bubba
06-12 01:15 AM
People need to understand that you need to give some to win some. I would like to propose to IV a kind of proposal that would be a win win for both the immigrants and the US.
1. It is meaningless to fight for the rights of ALL the visa holders. Any such attempts would always be resisted by the anti immigrant lobby.
2. Acknowledge their fundamental point of view that jobs are being stolen due to wage destruction and perpetual visa fraud by these outsourcing companies. Of course resist all these racist BS types. They are the just the noise in the immigration debate.
My Proposal
1. Support the Grassley bill in its entirety. If you notice it is those outsourcing companies that are making all the noise but not the genuine companies that use H1B for innovation purposes. These outsourcing neither follow the rules or spirit of the H1B/L1 visas nor provide much of innovation to the market place. There is no point in expecting them to police themselves. We have tried this and they are not here to play by the rules.
2. In fact, provide the concessions to eliminate the H1/L1 visas for these outsourcers. In return, request visa number recapture for the H1Bs who are employed directly by the companies. I strongly believe that if you are a H1B employed directly by the company (not outsourcing cos), it is unlikely that you would be underskilled or underpaid. A few minor expections may be there but we can safely ignore these exceptions.
3. Again, people may argue that some of the consultants are highly skilled too. If that were the case, they would have been or would be hired into a permenant position soon once the Grassley bill passes. No company would like to let go of a good performer irrespective of whether they are permenant employees or contractors.
If you notice, some people echo the sentiment that the Grassley bill would lead to more offshoring. That in my opinion is absolute BS. Only low level jobs would be offshored and in my opinion a h1b visa should not be used for these low level jobs. The high skilled jobs would always stay here and they would not be under wage pressure. The best and the fittest would survive and get the same.
I strongly believe that by providing these concessions, atleast the skilled immigrants would be sparred the trauma of this mindless wait for a GC. I wish to reiterate here that I am neither anti immigration nor anti any ethnicity. I am simply trying to reiterate that we need to lose some to win some. There is no point in the Indian style of negotiations of win all or win none. Let us adapt to the give some take some style of concession building. In this process, it is okay to give up on the interests of those blood sucking outsourcers. For this, I am willing to provide financial, logistical and intellectual support.
By following this route, we prevent wage destruction which is what the anti immigrant lobby is clamouring about. It is a win win for all and a lose situation for the blood suckers
If you have seen any companies misuse the H1 and L1 visa, you can complain about them. Dont go screaming around that the whole H1 and L1 program is bad. Its because of people like you that a whole group gets a bad name due to some rotten apples. Btw, all your arguments dont seem to help the IV community. Why are you even here on IV if your idealogy is not aligned with IV ? If you cant support us we dont need suggestions from a traitor like you.
1. It is meaningless to fight for the rights of ALL the visa holders. Any such attempts would always be resisted by the anti immigrant lobby.
2. Acknowledge their fundamental point of view that jobs are being stolen due to wage destruction and perpetual visa fraud by these outsourcing companies. Of course resist all these racist BS types. They are the just the noise in the immigration debate.
My Proposal
1. Support the Grassley bill in its entirety. If you notice it is those outsourcing companies that are making all the noise but not the genuine companies that use H1B for innovation purposes. These outsourcing neither follow the rules or spirit of the H1B/L1 visas nor provide much of innovation to the market place. There is no point in expecting them to police themselves. We have tried this and they are not here to play by the rules.
2. In fact, provide the concessions to eliminate the H1/L1 visas for these outsourcers. In return, request visa number recapture for the H1Bs who are employed directly by the companies. I strongly believe that if you are a H1B employed directly by the company (not outsourcing cos), it is unlikely that you would be underskilled or underpaid. A few minor expections may be there but we can safely ignore these exceptions.
3. Again, people may argue that some of the consultants are highly skilled too. If that were the case, they would have been or would be hired into a permenant position soon once the Grassley bill passes. No company would like to let go of a good performer irrespective of whether they are permenant employees or contractors.
