cinqsit
01-14 02:10 PM
These rules has always been and so are they right now. Nothing is new in the memorandum. Some one publishes and one points and makes a comment and everyone else like a herd of sheep starts panicking...
Right these are nothing new. They have been followed up (very well I should add) by USCIS consistently for over 2 years now
cinqsit
Right these are nothing new. They have been followed up (very well I should add) by USCIS consistently for over 2 years now
cinqsit
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
gc28262
09-24 08:51 AM
Sent the email to everyone from the list
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pptN-jEpAiyd3snslhPjBfw
Sent one to my anti-immigrant congressman as well.
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pptN-jEpAiyd3snslhPjBfw
Sent one to my anti-immigrant congressman as well.
life99f
06-27 12:25 PM
I just asked my attorney this morning. She thinks it is possible. She got a
note reagrading the EB-3 category two weeks ago...
===>EB-3 Other Worker Visa Availability Update posted Jun. 15, 2007
USCIS has informed AILA Liaison that the State Dept. has advised that the EB
-3 Other Worker category has been exhausted. USCIS HQ has informed the TSC
and the NSC to reject EB-3 Other Worker adjustment applications even though
the June Visa Bulletin shows visa availability. AILA believes this
instruction is contrary to 8 CFR 245.1(g)(1) and has raised the issue with
USCIS HQ. Watch InfoNet for further developments.
note reagrading the EB-3 category two weeks ago...
===>EB-3 Other Worker Visa Availability Update posted Jun. 15, 2007
USCIS has informed AILA Liaison that the State Dept. has advised that the EB
-3 Other Worker category has been exhausted. USCIS HQ has informed the TSC
and the NSC to reject EB-3 Other Worker adjustment applications even though
the June Visa Bulletin shows visa availability. AILA believes this
instruction is contrary to 8 CFR 245.1(g)(1) and has raised the issue with
USCIS HQ. Watch InfoNet for further developments.
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
unseenguy
06-11 07:59 PM
My intention was not to devalue the merits of the incoming batch of immigrants. As I said, around 20% of the group are truly the best and the brightest. This was the case after the dotcom crash and will most likely be the case going forward. We had the same delays, retrogressions , guaranteed employment verification RFEs etc. Immigrationportal.com used to be the immigrationvoice of the times. I do not see much difference for the techies between what was then and what is going on now in terms of delays. I see 2 dramatic changes though
1. People arent patient enough during these times. You would agree to the amount of venting going on in this site.
2. The incessant dumping of low cost of L1s by the outsourcing companies.
If you think through deeply, the second point is what is causing all the heartburn among the people waiting for their GCs. Believe me. All these extrapolated timelines that scream that getting GC today would take 10 years are all bogus. These headlines were the same then too. I can confidently say that the GC process will move fast within a year's time once the layoffs stop. It is just that can you survive till the govt policies become more rational ? That is where the argument about the best and the brightest come into place. If you are one, you would survive this and you will get your GC within 3 years. Honestly, my ntention was to calm the nerves of those people genuinely talented and waiting for their GCs. If I had missed out on that count, I think I should improve my communication. The arwinian flush was just to highlight that fact.
Makes sense now. Peace.
1. People arent patient enough during these times. You would agree to the amount of venting going on in this site.
2. The incessant dumping of low cost of L1s by the outsourcing companies.
If you think through deeply, the second point is what is causing all the heartburn among the people waiting for their GCs. Believe me. All these extrapolated timelines that scream that getting GC today would take 10 years are all bogus. These headlines were the same then too. I can confidently say that the GC process will move fast within a year's time once the layoffs stop. It is just that can you survive till the govt policies become more rational ? That is where the argument about the best and the brightest come into place. If you are one, you would survive this and you will get your GC within 3 years. Honestly, my ntention was to calm the nerves of those people genuinely talented and waiting for their GCs. If I had missed out on that count, I think I should improve my communication. The arwinian flush was just to highlight that fact.
