sreedhar
09-04 12:13 PM
nik.patelc,
That might be true..revelation of a corrupt politician...masking people deaths for a vicious cause of sympathy.
Just one quick question�?
If you get a chance as politician, Can you say you will not do any corruption? If some try to kill you, if you have power, will you be remain silent �?
Facts:
1) If the person doesn�t want to do corruption even he is politician, He always be calm and do some social work as much as he can.
2) If the person who they want to make big money in easy way�they will choose politics and step by step they grow and do some cheatings like CBN did to NTR Or else as you mentioned YSR kill some people and become powerful politician like CM or some thing else. Even they don�t care about media or people like you keep telling about their cheating, factionist. They will do what they want to do.
3) People who want to do the corruption but they didn�t get a chance to do that. Searching and searching for a chance to do the corruption�But they all �GOOD FOR NOTHINGS�. Those people will always talk about other people corruptions and factionist stories even they don�t have enough knowledge. I men to say JUST LIKE YOU.
Hope you got the point here.
That might be true..revelation of a corrupt politician...masking people deaths for a vicious cause of sympathy.
Just one quick question�?
If you get a chance as politician, Can you say you will not do any corruption? If some try to kill you, if you have power, will you be remain silent �?
Facts:
1) If the person doesn�t want to do corruption even he is politician, He always be calm and do some social work as much as he can.
2) If the person who they want to make big money in easy way�they will choose politics and step by step they grow and do some cheatings like CBN did to NTR Or else as you mentioned YSR kill some people and become powerful politician like CM or some thing else. Even they don�t care about media or people like you keep telling about their cheating, factionist. They will do what they want to do.
3) People who want to do the corruption but they didn�t get a chance to do that. Searching and searching for a chance to do the corruption�But they all �GOOD FOR NOTHINGS�. Those people will always talk about other people corruptions and factionist stories even they don�t have enough knowledge. I men to say JUST LIKE YOU.
Hope you got the point here.
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
snathan
08-16 01:55 AM
Can you point to a single post praising the immigration system.
He is confused immigration with security system
He is confused immigration with security system
Jerrome
09-24 09:53 AM
I think your analysis considers EB1(ROW)+EB2(ROW) spill over to EB3(ROW) that is not true,
EB1 Overflow ---> EB2
EB2 Overflow ---> EB2(I)+EB China
That means as per your calculation, it would be 19,282 considering 0 EB1 and EB2 filled in 2010.
As i said in my previous posts EB2 would be May 2006 by end of this year for sure.
Best case scenario considering more than 30K spill over it would be end of 2006.
You are also calculating spillover as of today with the pending cases, but the spill over happens only in Last quarter of 2010. There would be some if not more EB1+EB2 ROW applicants.
Based on following link:
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/New%20Structure/2nd%20Level%20%28Left%20Nav%20Parents%29/Green%20Card%20-%202nd%20Level/Pending%20Form%20I-485%20Reports.pdf
28.6%/5 = 5.72% for EB3-India + Spillover from EB2 and EB1, not more than 10,000 of which to "Other Workers".
28.6%/5 = 5.72% for EB2-India + spillover from EB1
28.6%/5 = 5.72% for EB1-India + spillover from EB4 and EB5
Each category is 28.6% WW Quota.
WW Quota consists of 5 country specific sub-quotas 1)India 2)China 3) Mexico 4) Philipines 5)ROW.
Based on page 1, I do math as under for Philippines categories.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) Quota for EB4 -->7% x 140000/5=1960, Pending: 70 Quota to be spilled over to EB1= 1890
2) Quota for EB5 --> 7% x 140000 / 5 = 1960, Pending: 0 Quota to be spilled over to EB1 = 1960
3) Quota for EB1 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + EB4 spillover 1890 + EB5 spillover 1960 = 11858 - pending 74 = Total
11784 will go to EB2
4) Quota for EB2 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + 11784 =19792, Pending: 510, So total 19282 VISA numbers will be spilled
over to EB3.
5) Quota for EB3 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + 19282 spill over =27290 - 11563 Pending = 15727 VISA extra.
6) “Other Workers” – Pending: 264 TOTAL UNUSED VISAS = 15727-264 = 15463 UNUSED VISAS will go to the quota
of other countries.
Based on page 3, I do math as under for ROW categories.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) Quota for EB4 -->7% x 140000/5=1960, Pending: 1378 Quota to be spilled over to EB1= 582
2) Quota for EB5 --> 7% x 140000 / 5 = 1960, Pending: 40 Quota to be spilled over to EB1 = 1920
3) Quota for EB1 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + EB4 spillover 582 + EB5 spillover 1920 = 10510 - pending 2477 = Total
8033 will go to EB2
4) Quota for EB2 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + 8033 =16031, Pending: 7150, So total 8881 VISA numbers will be spilled
over to EB3.
5) Quota for EB3 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + 8881 spill over =16889. Pending: 62840 -16889 = 45951 applications will
still be pending and pushed to year 2011.