If you notice, some people echo the sentiment that the Grassley bill would lead to more offshoring. That in my opinion is absolute BS. Only low level jobs would be offshored and in my opinion a h1b visa should not be used for these low level jobs. The high skilled jobs would always stay here and they would not be under wage pressure. The best and the fittest would survive and get the same.
I strongly believe that by providing these concessions, atleast the skilled immigrants would be sparred the trauma of this mindless wait for a GC. I wish to reiterate here that I am neither anti immigration nor anti any ethnicity. I am simply trying to reiterate that we need to lose some to win some. There is no point in the Indian style of negotiations of win all or win none. Let us adapt to the give some take some style of concession building. In this process, it is okay to give up on the interests of those blood sucking outsourcers. For this, I am willing to provide financial, logistical and intellectual support.
By following this route, we prevent wage destruction which is what the anti immigrant lobby is clamouring about. It is a win win for all and a lose situation for the blood suckers
If you have seen any companies misuse the H1 and L1 visa, you can complain about them. Dont go screaming around that the whole H1 and L1 program is bad. Its because of people like you that a whole group gets a bad name due to some rotten apples. Btw, all your arguments dont seem to help the IV community. Why are you even here on IV if your idealogy is not aligned with IV ? If you cant support us we dont need suggestions from a traitor like you.
wallpaper Red Hibiscus Flower Tattoo
gcgoingon
06-14 05:33 PM
I guess my 9 months old prediction is coming true (off by a month).
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/1049939-post209.html
I hope your predictions for the coming months also come true..
I do not know why the bulletin is so conservative about the EB2-I estimates for the year 2010 (March/April 2006)?
The reason I am saying this is the initial estimate they gave for EB2-I in Jan '10 bulletin is Feb/March 2005.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/1049939-post209.html
I hope your predictions for the coming months also come true..
I do not know why the bulletin is so conservative about the EB2-I estimates for the year 2010 (March/April 2006)?
The reason I am saying this is the initial estimate they gave for EB2-I in Jan '10 bulletin is Feb/March 2005.
amsgc
07-04 12:43 PM
For my spouse, I've to take care of all the fees for I-485 / I-765 / I-131 / Biometric ( $325 + $180 + $170 + $ 70). For me, I've to take care only I-131 Fees ( $170). The Company Pays the fees only for my I-485 and I-765 and also take care of the Attorney Fees for both of us. They also reimburse the Medical Expenses, if the insurance does not cover the charges, only for Employee/ Primary applicant. For all dependents it is my responsibility.
I just want to point out that whether or not your company helps offset these costs is immaterial at this point. This is money that has gone down the drain. Depending on the Oct. Visa Bulletin, you, or your employer may have to incur the same expenses all over again. So in the end, you may end up spending more than twice the amount of money, and more in application fees.
My only beef is that if the USCIS was intentionally working hard to preempt the deluge in July, WHY DID IT NOT TALK TO THE DOS AND MAKE THIS INFO PUBLIC??? This is unethical and unacceptable conduct.
I just want to point out that whether or not your company helps offset these costs is immaterial at this point. This is money that has gone down the drain. Depending on the Oct. Visa Bulletin, you, or your employer may have to incur the same expenses all over again. So in the end, you may end up spending more than twice the amount of money, and more in application fees.
My only beef is that if the USCIS was intentionally working hard to preempt the deluge in July, WHY DID IT NOT TALK TO THE DOS AND MAKE THIS INFO PUBLIC??? This is unethical and unacceptable conduct.
