ArkBird
04-02 03:30 AM
愛你的幽默感 :)
ok. I will open a thread titled "who after hu" and put a poll in it too.
In case you are wondering who is hu... (pun intended)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/hu_jintao
胡锦涛
happy now?
Come on dude, don't be a 爛屄
ok. I will open a thread titled "who after hu" and put a poll in it too.
In case you are wondering who is hu... (pun intended)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/hu_jintao
胡锦涛
happy now?
Come on dude, don't be a 爛屄
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
morchu
06-05 02:38 PM
I guess many have mentioned this before.
Diversity should not be based on "country" as well. For example I can easily say that "India" has to be considered as "20 different countries", if it divided based on diversity. And probably many of the europian countries combined should be "1 country".
Means if the diversity quota is 100 per year, to call for proper diversity.....
2000 for India...
100 for many of the european countries combined....
(Note: I didn't mean "ALL of europe", I know that whole Europe is pretty diverse as well...)
Country based "diversity" doesn't make sense at all.
Diversity should not be based on "country" as well. For example I can easily say that "India" has to be considered as "20 different countries", if it divided based on diversity. And probably many of the europian countries combined should be "1 country".
Means if the diversity quota is 100 per year, to call for proper diversity.....
2000 for India...
100 for many of the european countries combined....
(Note: I didn't mean "ALL of europe", I know that whole Europe is pretty diverse as well...)
Country based "diversity" doesn't make sense at all.
mundada
07-22 04:05 PM
Excellent analysis and statistics...everyone on this forum has tried an analysis and all of them are very well done. I will thank vdlrao especially, he has provided some interesting links to statistics (which were very informative for me as I was not aware of lot of these numbers).
The problem is this: We are all assuming that USCIS will work LOGICALLY...which is impossible for them!:p
They simply can't do that...
One additional thing, (at least what I think) is that there is missing statistics about labor sub cases (and plz dont start the debate whether labor sub is good or bad thing), cases stuck in name check for years, and very old cases (cases that came out of backlog elimination centers--remember, those were working in four shifts during the last few months of their existance).
However, they HAVE proved the fact that they can not do even the RANDOM GC giveaway unless PD is in mid 2006 for EB2.
So I do believe that they will assign the visa number to whichever case they can (and some other cases randomly) to show that they used all visa numbers and approvals will come to the LUCKY winners over next several months (just like what happened in last June, is happneing this Aug). Overall, it is not a bad news...really a good news.
What will happen to PD in Sept VB? I guess, dates will probably remain the same or become unavailable, does not matter (as RANDOM visa giveaway fiesta might finish all in Aug or goes in sept, regardless, same numbers will be GIVEN AWAY and whether it happens in Aug or Sept does not matter much).
In Oct 08, dates will retrogress...(OF COURSE!) but probably not too much (as vdlrao said); and I am also not sure what would be the significance of those dates (besides filing of 485) as USCIS usuallydoes not care about it; they will wait till the end of the next fiscal year...and that's when the title of this thread "EB2 WILL BE CURRENT IN A YEAR" comes into play...To continue their usual RANDOM giveaway, they will have to move dates to 2008 at that time (under most circumstances...and based on all the stats!)...Again, we can not stop thinking LOGICALLY and USCIS can not understand what LOGIC is..:D
See, we need to understand, life is a Lottery. No place for Logic. USCIS LOVES lottery...after diversity visa lottery, they are also doing LOTTERY for H1 now, and one day if they like the idea of doing LOTTERY, for EB cases, they might throw away this all mambo jambo of EB1,2,3/PD/RD/ROW/IN/CH...and JUST DO THE LOTTERY!! After this post, I will go buy a California Lotto...;)
Great man...
you bring an excellent suggestion. USCIS should do lottery for EB and at least that would be more logical than what we have right now. Right now it is neither random nor logical. It is f$%^$% up!
If your date is not current then you are not sure what is the probability of your date becoming current next month;
If your date is current then you are not sure what is the probability of you actually winning the lottery;
If your date is current and you do not win the lottery this month then you are not sure what is the probability that your date will remain current in the next month
Best luck to all hoping to win this lottery!
