action. ;)
This way, you work for a cause as well as build your social network. Once you get your GC, you will see that you have all these new people you never knew them before.
A decision that I took few months back was to force IV core to agree to opening a state chapter in IL. Now I feel that initiative has reaped benefits as I am gaining contacts in local, state governments, immigration activists and also like minded people from neighboring states. This would not have happened if I had got a GC on a platter and did not have to struggle.
Now stop whining and do some action. ;)
hair Lady Gaga Lady Gaga performs
Canadian_Dream
07-08 09:07 PM
Macaca:
The anticipated demand (that is calculated based on Pending Applications, New Applications that might become approvable and plethora of other factors including guess work) on Oct 1 2005/Oct 1 2006 was MUCH higher than 140,000 that was available for the entire year. Infact you have to break 140,000 into four quarters and apply contry quota (7%) to it since EB-3 ROW was not current on these dates. Thus it was hardly a surprise that India and China and EB-3 ROW remained retrogress on these dates.
Now fast forward to June 2007, there were 40,000 visa available in that last quarter and EB-3 ROW was in no position to consume that many that means spillover would come to India and China EB3/EB3 or else visa would be wasted in big numbers. The solution was to increase the supply and hence everything was current overnight. Until USCIS came in to spoil the party. They didn't do it in any simple way instead they choose the route of complete exhashtion and hence shutting the door.
Bottom line is: Unless demand for EB-3 ROW subsides (or it becomes current leaving substantial numbers for spillover) India EB-2 will always be cap subjected to 3200 or so visas every year. The sad part is catching up with the demand for EB-3 ROW is a moving target and thus EB-2 India might NEVER qualify for spillovers. I hope I am proved wrong by someone who has more insight.
140K GCs were available on Oct 1 2005 and Oct 2006: categories were not current.
< 40K GCs were available on June 12 2007: all categories were current.
If there is a law to prevent acceptance of ALL AOS's on Oct 1 (when 140K GCs are available) then that law was violated on June 12 2007.
If there is no law to prevent acceptance of AOS's on June 12 (when < 40K GCs were available) then all categories should have been current on Oct 1 2005 and Oct 1 2006.
The anticipated demand (that is calculated based on Pending Applications, New Applications that might become approvable and plethora of other factors including guess work) on Oct 1 2005/Oct 1 2006 was MUCH higher than 140,000 that was available for the entire year. Infact you have to break 140,000 into four quarters and apply contry quota (7%) to it since EB-3 ROW was not current on these dates. Thus it was hardly a surprise that India and China and EB-3 ROW remained retrogress on these dates.
Now fast forward to June 2007, there were 40,000 visa available in that last quarter and EB-3 ROW was in no position to consume that many that means spillover would come to India and China EB3/EB3 or else visa would be wasted in big numbers. The solution was to increase the supply and hence everything was current overnight. Until USCIS came in to spoil the party. They didn't do it in any simple way instead they choose the route of complete exhashtion and hence shutting the door.
Bottom line is: Unless demand for EB-3 ROW subsides (or it becomes current leaving substantial numbers for spillover) India EB-2 will always be cap subjected to 3200 or so visas every year. The sad part is catching up with the demand for EB-3 ROW is a moving target and thus EB-2 India might NEVER qualify for spillovers. I hope I am proved wrong by someone who has more insight.
140K GCs were available on Oct 1 2005 and Oct 2006: categories were not current.
< 40K GCs were available on June 12 2007: all categories were current.
If there is a law to prevent acceptance of ALL AOS's on Oct 1 (when 140K GCs are available) then that law was violated on June 12 2007.
If there is no law to prevent acceptance of AOS's on June 12 (when < 40K GCs were available) then all categories should have been current on Oct 1 2005 and Oct 1 2006.
more...
gsc999
12-18 08:18 PM
Call me or e-mail me if you feel depressed. I have a long list of action items here with me that you could help me out with:)
I don't promise a cure but that will definitely turn your mind away from all this melancholy
I don't promise a cure but that will definitely turn your mind away from all this melancholy
hot Chicago#39;s Grant Park will be
amitjoey
07-11 07:08 PM
I agree absolutely. Living right here near DC and being a victim of the present USCIS mess, I still did not know about this campaign until a family member from India mentioned about it after reading it in the local newspaper.