Makes sense now. Peace.
more...
samay
07-30 04:22 PM
Hi,
1) My I-485(EB2-India) application file has two I-140 receipts (both of these are EB2) one of these I-140 is approved and the other was denied and a Motion to Reopen has been filed for this. How will the two EB2 I-140s affect my I-485 application?
2) I got a RFE for my I-1485 on June 17th 2008, asking for a I-140 approval notice. As we do not have a physical approval (never received the approval, may be lost in mail) notice my current attorney responded to the I-485 RFE and included the first I-140 receipt notice and also a copy of the approval email received from USCIS. The attorney also included the details of the second I-140 i.e the Motion to Reopen (I-290B) notice. Is the approach a good one?
3) My attorney also requested to consider the approved I-140 for adjucating the I-485 for me and my wife since the approved I-140 was filed and approved before filing the I-1485 and also we were married before the I-485 was filed. Will USCIS consider this request?
4) Also, will USCIS have a copy of my I-140 approval notice and will they use that and consider my I-485 case?
5) Will a Infopass appointment help in anyways?
My PERM labor was approved in May 2006 and my priority date is current for August 2008. The I-485 RFE response was received by USCIS on July 16th 2008 and my I-485 processing has resumed. I was wondering if USCIS will consider my approved I-140 for processing my I-485. Also, any other suggestions you could give me would be appreciated.
I am a little confused - Were two separate I-140 applications filed for you. If not why was a motion to reopen filed by your attorney if you received an approval notice. I am wondering why your attorney did not just inform the USCIS that they issued two receipts for the same case. As far as I can tell right now you should wait for the processing of your case. On another note even though your priority date is current your service center might not be processing cases with your filing date.
1) My I-485(EB2-India) application file has two I-140 receipts (both of these are EB2) one of these I-140 is approved and the other was denied and a Motion to Reopen has been filed for this. How will the two EB2 I-140s affect my I-485 application?
2) I got a RFE for my I-1485 on June 17th 2008, asking for a I-140 approval notice. As we do not have a physical approval (never received the approval, may be lost in mail) notice my current attorney responded to the I-485 RFE and included the first I-140 receipt notice and also a copy of the approval email received from USCIS. The attorney also included the details of the second I-140 i.e the Motion to Reopen (I-290B) notice. Is the approach a good one?
3) My attorney also requested to consider the approved I-140 for adjucating the I-485 for me and my wife since the approved I-140 was filed and approved before filing the I-1485 and also we were married before the I-485 was filed. Will USCIS consider this request?
4) Also, will USCIS have a copy of my I-140 approval notice and will they use that and consider my I-485 case?
5) Will a Infopass appointment help in anyways?
My PERM labor was approved in May 2006 and my priority date is current for August 2008. The I-485 RFE response was received by USCIS on July 16th 2008 and my I-485 processing has resumed. I was wondering if USCIS will consider my approved I-140 for processing my I-485. Also, any other suggestions you could give me would be appreciated.
I am a little confused - Were two separate I-140 applications filed for you. If not why was a motion to reopen filed by your attorney if you received an approval notice. I am wondering why your attorney did not just inform the USCIS that they issued two receipts for the same case. As far as I can tell right now you should wait for the processing of your case. On another note even though your priority date is current your service center might not be processing cases with your filing date.
vxg
06-04 01:09 PM
Instead of Interim GC we should demand that once Labor and I-140 is approved remove the restriction wherein a person has to stay in same job type until GC approved in other words allow the person to take any job while I-485 is pending. This will be a big benefit and logically makes sense. If this happens than GC wait will not pigeon hole people's career in one job and allow them to grow and contribute to economy.
Giving an interim GC while visa number is unavailable will have the effect of bypassing the entire GC quota system. How do you want the interim card to be different from the final thing? No way that anyone in Congress will allow for their laws to be overridden through USCIS rulemaking.
Giving an interim GC while visa number is unavailable will have the effect of bypassing the entire GC quota system. How do you want the interim card to be different from the final thing? No way that anyone in Congress will allow for their laws to be overridden through USCIS rulemaking.
more...
sledge_hammer
01-14 02:29 PM
They are implying that those who are currently working for body shops are to find an employer that would offer their definition of employer-employee relationship. But you are still with the body shop, then your extnesion will be denied!