2011 The Lotus Flower In Tattoo
tikka
07-03 11:48 PM
http://digg.com/politics/Rep_Lofgren_Issues_Statement_on_Updated_Visa_Bulle tin - 229 DIGS
http://digg.com/politics/U_S_Withdraws_Offer_of_60_000_Job_Based_Visas_Ange ring_Immigration_Lawyer/who 40 DIGS
http://digg.com/politics/USCIS_Visa_scandal - 31 DIGS
please DIGG!!
http://digg.com/politics/U_S_Withdraws_Offer_of_60_000_Job_Based_Visas_Ange ring_Immigration_Lawyer/who 40 DIGS
http://digg.com/politics/USCIS_Visa_scandal - 31 DIGS
please DIGG!!
more...
thepaew
12-13 04:46 PM
It will be a total waste of effort. Congress has exclusive purview to regulate relations, commerce, etc. with foreign nations. No lawyer/court can provide quick fix and the case will not be heard.
No shortcuts guys!! For any real change we have to convince the US Congress and the Executive Branch. And that involves time, commitment and money.
It will be a waste of money. The US does not have to allow any immigration if it chooses so. Do you realize that getting a GC is not a right, but a privelege? It's a matter of grace and no court has jurisdiction to review if government says "no".
No shortcuts guys!! For any real change we have to convince the US Congress and the Executive Branch. And that involves time, commitment and money.
It will be a waste of money. The US does not have to allow any immigration if it chooses so. Do you realize that getting a GC is not a right, but a privelege? It's a matter of grace and no court has jurisdiction to review if government says "no".
lazycis
02-13 09:06 AM
I agree that quota system is cumbersome. It would've been much easier just to have one bucket. But I fail to see how it is discriminatory when every coutry gets an equal piece of the pie. It is a classic supply and demand issue, but it's not a discrimination. Consider also the fact that GC is a grace not a right. "Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own?"
more...
samay
07-06 12:08 PM
Hello,
Could you tell at 140 level does a candidate needs to submit all the previous
H1 Approval notices.
I couldnt submit my previous 140 approval notice since it was during 2000-2001. How important is the previous H1 B approval notices for a 140 approval ? . I submitted the current approval notice which is from 2006-2009
Rajesh
Hello
We normally submit all the previous H-1B approvals with the I-140 application. I am a bit confused from your post is there a gap in your H-1 B approvals.
Could you tell at 140 level does a candidate needs to submit all the previous
H1 Approval notices.
I couldnt submit my previous 140 approval notice since it was during 2000-2001. How important is the previous H1 B approval notices for a 140 approval ? . I submitted the current approval notice which is from 2006-2009
Rajesh
Hello
We normally submit all the previous H-1B approvals with the I-140 application. I am a bit confused from your post is there a gap in your H-1 B approvals.
2010 Dragon Tattoos
mallu
02-16 02:57 PM
My friend, in 2003-2004 alone there were 136K EB greencards wasted. When recaptured, in the past they have been given to oversubscribed countries. That is almost an entire years supply of EB greencards.
I didn't know they give significant percentage of the recaptured numbers to retrogressed countries. That is cool.
As far as your last question goes: I'm amazed, given your interest in this subject, that you have not read the 2005-2006-2007 Ombudsmans reports which discusses in some detail how USCIS claims that it cannot provide data on pending applications by EB preference, country of chargeability, and PD. Do take some time to familiarize yourself with these reports (and read the damn footnotes.)
I think i read only last year's report , that too the section concerning FBI namecheck, because at that time my PD was current most of time and i was stuck in name check. Now time to read rest of the stuff in Ombud's rpt.
I didn't know they give significant percentage of the recaptured numbers to retrogressed countries. That is cool.
As far as your last question goes: I'm amazed, given your interest in this subject, that you have not read the 2005-2006-2007 Ombudsmans reports which discusses in some detail how USCIS claims that it cannot provide data on pending applications by EB preference, country of chargeability, and PD. Do take some time to familiarize yourself with these reports (and read the damn footnotes.)
I think i read only last year's report , that too the section concerning FBI namecheck, because at that time my PD was current most of time and i was stuck in name check. Now time to read rest of the stuff in Ombud's rpt.
more...
snthampi
08-02 04:38 PM
Same here. Let us give green to each other and make us very green. How about that?:)
I agree and will do.