Based on page 4, I do math as under for China categories.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) Quota For EB4 --> 7% x 140000 / 5 = 1960, Pending: 384 Quota to be spilled over to EB1 = 1576
2) Quota For EB5 --> 7% x 140000 / 5 = 1960, Pending: 13 Quota to be spilled over to EB1 = 1947
3) Quota for EB1 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + EB4 spillover 1576 + EB5 spillover 1947 = 11531 - pending 607 =
Total 10924 will go to EB2
4) Quota for EB2 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + 10924 =18932, Pending: 19333, So total 401 applications will be pushed to
year 2011 with pending approval.
5) Quota for EB3 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + no spillover = 8008 – 6343 Pending = 1665 visas Extra.
6) “Other Workers” – Pending: 30 TOTAL UNUSED VISAS = 1665-30 = 1635 UNUSED VISAS will go to the quota
of other countries.
Based on page 5, I do math as under for India categories.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) Quota for EB4 -->7% x 140000/5=1960, Pending: 123 Quota to be spilled over to EB1= 1960-123 = 1837
2) Quota for EB5 --> 7% x 140000 / 5 = 1960, Pending: 13 Quota to be spilled over to EB1 = 1960-13 = 1947
3) Quota for EB1 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + EB4 spillover 1837 + EB5 spillover 1947 = 11792 - pending 418 = Total
11374 will go to EB2
4) Quota for EB2 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + 11374 =19382, Pending: 47728, So total 28346 applications will still be
pending for year 2011.
5) Quota for EB3 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008, no spill over. Pending: 62607 -8008 = 54599 applications will still be pending
and pushed to year 2011.
Based on page 6, I do math as under for Mexico categories.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) Quota For EB4 --> 7% x 140000 / 5 = 1960, Pending: 62 Quota to be spilled over to EB1 = 1960-62=1898
2) Quota For EB5 --> 7% x 140000 / 5 = 1960, Pending: 0 Quota to be spilled over to EB1 = 1960
3) Quota for EB1 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + EB4 spillover 1898 + EB5 spillover 1960 = 11866 - pending 174 =
Total 11692 will go to EB2
4) Quota for EB2 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + 11692 =19700, Pending: 211, So total 19489 applications will spill over to
EB3 category.
5) Quota for EB3 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + 19489 spillover = 27497 – 7878 Pending = 19619 visas Extra.
6) “Other Workers” – Pending: 8415 TOTAL UNUSED VISAS = 19619-8415 = 11204 UNUSED VISAS will go to the quota
of other countries.
TOTAL UNUSED VISAS = 15463 + 1635 + 11204 = 28302.
Assuming these unused visas from Philippines, China and Mexico will be used for India, ROW equally India will benefit additional 14151 VISAS this year. Assuming all of these go to EB2 India Pushed down figure for EB2-India for the year 2011 will be 28346 – 14151 = 14195 pending EB2-I applications ready to go to year 2011.
EB1 Overflow ---> EB2
EB2 Overflow ---> EB2(I)+EB China
That means as per your calculation, it would be 19,282 considering 0 EB1 and EB2 filled in 2010.
As i said in my previous posts EB2 would be May 2006 by end of this year for sure.
Best case scenario considering more than 30K spill over it would be end of 2006.
You are also calculating spillover as of today with the pending cases, but the spill over happens only in Last quarter of 2010. There would be some if not more EB1+EB2 ROW applicants.
Based on following link:
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/New%20Structure/2nd%20Level%20%28Left%20Nav%20Parents%29/Green%20Card%20-%202nd%20Level/Pending%20Form%20I-485%20Reports.pdf
28.6%/5 = 5.72% for EB3-India + Spillover from EB2 and EB1, not more than 10,000 of which to "Other Workers".
28.6%/5 = 5.72% for EB2-India + spillover from EB1
28.6%/5 = 5.72% for EB1-India + spillover from EB4 and EB5
Each category is 28.6% WW Quota.
WW Quota consists of 5 country specific sub-quotas 1)India 2)China 3) Mexico 4) Philipines 5)ROW.
Based on page 1, I do math as under for Philippines categories.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) Quota for EB4 -->7% x 140000/5=1960, Pending: 70 Quota to be spilled over to EB1= 1890
2) Quota for EB5 --> 7% x 140000 / 5 = 1960, Pending: 0 Quota to be spilled over to EB1 = 1960
3) Quota for EB1 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + EB4 spillover 1890 + EB5 spillover 1960 = 11858 - pending 74 = Total
11784 will go to EB2
4) Quota for EB2 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + 11784 =19792, Pending: 510, So total 19282 VISA numbers will be spilled
over to EB3.
5) Quota for EB3 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + 19282 spill over =27290 - 11563 Pending = 15727 VISA extra.
6) “Other Workers” – Pending: 264 TOTAL UNUSED VISAS = 15727-264 = 15463 UNUSED VISAS will go to the quota
of other countries.
Based on page 3, I do math as under for ROW categories.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) Quota for EB4 -->7% x 140000/5=1960, Pending: 1378 Quota to be spilled over to EB1= 582
2) Quota for EB5 --> 7% x 140000 / 5 = 1960, Pending: 40 Quota to be spilled over to EB1 = 1920
3) Quota for EB1 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + EB4 spillover 582 + EB5 spillover 1920 = 10510 - pending 2477 = Total
8033 will go to EB2
4) Quota for EB2 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + 8033 =16031, Pending: 7150, So total 8881 VISA numbers will be spilled
over to EB3.