Q: What happens if I am filing a petition requesting a �Continuation of previously approved employment without change� or �Change in previously approved employment� and an extension of stay for the beneficiary in H-1B classification, but I did not maintain a valid employer-employee relationship with the beneficiary during the validity of the previous petition?
A: Your extension petition will be denied if USCIS determines that you did not maintain a valid employer-employee relationship with the beneficiary throughout the validity period of the previous petition. The only exception is if there is a compelling reason to approve the new petition (e.g. you are able to demonstrate that you did not meet all of the terms and conditions through no fault of your own). Such exceptions would be limited and made on a case-by-case basis.
Q: What if I am filing a petition requesting a �Change of Employer� and an extension of stay for the beneficiary�s H-1B classification? Would my petition be adjudicated under the section of the memorandum that deals with extension petitions?
A: No. The section of the memorandum that covers extension petitions applies solely to petitions filed by the same employer to extend H-1B status without a material change in the original terms of employment. All other petitions will be adjudicated in accordance with the section of the memorandum that covers initial petitions.
USCIS - Questions & Answers: USCIS Issues Guidance Memorandum on Establishing the "Employee-Employer Relationship" in H-1B Petitions (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=3d015869c9326210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCR D&vgnextchannel=6abe6d26d17df110VgnVCM1000004718190a RCRD)
Q: What happens if I am filing a petition requesting a �Continuation of previously approved employment without change� or �Change in previously approved employment� and an extension of stay for the beneficiary in H-1B classification, but I did not maintain a valid employer-employee relationship with the beneficiary during the validity of the previous petition?
A: Your extension petition will be denied if USCIS determines that you did not maintain a valid employer-employee relationship with the beneficiary throughout the validity period of the previous petition. The only exception is if there is a compelling reason to approve the new petition (e.g. you are able to demonstrate that you did not meet all of the terms and conditions through no fault of your own). Such exceptions would be limited and made on a case-by-case basis.
Q: What if I am filing a petition requesting a �Change of Employer� and an extension of stay for the beneficiary�s H-1B classification? Would my petition be adjudicated under the section of the memorandum that deals with extension petitions?
A: No. The section of the memorandum that covers extension petitions applies solely to petitions filed by the same employer to extend H-1B status without a material change in the original terms of employment. All other petitions will be adjudicated in accordance with the section of the memorandum that covers initial petitions.
USCIS - Questions & Answers: USCIS Issues Guidance Memorandum on Establishing the "Employee-Employer Relationship" in H-1B Petitions (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=3d015869c9326210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCR D&vgnextchannel=6abe6d26d17df110VgnVCM1000004718190a RCRD)
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
Picasa
07-27 03:08 PM
If you are making lot of money "more than $115". Please donate it to IV.
I get good monthly checks every month (more then $115), and they don't seem to bounce either. And good thing it increases. Don't need to google anything while I can get from credible sources.
I get good monthly checks every month (more then $115), and they don't seem to bounce either. And good thing it increases. Don't need to google anything while I can get from credible sources.
more...
waitingnwaiting
01-14 10:35 AM
I would like to see Plainspeak's project plan on his idea. The plan should detail out timeline, budget, manpower and responsibilities. Most importantly what will Plainspeak do in this plan as a responsibility.
Let us see if you can only write junk or can even post something useful.
Let us see if you can only write junk or can even post something useful.
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
snathan
01-14 10:59 AM
I understand. But it's true. I have many friends and these body shoppers don't pay for their medical insurance and all of my friends have a tough time - even Kforce etc doesn't pay if you're a contractor directly hired by them. Infosys, TCS pays and provides all kinds of benefits for people on H1, I don't know what ppl are against companies that have good business practice.
Deloitte, Accenture, IBM brings ppl from other countries on L1 - why balme Infosys, TCS.