I quickly signed up on this site and sent the flowers to be delivered yesterday.
Welcome to IV, what a way to know about the flower-campaign.
I quickly signed up on this site and sent the flowers to be delivered yesterday.
Welcome to IV, what a way to know about the flower-campaign.
more...
house Last year Lady Gaga,
hsingh82
05-08 03:33 PM
I think we should protest in front of capitol with placards reading "End Discrimination by National Origin". "USCIS practices Racism", "End Racism in Legal Immigration" "Remove country Caps", "Country Caps = Racism", "Choose Merit, Not Race". We should set up a tent and do a huger strike.
"End Discrimination by National Origin". "USCIS practices Racism", "End Racism in Legal Immigration" "Remove country Caps", "Country Caps = Racism", "Choose Merit, Not Race".
I liked these, how about we send copies of our degrees, W-2's (-ssn) and resumes with one of these to Obama to prove the point that we actually are highly skilled people?
"End Discrimination by National Origin". "USCIS practices Racism", "End Racism in Legal Immigration" "Remove country Caps", "Country Caps = Racism", "Choose Merit, Not Race".
I liked these, how about we send copies of our degrees, W-2's (-ssn) and resumes with one of these to Obama to prove the point that we actually are highly skilled people?
tattoo Lady GaGa @ Lollapalooza
desi3933
06-28 11:37 AM
However if someone takes the company to court based on "Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986" vs hiring an H1B, how can the company legally defend itself against this law ?
on what basis?
You need to show legal ground to file the case. First, read I-9 form.
From legal point of view, Employer has no legal obligation to file H-1B for any job applicant. Infact, employer can chose not to file H-1B extension for current employee.
Why don't put your question in attorney forum?
.
on what basis?
You need to show legal ground to file the case. First, read I-9 form.
From legal point of view, Employer has no legal obligation to file H-1B for any job applicant. Infact, employer can chose not to file H-1B extension for current employee.
Why don't put your question in attorney forum?
.
more...
pictures Lady GaGa @ Lollapalooza
lfadgyas
09-10 12:19 AM
Folks it has been long time I last wrote here � but this visa bulletin made me mad (sorry)
So I went and downloaded all the FLCDataCenter.com (http://www.flcdatacenter.com/CasePerm.aspx) data from 2000 till 2008. It looks like they recorded all the pre �perm cases as well. After this I exported all the stuff into mysql table and made some calculation on the labor certification data. Unfortunately cannot separate (e1,e2,e3 etc � some may want to try by country but �)
Again this is PERM � labor certification!!1 - but has to do with GC I guess...
Time frame 1999 Oct -2008 Oct:
Sum of cases: 720486, like '%CERT%' = 554635 (certified), like '%Deni%'= 60043 (denials), (Non duplicate case numbers were = 715191 (i.e. 5295 duplicates only from the 720486) )
There were ~100000 cases with some other �state� descriptions like Withdrawn = 13955, Received Regional Office = 69556 etc;
Anyway, by grouped years it comes to (sum � certified + denials +etc):
last action date with "null" entry ?? 34113
between '1999-10-01' and '2000-10-01' 74048
between '2000-10-01' and '2001-10-01' 82629
between '2001-10-01' and '2002-10-01' 89524
between '2002-10-01' and '2003-10-01' 95552
between '2003-10-01' and '2004-10-01' 98866
between '2004-10-01' and '2005-10-01' 6153
between '2005-10-01' and '2006-10-01' 79939
between '2006-10-01' and '2007-10-01' 98927
between '2007-10-01' and '2008-10-01' 61997
Guess work (nbr of labor certs are 10% less in each group � denials are not removed):
Still wait - % how many of that group still waiting � (some can give a better guess??)
Family x � one applicant will present 2.5 visa nbrs or so�.