The problem is this: We are all assuming that USCIS will work LOGICALLY...which is impossible for them!:p
They simply can't do that...
One additional thing, (at least what I think) is that there is missing statistics about labor sub cases (and plz dont start the debate whether labor sub is good or bad thing), cases stuck in name check for years, and very old cases (cases that came out of backlog elimination centers--remember, those were working in four shifts during the last few months of their existance).
However, they HAVE proved the fact that they can not do even the RANDOM GC giveaway unless PD is in mid 2006 for EB2.
So I do believe that they will assign the visa number to whichever case they can (and some other cases randomly) to show that they used all visa numbers and approvals will come to the LUCKY winners over next several months (just like what happened in last June, is happneing this Aug). Overall, it is not a bad news...really a good news.
What will happen to PD in Sept VB? I guess, dates will probably remain the same or become unavailable, does not matter (as RANDOM visa giveaway fiesta might finish all in Aug or goes in sept, regardless, same numbers will be GIVEN AWAY and whether it happens in Aug or Sept does not matter much).
In Oct 08, dates will retrogress...(OF COURSE!) but probably not too much (as vdlrao said); and I am also not sure what would be the significance of those dates (besides filing of 485) as USCIS usuallydoes not care about it; they will wait till the end of the next fiscal year...and that's when the title of this thread "EB2 WILL BE CURRENT IN A YEAR" comes into play...To continue their usual RANDOM giveaway, they will have to move dates to 2008 at that time (under most circumstances...and based on all the stats!)...Again, we can not stop thinking LOGICALLY and USCIS can not understand what LOGIC is..:D
See, we need to understand, life is a Lottery. No place for Logic. USCIS LOVES lottery...after diversity visa lottery, they are also doing LOTTERY for H1 now, and one day if they like the idea of doing LOTTERY, for EB cases, they might throw away this all mambo jambo of EB1,2,3/PD/RD/ROW/IN/CH...and JUST DO THE LOTTERY!! After this post, I will go buy a California Lotto...;)
Great man...
you bring an excellent suggestion. USCIS should do lottery for EB and at least that would be more logical than what we have right now. Right now it is neither random nor logical. It is f$%^$% up!
If your date is not current then you are not sure what is the probability of your date becoming current next month;
If your date is current then you are not sure what is the probability of you actually winning the lottery;
If your date is current and you do not win the lottery this month then you are not sure what is the probability that your date will remain current in the next month
Best luck to all hoping to win this lottery!
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
nozerd
05-13 10:21 AM
If the Judge things your staying out was unreasonable, PR will be cancelled and you will be asked to leave the country. If you do not leave the country voluntarily you will be deported.
I have heard Canadian Immigration officers are best swayed with reasons that involve a child. So if you had a child either just before or after becoming PR you can give the reason that you didnt wnat to move the child so soon after its birth, you wanted continuation of the Dr etc.
Thanks nozerd.
Also if the judge finds it unreasonable that I stayed out of CA for more than 3 years, will I be allowed to at least live in CA for the remaining duration (time remaining out of 5 years), OR I will have to leave CA immediately once the judge does not like my reasons.
Thanks again.
I have heard Canadian Immigration officers are best swayed with reasons that involve a child. So if you had a child either just before or after becoming PR you can give the reason that you didnt wnat to move the child so soon after its birth, you wanted continuation of the Dr etc.
Thanks nozerd.
Also if the judge finds it unreasonable that I stayed out of CA for more than 3 years, will I be allowed to at least live in CA for the remaining duration (time remaining out of 5 years), OR I will have to leave CA immediately once the judge does not like my reasons.
Thanks again.
more...
AirWaterandGC
05-09 11:04 PM
Anyone with any comments on this, please share
I do have my CA PR. Waiting for US GC, my CA PR clock is ticking. Once I am more than 3 years past in the CA PR card and if I still dont go to CA, I understand that my CA PR may not be renewed. My question is : Is is possible to at least enter CA for the last (during 5th) year of CA PR ? Also is it possible to re-apply for the CA PR once I am say 4 years done in my CA PR life without entering CA ? Gurus , please shed some light.