I agree and will do.
hair Flower Tattoo Designs - A
grupak
12-14 04:48 PM
Simple. If it wasn't for that ceiling the vast majority of the visas will go to applicants from the oversubscribed countries. Now this is not a bad thing if the visas are in unlimited supply. But since that's not the case, the country ceiling ensures that even people from smaller nations will get an equal oportunity to claim a visa before all the visa are grabbed by their BIG brothers and sisters. And what's more what ever is left is given back to the oversubscribed countries.
How can you call that unfair? Is it fair to deprive a person from a smaller country, equal chance to have go at his GC?
In the current situation, removing the country limit is not a solution because almost everyone is backlogged. On the other hand increasing the total number of GC even by a factor of 2 might not be the solution either because countries like China, India, Mexico and Philippines will likely still be backlogged.
IV is for everyone. Its not just for Indians only, and that is what I believe in. To help everyone, IV is pushing both increasing the total number and also increasing the per country limit. As I explained both of these have to go together otherwise it does not help.
How can you call that unfair? Is it fair to deprive a person from a smaller country, equal chance to have go at his GC?
In the current situation, removing the country limit is not a solution because almost everyone is backlogged. On the other hand increasing the total number of GC even by a factor of 2 might not be the solution either because countries like China, India, Mexico and Philippines will likely still be backlogged.
IV is for everyone. Its not just for Indians only, and that is what I believe in. To help everyone, IV is pushing both increasing the total number and also increasing the per country limit. As I explained both of these have to go together otherwise it does not help.
more...
reddymjm
09-23 04:35 PM
One thing, assume if it works out and 50% of the people are able to buy houses and get the GC, they are out of the queue right, so automatically the back logs are gone and the remaining people not able to buy the house will get benifited.
I am waiting for my GC to buy a house.
I am waiting for my GC to buy a house.
hot Free Tattoo Designs,
samay
07-14 06:08 AM
[QUOTE=AllVNeedGcPc;259781]I am a software engineer (15-xxx series):
- my LC got approved with 17-xxx code (Mechanical Engineer) (BECs fault, our forms OK), in 2006
- applied for LC amendment and returned original LC to BEC, right then
- No word from BEC, waited for a year, assumed 140 lost and then applied 140 with 17-xxx code and a copy of returned LC, in April 2007
- Applied EAD and AP, on July 2nd 2007
- meanwhile (after 140 application) LC got amended with new 15-xxx code, in August 2007 (Just before BECs shutdown)
- 140 that was applied in April 2007 is still pending
- Atty says that we will send the amended LC once we get an RFE
Should we wait for an RFE or should we inform USCIS about the amended code?
In my opinion you should have filed a copy of amended LC with the USCIS when you received it.
- my LC got approved with 17-xxx code (Mechanical Engineer) (BECs fault, our forms OK), in 2006
- applied for LC amendment and returned original LC to BEC, right then
- No word from BEC, waited for a year, assumed 140 lost and then applied 140 with 17-xxx code and a copy of returned LC, in April 2007
- Applied EAD and AP, on July 2nd 2007
- meanwhile (after 140 application) LC got amended with new 15-xxx code, in August 2007 (Just before BECs shutdown)
- 140 that was applied in April 2007 is still pending
- Atty says that we will send the amended LC once we get an RFE
Should we wait for an RFE or should we inform USCIS about the amended code?
In my opinion you should have filed a copy of amended LC with the USCIS when you received it.
more...
house Flower tattoo designs on back
John333
07-26 05:22 AM
Dear Attorney,
I have an approved H1B petition, but was given 221(g) during consular interview due to lack of license to practice my proffession in US. They instructed me to submit the license within one year to stamp the H1B visa.
Now I am comming to US on a Visitors visa to write the licensing exam and to get licenced.
I am aware of the aware of possibility of changing status from Visitors visa to H1B after getting licence without leaving US, since I already have an approved
H1B.
But I came to know that USCIS will take around 90 days to approve status change from Visitors visa to H1B.