Group Labor cert family x still wait 140000<-as of today
between '1999-10-01' and '2000-10-01' 74048 2.5 4% 7404.8 132595.2
between '2000-10-01' and '2001-10-01' 82629 2.5 9% 18591.53 114003.675
between '2001-10-01' and '2002-10-01' 89524 2.5 14% 31333.4 82670.275
between '2002-10-01' and '2003-10-01' 95552 2.5 19% 45387.2 37283.075
between '2003-10-01' and '2004-10-01' 98866 2.5 38% 93922.7 -56639.625
between '2004-10-01' and '2005-10-01' 6153 2.5 45% 6922.125 -63561.75
between '2005-10-01' and '2006-10-01' 79939 2.5 80% 159878 -223439.75
between '2006-10-01' and '2007-10-01' 98927 2.5 90% 222585.8 -446025.5
between '2007-10-01' and '2008-10-01' 61997 2.5 100% 154992.5 -601018
Do your calculation if you want �:eek:
So I went and downloaded all the FLCDataCenter.com (http://www.flcdatacenter.com/CasePerm.aspx) data from 2000 till 2008. It looks like they recorded all the pre �perm cases as well. After this I exported all the stuff into mysql table and made some calculation on the labor certification data. Unfortunately cannot separate (e1,e2,e3 etc � some may want to try by country but �)
Again this is PERM � labor certification!!1 - but has to do with GC I guess...
Time frame 1999 Oct -2008 Oct:
Sum of cases: 720486, like '%CERT%' = 554635 (certified), like '%Deni%'= 60043 (denials), (Non duplicate case numbers were = 715191 (i.e. 5295 duplicates only from the 720486) )
There were ~100000 cases with some other �state� descriptions like Withdrawn = 13955, Received Regional Office = 69556 etc;
Anyway, by grouped years it comes to (sum � certified + denials +etc):
last action date with "null" entry ?? 34113
between '1999-10-01' and '2000-10-01' 74048
between '2000-10-01' and '2001-10-01' 82629
between '2001-10-01' and '2002-10-01' 89524
between '2002-10-01' and '2003-10-01' 95552
between '2003-10-01' and '2004-10-01' 98866
between '2004-10-01' and '2005-10-01' 6153
between '2005-10-01' and '2006-10-01' 79939
between '2006-10-01' and '2007-10-01' 98927
between '2007-10-01' and '2008-10-01' 61997
Guess work (nbr of labor certs are 10% less in each group � denials are not removed):
Still wait - % how many of that group still waiting � (some can give a better guess??)
Family x � one applicant will present 2.5 visa nbrs or so�.
Group Labor cert family x still wait 140000<-as of today
between '1999-10-01' and '2000-10-01' 74048 2.5 4% 7404.8 132595.2
between '2000-10-01' and '2001-10-01' 82629 2.5 9% 18591.53 114003.675
between '2001-10-01' and '2002-10-01' 89524 2.5 14% 31333.4 82670.275
between '2002-10-01' and '2003-10-01' 95552 2.5 19% 45387.2 37283.075
between '2003-10-01' and '2004-10-01' 98866 2.5 38% 93922.7 -56639.625
between '2004-10-01' and '2005-10-01' 6153 2.5 45% 6922.125 -63561.75
between '2005-10-01' and '2006-10-01' 79939 2.5 80% 159878 -223439.75
between '2006-10-01' and '2007-10-01' 98927 2.5 90% 222585.8 -446025.5
between '2007-10-01' and '2008-10-01' 61997 2.5 100% 154992.5 -601018
Do your calculation if you want �:eek:
dresses Lady Gaga Lollapalooza 2010
grupak
08-05 10:51 AM
These guys are not consistent. I should have gotten a 2 year EAD.
Dunno who to take this up with.
Sorry to hear they gave you 1 yr EAD.
I don't know why USCIS just don't make their ( and our) life simpler by just issuing 2yr EADs. Deciding how close to current is close enough for 1 yr EAD is extra effort. If its a funding issue, they can give the customer the option for multi-year EAD and extra fee.
Dunno who to take this up with.
Sorry to hear they gave you 1 yr EAD.
I don't know why USCIS just don't make their ( and our) life simpler by just issuing 2yr EADs. Deciding how close to current is close enough for 1 yr EAD is extra effort. If its a funding issue, they can give the customer the option for multi-year EAD and extra fee.
more...
makeup Lady Gaga Lollapalooza crowd
zoooom
07-20 11:44 AM
Pl. count me in....I pledge $100 towards Aman's expense re-imbursement.