5) Quota for EB3 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + 8881 spill over =16889. Pending: 62840 -16889 = 45951 applications will
still be pending and pushed to year 2011.
Based on page 4, I do math as under for China categories.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) Quota For EB4 --> 7% x 140000 / 5 = 1960, Pending: 384 Quota to be spilled over to EB1 = 1576
2) Quota For EB5 --> 7% x 140000 / 5 = 1960, Pending: 13 Quota to be spilled over to EB1 = 1947
3) Quota for EB1 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + EB4 spillover 1576 + EB5 spillover 1947 = 11531 - pending 607 =
Total 10924 will go to EB2
4) Quota for EB2 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + 10924 =18932, Pending: 19333, So total 401 applications will be pushed to
year 2011 with pending approval.
5) Quota for EB3 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + no spillover = 8008 – 6343 Pending = 1665 visas Extra.
6) “Other Workers” – Pending: 30 TOTAL UNUSED VISAS = 1665-30 = 1635 UNUSED VISAS will go to the quota
of other countries.
Based on page 5, I do math as under for India categories.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) Quota for EB4 -->7% x 140000/5=1960, Pending: 123 Quota to be spilled over to EB1= 1960-123 = 1837
2) Quota for EB5 --> 7% x 140000 / 5 = 1960, Pending: 13 Quota to be spilled over to EB1 = 1960-13 = 1947
3) Quota for EB1 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + EB4 spillover 1837 + EB5 spillover 1947 = 11792 - pending 418 = Total
11374 will go to EB2
4) Quota for EB2 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + 11374 =19382, Pending: 47728, So total 28346 applications will still be
pending for year 2011.
5) Quota for EB3 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008, no spill over. Pending: 62607 -8008 = 54599 applications will still be pending
and pushed to year 2011.
Based on page 6, I do math as under for Mexico categories.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) Quota For EB4 --> 7% x 140000 / 5 = 1960, Pending: 62 Quota to be spilled over to EB1 = 1960-62=1898
2) Quota For EB5 --> 7% x 140000 / 5 = 1960, Pending: 0 Quota to be spilled over to EB1 = 1960
3) Quota for EB1 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + EB4 spillover 1898 + EB5 spillover 1960 = 11866 - pending 174 =
Total 11692 will go to EB2
4) Quota for EB2 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + 11692 =19700, Pending: 211, So total 19489 applications will spill over to
EB3 category.
5) Quota for EB3 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + 19489 spillover = 27497 – 7878 Pending = 19619 visas Extra.
6) “Other Workers” – Pending: 8415 TOTAL UNUSED VISAS = 19619-8415 = 11204 UNUSED VISAS will go to the quota
of other countries.
TOTAL UNUSED VISAS = 15463 + 1635 + 11204 = 28302.
Assuming these unused visas from Philippines, China and Mexico will be used for India, ROW equally India will benefit additional 14151 VISAS this year. Assuming all of these go to EB2 India Pushed down figure for EB2-India for the year 2011 will be 28346 – 14151 = 14195 pending EB2-I applications ready to go to year 2011.
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
h1techSlave
12-09 10:14 AM
" members are more interested in how to get their maid to US, which airline to fly etc etc .." and whether they should purchase a home or not. Members spend all their time in heated arguments for and against purchasing a home. pinto, are you familiar with any such members in this forum? ;););)
Thanks h1b ...thanks everyone else for the overwhelming support. actually it seems that without core leadership / directions ..IV is fast becoming just like a chat forum or as Indian ambassador would have put -- a headless chicken.
members are more interested in how to get their maid to US, which airline to fly etc etc ..
I guess time for rest of us to lay back ...and see what fate has in store without worrying much :D
Thanks h1b ...thanks everyone else for the overwhelming support. actually it seems that without core leadership / directions ..IV is fast becoming just like a chat forum or as Indian ambassador would have put -- a headless chicken.
members are more interested in how to get their maid to US, which airline to fly etc etc ..
I guess time for rest of us to lay back ...and see what fate has in store without worrying much :D
more...
samay
07-29 10:36 AM
Thanks a lot for your reply.
I had completed my BSc in computer science with 3 years & also completed my Masters(MCA) in computer science with 3 years.(both from India)
Total I have 6 years(3 yrs bachelors + 3 yrs masters) of education/qualification in Computer Science.
My labor has been approved & in that it is mentioned, position requires Masters degree.
Do I qualify for EB2 category?
I already filled I-140 in March 2008 under EB2.
I will really appreciate your response.
Thanks.
To answer your question I will have to go through all your I-140 documents. What did your academic evaluation and experiential evaluation stipulate.
I had completed my BSc in computer science with 3 years & also completed my Masters(MCA) in computer science with 3 years.(both from India)
Total I have 6 years(3 yrs bachelors + 3 yrs masters) of education/qualification in Computer Science.
My labor has been approved & in that it is mentioned, position requires Masters degree.