Kindly clarify whether I can start working for my H1B employer immediately after filing status change with USCIS, or do I need to wait till the approval, to start working.
Also do I need to include 221(g) I received after my H1B consulate interveiw for the status change application.
Thank you very much in advance...
I have an approved H1B petition, but was given 221(g) during consular interview due to lack of license to practice my proffession in US. They instructed me to submit the license within one year to stamp the H1B visa.
Now I am comming to US on a Visitors visa to write the licensing exam and to get licenced.
I am aware of the aware of possibility of changing status from Visitors visa to H1B after getting licence without leaving US, since I already have an approved
H1B.
But I came to know that USCIS will take around 90 days to approve status change from Visitors visa to H1B.
Kindly clarify whether I can start working for my H1B employer immediately after filing status change with USCIS, or do I need to wait till the approval, to start working.
Also do I need to include 221(g) I received after my H1B consulate interveiw for the status change application.
Thank you very much in advance...
tattoo Ankle Flower tattoos are great
jayleno
07-28 10:41 AM
I think you are one of the most sane Amway guy I have heard from. Thanks for all the explanation. Now I know I have a problem with BWW and their approach not Amway. Looks like they are good brainbleachers.
again, i am not with this business now but still think its a good model. it is based on word of mouth advertising, franchising, residual income - everything e-commerce (which is a subject taught at some universities). now add some short sighted people to do the teaching and BINGO.. screwed it up big time.
again, i am not with this business now but still think its a good model. it is based on word of mouth advertising, franchising, residual income - everything e-commerce (which is a subject taught at some universities). now add some short sighted people to do the teaching and BINGO.. screwed it up big time.
more...
pictures flower tattoo designs
Legal
07-21 04:19 PM
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/s...PR_FR_2007.pdf
Interesting information. Mexico's population 103 million is one tenth of India's population. Yet, consistently 2-3 times more GCs have been issued to Mexican citizens.This doesn't affect diversity!:rolleyes:
Interesting information. Mexico's population 103 million is one tenth of India's population. Yet, consistently 2-3 times more GCs have been issued to Mexican citizens.This doesn't affect diversity!:rolleyes:
dresses flower tattoos
saps
10-29 01:50 PM
I don't think waiting for GC will be such a big problem if we can get relief from Government related to flexibility in job change (just like after getting GC), option to opt for FT school, etc... We can request immediate relief to GC community that if their I-485 is pending for more than 2 years (say), they should be granted a temp. intermediate status which should allow them to change jobs which are not neccessarily similar or on same payscale, flexibility to opt as FT student if they want to..... If we get this flexibility, I don't think waiting for GC is going to hurt so much. We have tried so much to get the GC quota increased but nothing has worked. May be we should focus on small things like this first. Just thinking aloud.
more...
makeup lily flower tattoo designs
chanduv23
08-17 12:10 PM
So, lets stop this here :)
SRK says - it is a procedure but it isn an unfortunate procedure. Which in my opinion is true.
I did go through secondary inspection once in Atlanta, GA back in 2004 and it was kinda absurd. My name did not flash on computer but here is what this officer told me "Something wrong with the Chennai computer they have not uploaded your visa information. Did you really get this visa from Chennai Consulate?". Well, being a software engineer, I did understand that it is a system glitch but what can I do? I showed him my i 797 and all documents including EVL etc..... and he said i have to go through secondary inspection. Then at thesecondary inspection they asked me if I picked my luggage, I was taken aback because u r allowed to pick luggage only after the clearance and I said "no". they had a separate "officials only elevator" to baggage claim and asked me to go through that and bring my baggage and I did that. They asked me to open my bags and I did that. Then asked me which service center approved my h1b visa? I said texas. they looked up on their computer for a while and then took my i 797, tore the i 94 portion folded it and stapled it along with the white i 94 card and said I can go. But I decided to get some clarification and I politely asked the officer, why did I have to go through this? She politely said "It is a process". I asked why did she tear the i 94 portion of my i 797 and staple it to my passport? Do I have to keep it and what is the significance. She wanted to get me off her shoulder without asking questions and said "Yes, it has to be there, it is a proof, thank you and do let me know if you have any more questions" and smiled.