Pl. let me know how to send the amount coz your post clearly says
"do not pay it directly to the IV core funds, yet"
(so far contributed $100 to IV)
Sure will let you know. Please check back the thread on monday for more details...
Pl. let me know how to send the amount coz your post clearly says
"do not pay it directly to the IV core funds, yet"
(so far contributed $100 to IV)
Sure will let you know. Please check back the thread on monday for more details...
girlfriend Lady Gaga stole the show.
WeShallOvercome
10-08 03:09 PM
We are all missing a point here.
Someone with a PD of 2006 who filed his/her AOS in 2006 should be far ahead in processing compared to someone with a PD of 2001(or who has been in the country for the last 20 years) but applied just a week ago.
Should USCIS hold the first case and wait for the other case to reach that stage? They can certainly do that if we don't blame them for wasting visa numbers every year.
It's not as simple as it sounds --Give GC to those old timers before the new comers!
Having said that, It certainly makes more sense to have some system which would atleast honestly attempt to be fair to the old timers.
BTW, I'm an old timer myself, 7th year in the country and a PD of 2003.
I would rather have them approve ANY case instead of wasting a single visa number.
Someone with a PD of 2006 who filed his/her AOS in 2006 should be far ahead in processing compared to someone with a PD of 2001(or who has been in the country for the last 20 years) but applied just a week ago.
Should USCIS hold the first case and wait for the other case to reach that stage? They can certainly do that if we don't blame them for wasting visa numbers every year.
It's not as simple as it sounds --Give GC to those old timers before the new comers!
Having said that, It certainly makes more sense to have some system which would atleast honestly attempt to be fair to the old timers.
BTW, I'm an old timer myself, 7th year in the country and a PD of 2003.
I would rather have them approve ANY case instead of wasting a single visa number.
hairstyles Lady Gaga performs at
arumalla
07-08 04:45 PM
can some one send me the updated notice page link, so I can post some threads and start linking to that page in all the tech and news forums I know of... so that we can get more awareness of this issue....
Thanks
Chandra Arumalla
Thanks
Chandra Arumalla
geevikram
07-20 01:32 PM
Pl don't make blanket statements such as this. BTW, I contributed to DC advocacy and many other EB3s also did the same.
Fixing the language so that folks do not take it personally.
looivy, Please have a conversation and don't turn this into a pissing contest.
What the other post said is very true. We have 45000 members in this board, a significant majority of them are EB3. Even if 50% of the members 22000 (as an example ) contributed 25$ each, IV would have more than half a million bucks. With this money EB backlog plight could easily come out in mainstream media. Just because you, as a person, contributed does not mean all of EB people are contributing. Realizing our problem is the first step in solving it. Problem is people are not willing to contribute to IV, either their money or time, but want issues solved. Doesn't work that way..
Again the original poster is correct in his statement.
my .02$
Fixing the language so that folks do not take it personally.
looivy, Please have a conversation and don't turn this into a pissing contest.
What the other post said is very true. We have 45000 members in this board, a significant majority of them are EB3. Even if 50% of the members 22000 (as an example ) contributed 25$ each, IV would have more than half a million bucks. With this money EB backlog plight could easily come out in mainstream media. Just because you, as a person, contributed does not mean all of EB people are contributing. Realizing our problem is the first step in solving it. Problem is people are not willing to contribute to IV, either their money or time, but want issues solved. Doesn't work that way..
Again the original poster is correct in his statement.
my .02$
CADude
08-01 04:53 PM
USCIS are doing internal transfer from more than a year(140 & 485). They are processing 140 and 485 at both the centers and requesting the application at NE only. It seems now you noticed.
I looked at both the service center webpages(texas & nebraska) & I-485 application has to be sent to Nebraska only.I do not understand now why they are transferring the application from nebraska to Texas
if I-140 is approved at Texas.
Has anyone have any idea?
I looked at both the service center webpages(texas & nebraska) & I-485 application has to be sent to Nebraska only.I do not understand now why they are transferring the application from nebraska to Texas
if I-140 is approved at Texas.
Has anyone have any idea?
No comments:
Post a Comment