Check what they are paying. I know a company which charges $110-$130 ph to the client and payes around $30K for the employee in L1. Is it good business practice...? Not only desi consulting cos...these a$$ also the reason we are in this mess today. Just imagine when the antis comes to know that 30K pa salary....
Deloitte, Accenture, IBM brings ppl from other countries on L1 - why balme Infosys, TCS.
Check what they are paying. I know a company which charges $110-$130 ph to the client and payes around $30K for the employee in L1. Is it good business practice...? Not only desi consulting cos...these a$$ also the reason we are in this mess today. Just imagine when the antis comes to know that 30K pa salary....
more...
arc
07-08 07:18 PM
Dear Sir/Madam
Thank you for helping us.
Scenario:
If one is working with company A on H1 and Company B applies a future employment GC for the person. The Person received EAD/AP for the 485 which is pending from 1 year through company B. Also have a valid and stamped H1 for 3 years from company A.
Now in this case:
1) Is there a Law or Need to Join company B since EAD has been issued?
2) Can one stick with company A even after getting EAD till he gets GC? In that case is AC21 required to remain with Company A?
3) Can one Join new Company X and use AC21?
I really appriciate your community service, thanks in advance!
Thank you for helping us.
Scenario:
If one is working with company A on H1 and Company B applies a future employment GC for the person. The Person received EAD/AP for the 485 which is pending from 1 year through company B. Also have a valid and stamped H1 for 3 years from company A.
Now in this case:
1) Is there a Law or Need to Join company B since EAD has been issued?
2) Can one stick with company A even after getting EAD till he gets GC? In that case is AC21 required to remain with Company A?
3) Can one Join new Company X and use AC21?
I really appriciate your community service, thanks in advance!
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
sammyb
02-14 01:53 PM
to close this thread and/or change settings so that no further new posts allowed... We have had enough on this ... it is now better to rest this topic in peace...
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
sledge_hammer
02-16 08:27 AM
Great find!
I guess all the talk about suing USCIS will go down the toilet based on this excerpt from the article -
"Assuming that under the plenary power doctrine noncitizens possess few, if any, constitutional protections with respect to entering the country, the implications of racial and national origin exclusions on citizens must be considered. Because the Constitution unquestionably protects the rights of citizens, citizens claiming injury have a better chance at successfully challenging the immigration laws than noncitizens directly affected by their operation. Courts have recognized that citizens in certain circumstances may challenge the lawfulness of immigration laws because of the impact on their rights."
oguinan,
Paragraph 1 of Article 1 establishes the definition of racial discrimination for the purpose of the document. Paragraphs 2 and 3 limit the operation of the convention. As to why paragraphs 2 & 3 were included, perhaps they were required to get countries to sign on to the convention.
Here's a better link. Read under Modern Racial Exclusion, excerpts of which I have posted below.
http://academic.udayton.edu/race/02rights/immigr09.htm
...similarly situated persons (e.g., siblings and children of U.S. citizens) may face radically different waits for immigration depending on their country of origin, with accompanying racial impacts.
The law created a new immigrant visa program that effectively represents affirmative action for white immigrants, a group that benefitted from preferential treatment under the national origins quota system until 1965. Congress, in an ironic twist of political jargon, established the "diversity" visa program, which though facially neutral prefers immigrants from nations populated primarily by white people.
The link to the CERD report is here. The convention does not address the country limit directly as the convention expressly does not apply in that area, but it does show that there is awareness about the discrimination faced by immigrants. http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(Symbol)/6d8aee7e356e6498c1256d4e00557f3b?Opendocument
You can see that the UN panel is aware of the fact that racial discrimination manifests itself in disproportional representation (note the reference to the composition of the Supreme Court). It can be argued that the 7% country limit provides a pretext to discriminate against India/China/Mexico on the basis of ethnic or racial origin, and as such would run afoul of the convention.