While we all debate that procedures are followd in best interests of national security, at times we must also understand what these procedures are and how do they help.
Some argued that because of tight security another 9/11 could be averted.
Some argued that SRK is no VIP.
In my opinion SRK is "no matter what" a star and an icon. Those who trash him, must understand that people like him have capabilities that u or I lack and thest why he is such a star. They can win hearts of people "children, adults, youth" they can entertain you and make you happy and on top of it al for them it is life and career path and they are best possible candidates for ambassadors for anything ranging from peace to disease to unity etc.... everything because of their charm.
SRK managed to get DHS officials to speak and atleast give a statement which we as a community never managed to but we accept all this as part of life and think why should this guy not be treated like us.
Folks - it is not easy to become a star and gain all this popularity - it is challenging which includes a lot of dedication, efforts, luck, timing and so many different things people have to do. Life of stars is not that rosy as they "smile" and wave to people. For them every minute and second is a challenge - they are not like American Lawyers or Doctors who have ABA or AMA who control the flow and competition always keep theem rich.
The world is a small place and we all have to wake up to reality. Prof Gates gained such traction because he was having contacts with the president. Now if not for his incident, and not for the President vouching for him we would accept "it is how things are and live with it"
We accept everything and say "it is how things are" at workplaces, or anywhere we put ourselves down and say "It is a part of culture" we have to live with it.
The issue with us all is "We are highly educated and talented" but we never learned those lessons in schools where we stand up for causes - we are ready to blame and bash the victim - this is what exactly we do because first thing - we do not respect a victim, as it is not "us" and when it happens to us - we tend to live with it and not discuss it or do something about it.
So folks lets stop it here. Stop blaming SRK or CBP. If you do not want to see his movie, no one is forcing you to.
Things do happen for a reason, and it all depends to how you face situations like this in your life. Look at such incidents to get an idea of how to deal with things.
SRK says - it is a procedure but it isn an unfortunate procedure. Which in my opinion is true.
I did go through secondary inspection once in Atlanta, GA back in 2004 and it was kinda absurd. My name did not flash on computer but here is what this officer told me "Something wrong with the Chennai computer they have not uploaded your visa information. Did you really get this visa from Chennai Consulate?". Well, being a software engineer, I did understand that it is a system glitch but what can I do? I showed him my i 797 and all documents including EVL etc..... and he said i have to go through secondary inspection. Then at thesecondary inspection they asked me if I picked my luggage, I was taken aback because u r allowed to pick luggage only after the clearance and I said "no". they had a separate "officials only elevator" to baggage claim and asked me to go through that and bring my baggage and I did that. They asked me to open my bags and I did that. Then asked me which service center approved my h1b visa? I said texas. they looked up on their computer for a while and then took my i 797, tore the i 94 portion folded it and stapled it along with the white i 94 card and said I can go. But I decided to get some clarification and I politely asked the officer, why did I have to go through this? She politely said "It is a process". I asked why did she tear the i 94 portion of my i 797 and staple it to my passport? Do I have to keep it and what is the significance. She wanted to get me off her shoulder without asking questions and said "Yes, it has to be there, it is a proof, thank you and do let me know if you have any more questions" and smiled.
While we all debate that procedures are followd in best interests of national security, at times we must also understand what these procedures are and how do they help.
Some argued that because of tight security another 9/11 could be averted.
Some argued that SRK is no VIP.
In my opinion SRK is "no matter what" a star and an icon. Those who trash him, must understand that people like him have capabilities that u or I lack and thest why he is such a star. They can win hearts of people "children, adults, youth" they can entertain you and make you happy and on top of it al for them it is life and career path and they are best possible candidates for ambassadors for anything ranging from peace to disease to unity etc.... everything because of their charm.