Do I qualify for EB2 category?
I already filled I-140 in March 2008 under EB2.
I will really appreciate your response.
Thanks.
To answer your question I will have to go through all your I-140 documents. What did your academic evaluation and experiential evaluation stipulate.
samay
07-14 06:43 AM
Hi,
I (EB3-India, PD Nov 2002) got approved last year. We were only able to file my wife;s I-484 days before my approval. We are still waiting for her GC as my PD is no longer current. Is there any way she can get her GC quickly?
Thanks,
485_spouse
Sorry she will have to wait for the your PD to get current.
I (EB3-India, PD Nov 2002) got approved last year. We were only able to file my wife;s I-484 days before my approval. We are still waiting for her GC as my PD is no longer current. Is there any way she can get her GC quickly?
Thanks,
485_spouse
Sorry she will have to wait for the your PD to get current.
more...
bobzibub
04-04 10:14 AM
As a Canuck:
It is an honor that you folks choose my country to live in.
Temporarily, or permanent, I hope it works out.
Every country has its warts. (Mine has them too) but the immigrants to a country are what give it life.
For the Doctors, check out some rural areas various provinces. I think they have programs that ease the regulatory burden.
Welcome!
-b
It is an honor that you folks choose my country to live in.
Temporarily, or permanent, I hope it works out.
Every country has its warts. (Mine has them too) but the immigrants to a country are what give it life.
For the Doctors, check out some rural areas various provinces. I think they have programs that ease the regulatory burden.
Welcome!
-b
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
gjoe
02-15 09:38 AM
Modern Day Slavery in the 21st century
Any person who is restricted from making travel choices, employer choice, personal choices beneficial to himself and his family, just because his employer or the goverment is restricting him in some form to make monetary benefit for itself, is called a slave.
I have reached the critical mass in me to take this up on my own, any legal advice and moral support from you guys would be appreciated.
Thanks
The current situation is a gross voilation of the constitutional right of employment at will. This amounts to Involuntary servitude which is a more techincal term for slavery. Read yourself the definition of both and make your own judgement.
In my view (though crazy and totaly impractical) the law suit should be against all the employers because they are the one who represent Govt/USCIS in processing our Green cards. Employers told us that we will process your greencard and you will be a PR in x number of years and now that x is infinite.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will)
At-will employment is a doctrine of American law that defines an employment relationship in which either party can terminate the relationship with no liability if there was no express contract for a definite term governing the employment relationship. Under this legal doctrine:
“ any hiring is presumed to be "at will"; that is, the employer is free to discharge individuals "for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all," and the employee is equally free to quit, strike, or otherwise cease work.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Involuntary_servitude :
Involuntary servitude is a United States legal and constitutional term for a person laboring against that person's will to benefit another, under some form of coercion. While laboring to benefit another occurs in the condition of slavery, involuntary servitude does not necessarily connote the complete lack of freedom experienced in chattel slavery; involuntary servitude may also refer to other forms of unfree labor. Involuntary servitude is not dependent upon compensation or its amount.
Any person who is restricted from making travel choices, employer choice, personal choices beneficial to himself and his family, just because his employer or the goverment is restricting him in some form to make monetary benefit for itself, is called a slave.
I have reached the critical mass in me to take this up on my own, any legal advice and moral support from you guys would be appreciated.
Thanks
The current situation is a gross voilation of the constitutional right of employment at will. This amounts to Involuntary servitude which is a more techincal term for slavery. Read yourself the definition of both and make your own judgement.
In my view (though crazy and totaly impractical) the law suit should be against all the employers because they are the one who represent Govt/USCIS in processing our Green cards. Employers told us that we will process your greencard and you will be a PR in x number of years and now that x is infinite.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will)
At-will employment is a doctrine of American law that defines an employment relationship in which either party can terminate the relationship with no liability if there was no express contract for a definite term governing the employment relationship. Under this legal doctrine:
“ any hiring is presumed to be "at will"; that is, the employer is free to discharge individuals "for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all," and the employee is equally free to quit, strike, or otherwise cease work.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Involuntary_servitude :
Involuntary servitude is a United States legal and constitutional term for a person laboring against that person's will to benefit another, under some form of coercion. While laboring to benefit another occurs in the condition of slavery, involuntary servitude does not necessarily connote the complete lack of freedom experienced in chattel slavery; involuntary servitude may also refer to other forms of unfree labor. Involuntary servitude is not dependent upon compensation or its amount.
more...
oguinan
02-15 09:14 PM
Nope. Article 1 Paragraph 3 just states that the convention does not apply in those cases. The definition of racial discrimination stands. You should read through the US response to the last review under the CERD (in 2003) and check the responses on immigration policy.
Do you have a specific link? There are a number of immigration related documents in the 2003 session, mostly related to the southern border.
I'm not a lawyer - but I do know that the spirit Article 1 Paragraph 2 of the document says that immigration and naturalization laws are somehow "not the same" as other laws when testing for racial discrimination. The spirit of the document is clear - otherwise why provide the second paragraph at all? I think that the case of Bhagat Singh Thind which I cited earlier clearly did show racial discrimination by any reasonable test.