I guess all the talk about suing USCIS will go down the toilet based on this excerpt from the article -
"Assuming that under the plenary power doctrine noncitizens possess few, if any, constitutional protections with respect to entering the country, the implications of racial and national origin exclusions on citizens must be considered. Because the Constitution unquestionably protects the rights of citizens, citizens claiming injury have a better chance at successfully challenging the immigration laws than noncitizens directly affected by their operation. Courts have recognized that citizens in certain circumstances may challenge the lawfulness of immigration laws because of the impact on their rights."
oguinan,
Paragraph 1 of Article 1 establishes the definition of racial discrimination for the purpose of the document. Paragraphs 2 and 3 limit the operation of the convention. As to why paragraphs 2 & 3 were included, perhaps they were required to get countries to sign on to the convention.
Here's a better link. Read under Modern Racial Exclusion, excerpts of which I have posted below.
http://academic.udayton.edu/race/02rights/immigr09.htm
...similarly situated persons (e.g., siblings and children of U.S. citizens) may face radically different waits for immigration depending on their country of origin, with accompanying racial impacts.
The law created a new immigrant visa program that effectively represents affirmative action for white immigrants, a group that benefitted from preferential treatment under the national origins quota system until 1965. Congress, in an ironic twist of political jargon, established the "diversity" visa program, which though facially neutral prefers immigrants from nations populated primarily by white people.
The link to the CERD report is here. The convention does not address the country limit directly as the convention expressly does not apply in that area, but it does show that there is awareness about the discrimination faced by immigrants. http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(Symbol)/6d8aee7e356e6498c1256d4e00557f3b?Opendocument
You can see that the UN panel is aware of the fact that racial discrimination manifests itself in disproportional representation (note the reference to the composition of the Supreme Court). It can be argued that the 7% country limit provides a pretext to discriminate against India/China/Mexico on the basis of ethnic or racial origin, and as such would run afoul of the convention.
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
vdlrao
07-31 05:58 PM
http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5766
posted 07-24 09:59 AM
Ron Gotcher has some thoughts on India E2 movement over the next two months.
More and more, I see people posting messages containing the unspoken assumption that since the Indian E2 cutoff date has moved forward, it is likely to move forward further in the coming months. This is a false hope.
Even with a cutoff date in early 2003, the CIS has sufficient inventory of Indian E2 adjustments on file to use up the remaining inventory of E2 visas for this fiscal year. The reason that the Visa Office advanced the priority date is to move it up to the point where overseas consular posts can take up the slack left by the CIS's inability to close out enough cases and avoid wasting visas this year.
The CIS inventory of pending cases is massive. If there were no quota at all - if everyone were suddenly "current" - and no new cases were filed after today, it would still take the CIS four to five years to close out all of the pending cases that they already have in their inventory.
Overseas consular posts maintain inventories of cases as well. When the priority date for a particular case starts to edge forward and it appears that the applicant may become "current' in the not too distant future, the applicant is told to submit all required supporting documents to the post or the NVC. When this is done, the applicant is reported to the Visa Office as being "documentarily qualified." This means that the case is in a position where an immigrant visa can be issued to the applicant as soon as a visa number becomes available.
The inventory of documentarily qualified cases with current priority dates at a consular post never exceeds that post's ability to process all such cases within sixty days. Consular posts have very high bandwidth processing capabilities. No matter how many cases become current, they are able to process all of them within sixty days.
The reason that the Indian E2 cutoff date has moved forward is that the Visa Office fears that the CIS will not be able to adjudicate enough adjustment of status applications to exhaust the annual quota. They have advanced the cutoff date in order to make more cases overseas eligible for final processing.
This means that overseas consular posts have exhausted their inventories of Indian E2 cases with priority dates earlier than 2006 and the Visa Office had to move the cutoff date forward in order to make more cases eligible to be closed out.
This does not mean that the CIS has closed out all of the pre-2006 cases pending in their inventory. Far from it. When the new fiscal year starts, Indian E2 is likely to retrogress back to late 2002 or early 2003. This is roughly the point reached by the CIS in processing their inventory of pending cases.
Please understand that this is a temporary phenomenon and due entirely to the difference in the processing capabilities of the CIS and the overseas consular posts.
I hope this clarifies matters.