SRK managed to get DHS officials to speak and atleast give a statement which we as a community never managed to but we accept all this as part of life and think why should this guy not be treated like us.
Folks - it is not easy to become a star and gain all this popularity - it is challenging which includes a lot of dedication, efforts, luck, timing and so many different things people have to do. Life of stars is not that rosy as they "smile" and wave to people. For them every minute and second is a challenge - they are not like American Lawyers or Doctors who have ABA or AMA who control the flow and competition always keep theem rich.
The world is a small place and we all have to wake up to reality. Prof Gates gained such traction because he was having contacts with the president. Now if not for his incident, and not for the President vouching for him we would accept "it is how things are and live with it"
We accept everything and say "it is how things are" at workplaces, or anywhere we put ourselves down and say "It is a part of culture" we have to live with it.
The issue with us all is "We are highly educated and talented" but we never learned those lessons in schools where we stand up for causes - we are ready to blame and bash the victim - this is what exactly we do because first thing - we do not respect a victim, as it is not "us" and when it happens to us - we tend to live with it and not discuss it or do something about it.
So folks lets stop it here. Stop blaming SRK or CBP. If you do not want to see his movie, no one is forcing you to.
Things do happen for a reason, and it all depends to how you face situations like this in your life. Look at such incidents to get an idea of how to deal with things.
girlfriend flower tattoo brknewsup7
JunRN
05-29 11:30 AM
1] To date there are 60K EB2I and another 60K EB3I I-485 applictaions pending.
2] 3.2K visas were available for EB2I for FY2009.
Assuming 3.2K visas are available every year from now on, it will take 60/3.2=18.75 years for all EB2I applicants upto today to be granted GC.
Unbelievable!
I think you have not yet included those doing Consular Processing in your computation. CP accounts for about 20% of total usage.
2] 3.2K visas were available for EB2I for FY2009.
Assuming 3.2K visas are available every year from now on, it will take 60/3.2=18.75 years for all EB2I applicants upto today to be granted GC.
Unbelievable!
I think you have not yet included those doing Consular Processing in your computation. CP accounts for about 20% of total usage.
hairstyles the best tattoo designs,
Administrator2
12-15 09:48 PM
We have taken these ideas to executive and legislative branches of the government. Our suggestions/proposals have been taken up at the top most level. This has been discussed more than few times with favorable consideration. Without being able to share the specifics, we have received extremely positive feedback for our suggestions. Specific events have to occur before this and similar ideas could possibly be considered in the new administration.
Thanks,
Thanks,
rajsenthil
05-02 05:20 PM
You are talking about Sinhala... LOL... Have you ever been to chennai? Look at the Black paint on Hindi letters on Government boards!:D
It is far far better than where in some states, North Indian people are kicked and thrown out. This NEVER happed in TN. May be some arrogant people like you make it happen.
It is far far better than where in some states, North Indian people are kicked and thrown out. This NEVER happed in TN. May be some arrogant people like you make it happen.
lazycis
02-14 12:58 PM
Galvez v. Howerton 503 F. Supp. 35, 39 (C.D. Cal. 1980)
http://boards.immigrationportal.com/showpost.php?p=1838094&postcount=14843
"Plaintiffs herein allege that officials of the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) have engaged in affirmative misconduct in failing to process their applications for adjustment of status to that of permanent resident aliens. They seek a court order compelling the defendants to issue them appropriate visa numbers."
"Where there has been affirmative misconduct on the part of the INS, the United States may be estopped to deny the availability of visas to those otherwise eligible but for the government's acts. See Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Hibi, 414 U.S. 5, 8-9, 94 S. Ct. 19, 21-22, 38 L. Ed. 2d 7 (1973); see also Villena v. Immigration & Naturalization Service, 622 F.2d 1352 (9th Cir. 1980) (en banc); Santiago v. Immigration & Naturalization Service, 526 F.2d 488, 492-93 (9th Cir. 1975) (en banc), cert. denied, 425 U.S. 971, 96 S. Ct. 2167, 48 L. Ed. 2d 794 (1976). The central inquiry here is the determination whether or not the conduct of the INS, including the failure of the INS officials to understand the applicable law, the improper rejection of plaintiffs' visa applications on two occasions, and the ensuing delay, constitute affirmative misconduct.