I noticed that you changed my quoted text in the previous post. I'm not sure how that fits in with the traditions and practice of the forums here - but I'd appreciate you mentioning it in the text of your post.
Do you have a specific link? There are a number of immigration related documents in the 2003 session, mostly related to the southern border.
I'm not a lawyer - but I do know that the spirit Article 1 Paragraph 2 of the document says that immigration and naturalization laws are somehow "not the same" as other laws when testing for racial discrimination. The spirit of the document is clear - otherwise why provide the second paragraph at all? I think that the case of Bhagat Singh Thind which I cited earlier clearly did show racial discrimination by any reasonable test.
I noticed that you changed my quoted text in the previous post. I'm not sure how that fits in with the traditions and practice of the forums here - but I'd appreciate you mentioning it in the text of your post.
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
rajsenthil
05-02 07:10 AM
There are few people here trying to mislead the biggest problem. When the Indians support SL Tamils, it is not just ethnic affinity, it is also based on our country's own interest. If India could not handle a country like SL, then what else we can do. I dont like the way India handling this situation, completely ignoring the deaths of thousands of innocent people. Even today, there was bombing on the hospital. It has become common now to bomb schools and hospitals and trying to justify that.
I still find it hard to equate a person death > tens of 1000's of innocent people death.
But still wanting for more deaths. India should step in and stop this genocide. It is shame on us to turn our face and watching it.
I still find it hard to equate a person death > tens of 1000's of innocent people death.
But still wanting for more deaths. India should step in and stop this genocide. It is shame on us to turn our face and watching it.
more...
soma
02-13 10:59 PM
you cannot sue for incompetence, or the courts would be full!
If thats the case why did 180 day rule for namecheck get through in court?! wasn't that incompetence?
If thats the case why did 180 day rule for namecheck get through in court?! wasn't that incompetence?
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
GetGC08
07-30 05:01 PM
Both these are separate processes and note that the I-140 is for a future job.So relax.
Hello Samay,
I just received RFE for I-140.
I-140 Details:
I have applied I-140 under EB2 India.
I have BS(3 years) with computer science & MCA(MS 3 years) in computer science. So total 6 years of education in computer science(3 yrs BS + 3 yrs MS).
Also I have 1.5 years(18 months) of experience after completing my MS. I have submitted my experience letter at the time of filling labor But USCIS didn't ask anything regarding experience.
In labor(PERM) we mentioned Masters required
& Major field of study is Computers.
Do I qualify for EB2??Plz let me know.
RFE details:
1) Degree evaluation(what's the procedure?)
&
2) They want most recent W2 for 2007.
In 2007(W2) I got paid $59K(gross) & in LCA(H1B) prevailing wage mentioned is $55k.
In labor(PERM) prevailing wage mentioned is $63K & offered wage mentioned is $ 65K.
Difference between W2 & Prevailing wage in labor(PERM) is $4000($63K - $59K).
Difference between W2 & Offered wage in labor(PERM) is $6000($65K - $59K).
Is this a serious problem???
My labor already got approved.
My company is financially very good.
Now which wage USCIS consider or match with W2??
I will really appreciate your response.
Thanks.
Hello Samay,
I just received RFE for I-140.
I-140 Details:
I have applied I-140 under EB2 India.
I have BS(3 years) with computer science & MCA(MS 3 years) in computer science. So total 6 years of education in computer science(3 yrs BS + 3 yrs MS).
Also I have 1.5 years(18 months) of experience after completing my MS. I have submitted my experience letter at the time of filling labor But USCIS didn't ask anything regarding experience.
In labor(PERM) we mentioned Masters required
& Major field of study is Computers.
Do I qualify for EB2??Plz let me know.
RFE details:
1) Degree evaluation(what's the procedure?)
&
2) They want most recent W2 for 2007.
In 2007(W2) I got paid $59K(gross) & in LCA(H1B) prevailing wage mentioned is $55k.
In labor(PERM) prevailing wage mentioned is $63K & offered wage mentioned is $ 65K.
Difference between W2 & Prevailing wage in labor(PERM) is $4000($63K - $59K).
Difference between W2 & Offered wage in labor(PERM) is $6000($65K - $59K).
Is this a serious problem???
My labor already got approved.
My company is financially very good.
Now which wage USCIS consider or match with W2??
I will really appreciate your response.
Thanks.
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
inthehole
07-21 09:54 PM
I apologize if this question has been answered before.
I changed employer "A" after 8 years and joined employer "B" last month.
I have LCA approval copy,I140 approval copy and I485 receipt notice copy. I never had access to my employer A's attorney before and the attorney cannot & will not talk to me now.
Now I am with employer "B" using my EAD. Since all the queries or any RFE's would still go to my previous employer's attorney, I would like to file a change of representation G-28 with a new attorney so that I can receive any future communication from USCIS.
But few attorneys I contacted are asking me for my LCA papers from my employer "A" to get my job description. My employer A will not give it to me.
Also they are insisting that I must send a AC21 portability letter to USCIS on behalf of my new employer B. My new employer B is a big multinational company with heavy Bureaucracy and does not understand AC21 law. As long as I have an EAD, I will be employed by employer "B".