Ron Gotcher
I dont agree with his post except that "EB2 will retrogress in the coming months". EB2 may retrogress in the coming bulletins as part of the adjustment of demand VS available visa numbers. But the retrogression will be very mild and it would be there very short span of time. After that the cut off date will run like to catch up the current. In Ron's post he has no where mentioned about the horizontal spill overs. May be he might have been talking with DOS officials once in a while. But he is not predicting the EB2 movement properly on a whole.
And besides that our core team has started a call campaign on HR5882 bill. Please participate in that. We have a dedicated IV core team for our Immigration Issues. If this bill passes it will give a great relief for our EB3 friends who are already waiting for years. Hope this bill will pass.
posted 07-24 09:59 AM
Ron Gotcher has some thoughts on India E2 movement over the next two months.
More and more, I see people posting messages containing the unspoken assumption that since the Indian E2 cutoff date has moved forward, it is likely to move forward further in the coming months. This is a false hope.
Even with a cutoff date in early 2003, the CIS has sufficient inventory of Indian E2 adjustments on file to use up the remaining inventory of E2 visas for this fiscal year. The reason that the Visa Office advanced the priority date is to move it up to the point where overseas consular posts can take up the slack left by the CIS's inability to close out enough cases and avoid wasting visas this year.
The CIS inventory of pending cases is massive. If there were no quota at all - if everyone were suddenly "current" - and no new cases were filed after today, it would still take the CIS four to five years to close out all of the pending cases that they already have in their inventory.
Overseas consular posts maintain inventories of cases as well. When the priority date for a particular case starts to edge forward and it appears that the applicant may become "current' in the not too distant future, the applicant is told to submit all required supporting documents to the post or the NVC. When this is done, the applicant is reported to the Visa Office as being "documentarily qualified." This means that the case is in a position where an immigrant visa can be issued to the applicant as soon as a visa number becomes available.
The inventory of documentarily qualified cases with current priority dates at a consular post never exceeds that post's ability to process all such cases within sixty days. Consular posts have very high bandwidth processing capabilities. No matter how many cases become current, they are able to process all of them within sixty days.
The reason that the Indian E2 cutoff date has moved forward is that the Visa Office fears that the CIS will not be able to adjudicate enough adjustment of status applications to exhaust the annual quota. They have advanced the cutoff date in order to make more cases overseas eligible for final processing.
This means that overseas consular posts have exhausted their inventories of Indian E2 cases with priority dates earlier than 2006 and the Visa Office had to move the cutoff date forward in order to make more cases eligible to be closed out.
This does not mean that the CIS has closed out all of the pre-2006 cases pending in their inventory. Far from it. When the new fiscal year starts, Indian E2 is likely to retrogress back to late 2002 or early 2003. This is roughly the point reached by the CIS in processing their inventory of pending cases.
Please understand that this is a temporary phenomenon and due entirely to the difference in the processing capabilities of the CIS and the overseas consular posts.
I hope this clarifies matters.
Ron Gotcher
I dont agree with his post except that "EB2 will retrogress in the coming months". EB2 may retrogress in the coming bulletins as part of the adjustment of demand VS available visa numbers. But the retrogression will be very mild and it would be there very short span of time. After that the cut off date will run like to catch up the current. In Ron's post he has no where mentioned about the horizontal spill overs. May be he might have been talking with DOS officials once in a while. But he is not predicting the EB2 movement properly on a whole.
And besides that our core team has started a call campaign on HR5882 bill. Please participate in that. We have a dedicated IV core team for our Immigration Issues. If this bill passes it will give a great relief for our EB3 friends who are already waiting for years. Hope this bill will pass.
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
gjoe
02-14 04:20 PM
[QUOTE=paskal;223415]
I could be a member of drink-raw-milk Club. Am I supposed to declare that on I-485? ;)
Yes, I guess so. If the drink raw milk club is a registered orginization.
Disclosure : I am not a lawyer, please check with your legal ......no just save that money for a rainy day
:)
I could be a member of drink-raw-milk Club. Am I supposed to declare that on I-485? ;)
Yes, I guess so. If the drink raw milk club is a registered orginization.