It is the duty of the agency to inform itself of the law which Congress has authorized it to enforce. The INS admits that its personnel were not familiar with the current statute applicable to plaintiffs' visa eligibility and thus erred in returning [**8] the plaintiffs' applications on the basis of a misinterpretation of the relevant law. This failure to act in accordance with law is an aspect of the agency's affirmative misconduct which the Court cannot overlook. Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. � 706(2)(A) (agency action to be set aside where "not in accordance with law").
Another aspect of the present misconduct relates to the agency's failure to fulfill a statutory duty. The INS has a statutory obligation to issue visas to qualified applicants to the full extent of the annual quota limits established by Congress. 6 The legislative history of the Immigration & Naturalization Act indicates that this duty has not been left to agency discretion, see S.Rep. No. 748, 89th Cong., 1st Sess. reprinted in (1965) U.S.Code Cong. & [*39] Ad.News, pp. 3328, 3337-38, but is obligatory upon the agency. "
"IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment is granted, and defendants' [**14] Motion for Summary Judgment is denied. The Court orders the defendant Secretary of State to issue A.T. Cortes and E. Cortes Fifth Preference visa numbers and to charge them to the 1979 visa allotments"
http://boards.immigrationportal.com/showpost.php?p=1838094&postcount=14843
"Plaintiffs herein allege that officials of the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) have engaged in affirmative misconduct in failing to process their applications for adjustment of status to that of permanent resident aliens. They seek a court order compelling the defendants to issue them appropriate visa numbers."
"Where there has been affirmative misconduct on the part of the INS, the United States may be estopped to deny the availability of visas to those otherwise eligible but for the government's acts. See Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Hibi, 414 U.S. 5, 8-9, 94 S. Ct. 19, 21-22, 38 L. Ed. 2d 7 (1973); see also Villena v. Immigration & Naturalization Service, 622 F.2d 1352 (9th Cir. 1980) (en banc); Santiago v. Immigration & Naturalization Service, 526 F.2d 488, 492-93 (9th Cir. 1975) (en banc), cert. denied, 425 U.S. 971, 96 S. Ct. 2167, 48 L. Ed. 2d 794 (1976). The central inquiry here is the determination whether or not the conduct of the INS, including the failure of the INS officials to understand the applicable law, the improper rejection of plaintiffs' visa applications on two occasions, and the ensuing delay, constitute affirmative misconduct.
It is the duty of the agency to inform itself of the law which Congress has authorized it to enforce. The INS admits that its personnel were not familiar with the current statute applicable to plaintiffs' visa eligibility and thus erred in returning [**8] the plaintiffs' applications on the basis of a misinterpretation of the relevant law. This failure to act in accordance with law is an aspect of the agency's affirmative misconduct which the Court cannot overlook. Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. � 706(2)(A) (agency action to be set aside where "not in accordance with law").
Another aspect of the present misconduct relates to the agency's failure to fulfill a statutory duty. The INS has a statutory obligation to issue visas to qualified applicants to the full extent of the annual quota limits established by Congress. 6 The legislative history of the Immigration & Naturalization Act indicates that this duty has not been left to agency discretion, see S.Rep. No. 748, 89th Cong., 1st Sess. reprinted in (1965) U.S.Code Cong. & [*39] Ad.News, pp. 3328, 3337-38, but is obligatory upon the agency. "
"IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment is granted, and defendants' [**14] Motion for Summary Judgment is denied. The Court orders the defendant Secretary of State to issue A.T. Cortes and E. Cortes Fifth Preference visa numbers and to charge them to the 1979 visa allotments"