Even though I understand the reasons behind the attorney's suggestions, my question is
1. Can't I just file the Change of Representation G-28 form to make sure that I receive any future communication from USCIS and respond to the same or similar job question if I get an RFE?.
2. Also am I or my new employer B breaking any laws by not sending the AC21 portability letter to USCIS?
(my I140 is approved on 2005 and will not be revoked by my ex employer. Changed job after more than 200 days since I filed my I485)
Thank you.
I changed employer "A" after 8 years and joined employer "B" last month.
I have LCA approval copy,I140 approval copy and I485 receipt notice copy. I never had access to my employer A's attorney before and the attorney cannot & will not talk to me now.
Now I am with employer "B" using my EAD. Since all the queries or any RFE's would still go to my previous employer's attorney, I would like to file a change of representation G-28 with a new attorney so that I can receive any future communication from USCIS.
But few attorneys I contacted are asking me for my LCA papers from my employer "A" to get my job description. My employer A will not give it to me.
Also they are insisting that I must send a AC21 portability letter to USCIS on behalf of my new employer B. My new employer B is a big multinational company with heavy Bureaucracy and does not understand AC21 law. As long as I have an EAD, I will be employed by employer "B".
Even though I understand the reasons behind the attorney's suggestions, my question is
1. Can't I just file the Change of Representation G-28 form to make sure that I receive any future communication from USCIS and respond to the same or similar job question if I get an RFE?.
2. Also am I or my new employer B breaking any laws by not sending the AC21 portability letter to USCIS?
(my I140 is approved on 2005 and will not be revoked by my ex employer. Changed job after more than 200 days since I filed my I485)
Thank you.
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
bfadlia
02-15 11:30 PM
Reality is that you don't want to see Indians and Chinese around you. I am sure IV does not need people like you. IV does not promote nationality and we are against all the bad pracitices of the body shoppers but we don't want someone to label Indians and Chinese in this country product of bodyshopping immigration.
Most of the population are well educated , skilled professionals and labelling them that they are flooding the market is insulting. If you think that you don't have marketable skills and is difficult for you to play due to Indians and Chinese, please feel free not to come back to this website. There are many Anti-Chinese and Anti-India blogs for your agenda. I am not sure whose side you are on and who has planted you here.
Sir, first, not that I will listen to you, but you have no business telling anybody that IV doesn't need them, it's very serious when every disgruntled member decides to speak on others behalf and tell people who disagree with them they need to leave IV
second, do u have a crystal ball that allows you to know my feelings more than I do and put words in my mouth that i didn't say.. when i say that bodyshops participated in creating the disproportionate lines for india and china where do you get an insult or conclude that i want indians and chinese to disappear or that i feel i lack marketable skills..
stick to arguments please instead of these endless fabrications.
Most of the population are well educated , skilled professionals and labelling them that they are flooding the market is insulting. If you think that you don't have marketable skills and is difficult for you to play due to Indians and Chinese, please feel free not to come back to this website. There are many Anti-Chinese and Anti-India blogs for your agenda. I am not sure whose side you are on and who has planted you here.
Sir, first, not that I will listen to you, but you have no business telling anybody that IV doesn't need them, it's very serious when every disgruntled member decides to speak on others behalf and tell people who disagree with them they need to leave IV
second, do u have a crystal ball that allows you to know my feelings more than I do and put words in my mouth that i didn't say.. when i say that bodyshops participated in creating the disproportionate lines for india and china where do you get an insult or conclude that i want indians and chinese to disappear or that i feel i lack marketable skills..
stick to arguments please instead of these endless fabrications.
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
Ramba
03-31 06:02 PM
A person who assists in the murder of people whom he has taken an oath to protect, cannot be really thinking about the country or for its development. By saying that HE is responsible for the development is clearly under estimating the capabilities of the gujrati people. The gujratis and rajasthanis are leaders in creating wealth and they did that for thousands of years successfully with world's envy before this ugly Indian came into picture. With your logic fodder eating Lalu is the smartest politician ever born....remember his $20Billion revenue he is bringing in from railways....never heard of from any sector...leave alone the ever losing railways...the only thing lalu can be given credit for is...not stopping the elite civil services managing directors and the academia (IIM, ISB) from doing their work...which they have been trying to for several decades....so I dont think the theory is right that one person (call him black spot of India) had done something....when each individual in the state is born with the blood which carries enterpreneurship.....kudos to all gujaratis....
Well said. It is similar to Bill Clinton takes credit for revolution in IT area. It is all time. Gujarat prospered becuse of successful bussiness minded people. Growth was aided by high demand for export. I agree with you that though a guy has a great leadership skills, commanding speech, great administartive and management skills, if he commited/aided the crime, he has no right to hold the office. See the Alska Senator..He was one of the most successful politician and elected many times from alska for Senate. Now he is in jail at his very old age, just becuse he got money from oil comapines to renovate his house.