Disclosure : I am not a lawyer, please check with your legal ......no just save that money for a rainy day
:)
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
pd_recapturing
03-14 09:27 AM
Hi, I am seriously planning to start Canadian immigration after wasting 7 years of my life in chasing GC. Can anybody suggest some good lawyers/attorneies/agencies who are not money suckers like US immigration attornies ? Also, somebody mentioned that one can apply Can immigration by himself. Is there any issue with that ?
Thanks
Thanks
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
okuzmin
09-30 04:36 AM
In addition to the written above, you must stay in Canada for at least 2 years out of 5 in order to keep your PR status.
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/pub/imm-law.html , "Permanent residents" section
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/pub/imm-law.html , "Permanent residents" section
girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14%
gapala
04-20 04:08 PM
Guys,
Poll is ok, but what about our voting rights? Many countries allow citizens to use proxy vote / vote by mail to exercise their rights... I remember that there was a bill in 2006 on the floor of parlement to allow this for NRI's and Congress party was dead against such a bill due to some reason... Not sure what happened after that...
Its rediculous that about a million folks in this country and many more around the world, (I believe 30 million or so NRI's in total) are deprived of their fundamental contitutional right to vote, well a small portion compared to total population. Its unfortunate.
Poll is ok, but what about our voting rights? Many countries allow citizens to use proxy vote / vote by mail to exercise their rights... I remember that there was a bill in 2006 on the floor of parlement to allow this for NRI's and Congress party was dead against such a bill due to some reason... Not sure what happened after that...
Its rediculous that about a million folks in this country and many more around the world, (I believe 30 million or so NRI's in total) are deprived of their fundamental contitutional right to vote, well a small portion compared to total population. Its unfortunate.
hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11%
days_go_by
08-04 07:16 AM
08/04/2006: Final Rule of Labor Certification Substitution Elimination: Where Is It?
* A rumor starts surfacing in the immigrant community that the DOL is finalizing the rule-making process for this final rule and the rule may be published in the federal register in the near future. This rumor has not been confirmed by the DOL. Neither the OMB rule-making agenda reflects such request by the DOL. We will closely watch and monitor this rule-making process. Please stay tuned.
* A rumor starts surfacing in the immigrant community that the DOL is finalizing the rule-making process for this final rule and the rule may be published in the federal register in the near future. This rumor has not been confirmed by the DOL. Neither the OMB rule-making agenda reflects such request by the DOL. We will closely watch and monitor this rule-making process. Please stay tuned.
yabadaba
02-14 02:32 PM
Please be advised, that IV will not endorse this. If people are gathering here and in places like , please form your own mailing group and proceed.
Those who are on this thread, if you have not yet sent the letter to President for the Admin fix campaign, please send it, and help IV make the grassroots campaign successful.
chandu...have u read the lawsuit outcome? do u still think that an administrative fix is easier to achieve than a lawsuit? lets say it comes down to either/or...either a lawsuit or an administrative fix...which one would IV support?
Those who are on this thread, if you have not yet sent the letter to President for the Admin fix campaign, please send it, and help IV make the grassroots campaign successful.
chandu...have u read the lawsuit outcome? do u still think that an administrative fix is easier to achieve than a lawsuit? lets say it comes down to either/or...either a lawsuit or an administrative fix...which one would IV support?
minimalist
05-11 10:23 PM
As a person you are offended that I made comment based on what you said in one post without considering your whole lifestory. India's history is out there for everybody to see and most educated indians know pretty well what kind of a nation India is.
However, you managed to compare India with Nazi Germany. Great job. Based on 1 incident, you managed to slam a great nation like India. But when it comes to you you want many factors considered. Why the double standard?
Then there are some wacko job politician from TN that says if Prabhakaran is hurt , they will separate from India. All they need is read back to early years of post independence India and a person named Vallabh Bhai Patel. There are still people with similar capacity in India, that will bring such wacko jobs and their supporters in control.
Remember, same goes true for the wacko jobs from Maharashtra too who say Maharashtra is for Marathi's.
Don't compare 1971 Bangladesh with current day Srilanka, if you can think straight.