Well said. It is similar to Bill Clinton takes credit for revolution in IT area. It is all time. Gujarat prospered becuse of successful bussiness minded people. Growth was aided by high demand for export. I agree with you that though a guy has a great leadership skills, commanding speech, great administartive and management skills, if he commited/aided the crime, he has no right to hold the office. See the Alska Senator..He was one of the most successful politician and elected many times from alska for Senate. Now he is in jail at his very old age, just becuse he got money from oil comapines to renovate his house.
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
bayarea07
07-27 05:51 PM
Here is the story (in a free book format) of a big Shot (I believe he was emerald ) who went broke while doing amway (MUST READ BEFORE DOING AMWAY)
http://www.transgallaxys.com/~emerald/files/MerchantsOfDeception.pdf
http://www.transgallaxys.com/~emerald/files/MerchantsOfDeception.pdf
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
gchandu
07-29 05:41 PM
Hi
I am on H1B and have my visa valid till Sep 30 2008, my wife and son also has H4 visas till Sep 30 2008.
I applied for my H1 & H4 extensions, received the receipt notices from NSC and our case are pending.
Now We are travelling to India on 7th Aug 2008 and return on 11th Sep 2008 about 19 days prior to our initial H1 / H4 visa stamps.
Should I need to do an amendment to my pending H1/H4 if they get approved while I was in India? If the extention cases wont approve even after I come back to US , do I still need an amendment when it gets approved.
Please suggest a best possible way
Thanks
Gangadhar
I am on H1B and have my visa valid till Sep 30 2008, my wife and son also has H4 visas till Sep 30 2008.
I applied for my H1 & H4 extensions, received the receipt notices from NSC and our case are pending.
Now We are travelling to India on 7th Aug 2008 and return on 11th Sep 2008 about 19 days prior to our initial H1 / H4 visa stamps.
Should I need to do an amendment to my pending H1/H4 if they get approved while I was in India? If the extention cases wont approve even after I come back to US , do I still need an amendment when it gets approved.
Please suggest a best possible way
Thanks
Gangadhar
girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14%
deepakjain
08-15 10:17 AM
If we those who have worked here, paid taxes , abided the law, followed the law of land once we return from India many of us have been questioned. Though as per us nothing might have changed like employer, salary, position, residential address etc etc... still many of our friends are detainted and asked to proved documental proof....{If we who have stayed here for years are detained} then why not SRK or any other person.....
After staying here for 9 years, I was detained in 2007 for 1 hour for questioning.....that way US has more proof about me for past 9 years then SRK or any other Indian bollywood stars....
After staying here for 9 years, I was detained in 2007 for 1 hour for questioning.....that way US has more proof about me for past 9 years then SRK or any other Indian bollywood stars....
hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11%
alisa
02-13 07:09 PM
Man this is complicated. I agree with you.
Any changes to the law have to be beneficial to all three IV constituents, i.e. EB-3 ROW, EB-2 India and EB-3 India.
This is not a legal issue. And this is not an issue of morality.
This is a political issue, and like all political issues, it involves self-interests of different groups. Those different groups have to come together, agree upon a common denominator, and work towards a common goal.
As an example, all indications are that this summer, our fate would be tied with that of CIR. Core group would be working to make sure that laws beneficial to us are passed. However, we will have to work with the illegal aliens and try to get CIR passed. Its not fair that they have been here illegally, while we have been here legally. But it doesn't matter whats fair and what is not.
What matters is that we got to work with them to achieve a common goal (CIR.) Likewise, the three constituents of this forum have to work together to achieve a common goal (relief for all.)
Lets see how long it takes before I have to reiterate this point. The clock starts now.
(a) INA 202(a)(3) states that the total number of visas available under both subsections (a) and (b) [...] exceeds the number of qualified immigrants [...] (2) shall not apply [...]. In your case, there are no excess visas available for FB immigrants.
(b) INA 202(e) Special Rules for Countries at Ceiling. requires that additional visas are distributed according to the world-wide distribution across FB and EB categories. Of the 100 unused visas 77 would have to be alloted to FB, and only 22 to EB categories. Assuming a 1/3 distribution in EB categories EB1, EB2, EB3, 7 would go to EB2.
If USCIS cannot follow this rule, those 100 visas would be unused for that fiscal year.
With AC21, the 100 can be assigned to oversubscribed countries, if Visas are available, ie. demand in all categories is less than supply. With EB3-ROW retrogressed, that is not the case.
Just the way I see it....
Any changes to the law have to be beneficial to all three IV constituents, i.e. EB-3 ROW, EB-2 India and EB-3 India.
This is not a legal issue. And this is not an issue of morality.
This is a political issue, and like all political issues, it involves self-interests of different groups. Those different groups have to come together, agree upon a common denominator, and work towards a common goal.
As an example, all indications are that this summer, our fate would be tied with that of CIR. Core group would be working to make sure that laws beneficial to us are passed. However, we will have to work with the illegal aliens and try to get CIR passed. Its not fair that they have been here illegally, while we have been here legally. But it doesn't matter whats fair and what is not.
What matters is that we got to work with them to achieve a common goal (CIR.) Likewise, the three constituents of this forum have to work together to achieve a common goal (relief for all.)
Lets see how long it takes before I have to reiterate this point. The clock starts now.
(a) INA 202(a)(3) states that the total number of visas available under both subsections (a) and (b) [...] exceeds the number of qualified immigrants [...] (2) shall not apply [...]. In your case, there are no excess visas available for FB immigrants.
(b) INA 202(e) Special Rules for Countries at Ceiling. requires that additional visas are distributed according to the world-wide distribution across FB and EB categories. Of the 100 unused visas 77 would have to be alloted to FB, and only 22 to EB categories. Assuming a 1/3 distribution in EB categories EB1, EB2, EB3, 7 would go to EB2.
If USCIS cannot follow this rule, those 100 visas would be unused for that fiscal year.
With AC21, the 100 can be assigned to oversubscribed countries, if Visas are available, ie. demand in all categories is less than supply. With EB3-ROW retrogressed, that is not the case.
Just the way I see it....
logiclife
02-12 09:04 PM
Per country limit applies to every country in exactly the same way. It doesn't discriminate between Chad or China. So, how is it discrimination? And think about it- in Olympics soccer/basketball every country can send only one team. Should China and India be allowed to send more teams since they have a larger population? We should try to increase the number of GCs.
That is an apples to dinosaur analogy.
The per-country ceiling was originally created in order to establish and maintain proportionality in various immigrants coming from different countries in FAMILY BASED IMMIGRATION.
Family based immigration is driven by family relationship. Its not driven by talent or economic contribution. Therefore its important to make sure that no country completely dominates the family based immigration system by getting a head start. If one country is ahead initially in sending immigrants (like the Irish in the 1920s and Italians in 1930s), then that country's immigrants would sponsor their family and that new family would in turn sponsor their relatives and so on. Whichever country has an advantage in the begining would keep building on that advantage and eat up the entire family based quota. That's why when they wrote the INA in 1965 by codifying a bunch of loose federal regulations that governed immigration, they inserted the per-country ceiling. And that makes sense even today in Family based immigration.
Every country in the world has unlimited potential to send family members and relatives to America. But every country in the world does not have unlimited potential to send Ph.Ds and skilled labor. That ability is disproportionately huge with India, China, Mexico and Phillipines.
The per-country ceilings got INHERITED into employment based system because our legislators were too lazy to spot the difference in two systems. One system gives you a green card because you are related to someone. Other system gives you a green card because you have skills that are wanted by an employer here.
Benefits driven by family relationship should be rationed and given out propotionally because an Irish family, Italian family and a Chinese family all love their families equally and the value of family re-unification is the same. You cant say that the Irish love their sibilings more than the Chinese or Indians do. HENCE THE COUNTRY LIMITS IN FAMILY BASED SYSTEM.
But in employment based system, what the system is doing is that an Irish guy, (or any ROW guy) with Bachelor's degree in EB3 is getting green card sooner than an Indian guy or Chinese guy with masters degree in EB2. THAT IS DISCRIMINATION. Yes, that is discrimination not matter how you slice it and dice it with your olympic analogies.
That is an apples to dinosaur analogy.
The per-country ceiling was originally created in order to establish and maintain proportionality in various immigrants coming from different countries in FAMILY BASED IMMIGRATION.
Family based immigration is driven by family relationship. Its not driven by talent or economic contribution. Therefore its important to make sure that no country completely dominates the family based immigration system by getting a head start. If one country is ahead initially in sending immigrants (like the Irish in the 1920s and Italians in 1930s), then that country's immigrants would sponsor their family and that new family would in turn sponsor their relatives and so on. Whichever country has an advantage in the begining would keep building on that advantage and eat up the entire family based quota. That's why when they wrote the INA in 1965 by codifying a bunch of loose federal regulations that governed immigration, they inserted the per-country ceiling. And that makes sense even today in Family based immigration.
Every country in the world has unlimited potential to send family members and relatives to America. But every country in the world does not have unlimited potential to send Ph.Ds and skilled labor. That ability is disproportionately huge with India, China, Mexico and Phillipines.
The per-country ceilings got INHERITED into employment based system because our legislators were too lazy to spot the difference in two systems. One system gives you a green card because you are related to someone. Other system gives you a green card because you have skills that are wanted by an employer here.
Benefits driven by family relationship should be rationed and given out propotionally because an Irish family, Italian family and a Chinese family all love their families equally and the value of family re-unification is the same. You cant say that the Irish love their sibilings more than the Chinese or Indians do. HENCE THE COUNTRY LIMITS IN FAMILY BASED SYSTEM.
But in employment based system, what the system is doing is that an Irish guy, (or any ROW guy) with Bachelor's degree in EB3 is getting green card sooner than an Indian guy or Chinese guy with masters degree in EB2. THAT IS DISCRIMINATION. Yes, that is discrimination not matter how you slice it and dice it with your olympic analogies.
mirage
03-28 08:42 AM
Remove 'Bahenji' ? If LK Advani or Manmohan Singh don't get enough seats we may see Behanji at the Helm...She looks to win most number of seats in the 3rd front, which makes her the front runner for PM candidate in the 3rd front. If 3rd front gets a good number of seats they may get support of opportunist parties like BJD who are not telling who they stand with. remove Atalaji...add Bahenji.
No comments:
Post a Comment