Flag burnig is a criminal offense in India, just FYI.
Technically I can change my country of citizenship any number of times in my life (cannot, if struck like this GC limbo) or even religion but I cannot change my ethnicity even once because I'm born into it.
I agree Sri Lanka is a sovereign country but why did India poke its nose on the pre-1971 Pakistan and created a new country Bangladesh. Is there a different standard for different people with the Indian govt policies?
Even If I had not got the opportunity to come this great nation United States of America, land of free and country of brave, I would have done whatever I could in India to help the beleaguered Sri Lankan Tamils and protested against the policies of Govt of India toward this issue.
I�m upfront about showing my resentment towards my country of birth and I �don�t show false patriotism/nationalism towards India like other Pseudo-Nationalists, who internally betray India at any moment and ready to change their nationality at the next opportunity but externally portray that they are the guardian of India and it is their soul. I currently live in a country, where even burning the national flag is considered a form of protest, if someone thinks that expressing resentment to India or protesting against her policy is unpatriotic, grow up guys.
You can say whatever you want and judge me in your point of view, I�m not going to argue about it because you don�t live a life of a Indian Tamil with hands tied of being called a terrorist, when you support Sri Lankan Tamil cause, and you cannot understand the relationship we (Tamils from India) have with the Sri Lankan Tamils, besides the people (including small babies and even some in the womb), who are getting killed in Sri Lanka by the Sri Lankan government are not your kith and kin.
You don�t know me, and you don�t know what positive things me and my family has done and doing to the people of India, particularly to the farming community and you don�t know what I�m doing to rectifying issues (whatever I�m working on)�..you should be careful when making these kind of statements on person you don�t know anything about except one comment on this thread.
However, you managed to compare India with Nazi Germany. Great job. Based on 1 incident, you managed to slam a great nation like India. But when it comes to you you want many factors considered. Why the double standard?
Then there are some wacko job politician from TN that says if Prabhakaran is hurt , they will separate from India. All they need is read back to early years of post independence India and a person named Vallabh Bhai Patel. There are still people with similar capacity in India, that will bring such wacko jobs and their supporters in control.
Remember, same goes true for the wacko jobs from Maharashtra too who say Maharashtra is for Marathi's.
Don't compare 1971 Bangladesh with current day Srilanka, if you can think straight.
Flag burnig is a criminal offense in India, just FYI.
Technically I can change my country of citizenship any number of times in my life (cannot, if struck like this GC limbo) or even religion but I cannot change my ethnicity even once because I'm born into it.
I agree Sri Lanka is a sovereign country but why did India poke its nose on the pre-1971 Pakistan and created a new country Bangladesh. Is there a different standard for different people with the Indian govt policies?
Even If I had not got the opportunity to come this great nation United States of America, land of free and country of brave, I would have done whatever I could in India to help the beleaguered Sri Lankan Tamils and protested against the policies of Govt of India toward this issue.
I�m upfront about showing my resentment towards my country of birth and I �don�t show false patriotism/nationalism towards India like other Pseudo-Nationalists, who internally betray India at any moment and ready to change their nationality at the next opportunity but externally portray that they are the guardian of India and it is their soul. I currently live in a country, where even burning the national flag is considered a form of protest, if someone thinks that expressing resentment to India or protesting against her policy is unpatriotic, grow up guys.
You can say whatever you want and judge me in your point of view, I�m not going to argue about it because you don�t live a life of a Indian Tamil with hands tied of being called a terrorist, when you support Sri Lankan Tamil cause, and you cannot understand the relationship we (Tamils from India) have with the Sri Lankan Tamils, besides the people (including small babies and even some in the womb), who are getting killed in Sri Lanka by the Sri Lankan government are not your kith and kin.
You don�t know me, and you don�t know what positive things me and my family has done and doing to the people of India, particularly to the farming community and you don�t know what I�m doing to rectifying issues (whatever I�m working on)�..you should be careful when making these kind of statements on person you don�t know anything about except one comment on this thread.
No comments:
Post a Comment