On another note : I would request no one to make offensive remarks about a great country like Canada. It may not have as many opportunities as US has or be a lot more restricitve in providing licensure to some professionals, but please bear in mind that it has provided respect to some of us by making some of us it PR .... which the great US is still to bestow on us. Even when we have not contributed a single cent to CA or its economy while we have earned/contributed millions to the US / its economy.
I do have my CA PR. Waiting for US GC, my CA PR clock is ticking. Once I am more than 3 years past in the CA PR card and if I still dont go to CA, I understand that my CA PR may not be renewed. My question is : Is is possible to at least enter CA for the last (during 5th) year of CA PR ? Also is it possible to re-apply for the CA PR once I am say 4 years done in my CA PR life without entering CA ? Gurus , please shed some light.
On another note : I would request no one to make offensive remarks about a great country like Canada. It may not have as many opportunities as US has or be a lot more restricitve in providing licensure to some professionals, but please bear in mind that it has provided respect to some of us by making some of us it PR .... which the great US is still to bestow on us. Even when we have not contributed a single cent to CA or its economy while we have earned/contributed millions to the US / its economy.
mrdelhiite
07-08 08:54 PM
My question: I came to us on F1 Visa. I do not have my last name in my passport. Yes it is true ..stupid passport department missed it as they write names with hand ... passport was made when I was in high school…9th grade to be precise. I never got it corrected and came to us …visa was issued to me using FNU firstname format. When I applied for I-20 SSN, and everything in US after that I added my last name (my actual family name which got missed in passport) as us system does not allow blank last name. Note that my passport last page correctly shows my fathers and mothers last name which I have added on all my us documents like SSN, DL, … now I have been in us from past 5 years with all ( and I actually mean all) my us docs like H1, SSN, I-20, License, 495 application etc in firstname lastname format. ….. the only 2 things which are not in my first name last name format is
1) visa which is FNU Firstname ( FNU = First name used)
2) My passport which has just my first name and no last name
one of my good friend got a 485 query as his first, middle and last name are mixed up with respect to his passport and 485 application. Which I feel is a much simpler case as compared to mine.
Now my question is should I go ahead and change my name in my passport which is nothing but add my last name and get a new passport preemptively…or I should wait for USCIS decision .. Usually RFE is given 30 – 40 days to reply and I don’t think I will have time to get my passport fixed if and when RFE comes on my 485 .. the only issue I have with preemptive fixing name is sometime it is just better not to add complication to a case when it comes to USCIS …. A lawyer’s opinion is much needed and appreciated.
Thanks for your help
-M
PS: my priority is Feb 2007 EB3
1) visa which is FNU Firstname ( FNU = First name used)
2) My passport which has just my first name and no last name
one of my good friend got a 485 query as his first, middle and last name are mixed up with respect to his passport and 485 application. Which I feel is a much simpler case as compared to mine.
Now my question is should I go ahead and change my name in my passport which is nothing but add my last name and get a new passport preemptively…or I should wait for USCIS decision .. Usually RFE is given 30 – 40 days to reply and I don’t think I will have time to get my passport fixed if and when RFE comes on my 485 .. the only issue I have with preemptive fixing name is sometime it is just better not to add complication to a case when it comes to USCIS …. A lawyer’s opinion is much needed and appreciated.
Thanks for your help
-M
PS: my priority is Feb 2007 EB3
more...
RNGC
02-13 02:30 PM
how abt IV core leading us here or how abt murthy and other IV supporters who are immigration lawyers too.
Are u kidding me....She is the happiest soul out there and thriving on our problems. If USCIS is efficient and no backlogs she will be out of business...
Are u kidding me....She is the happiest soul out there and thriving on our problems. If USCIS is efficient and no backlogs she will be out of business...
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
akred
02-15 11:11 PM
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.
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.
more...
PlainSpeak
01-13 03:16 PM
Calm down Girl. relax. atleast you called me your friend. freinds dont fight. just take it easy and relax. take a nap, you will feel better.
Sorry if i said some thing wrong.
Your friend
MC
Mr Michael chertoff - do you know what happens when you act fresh with a gal.
You either get a slap or a kiss. I have not made up my mind about either way but you need to keep on your toes
You know i think i can see you as a friend (And no i donot need your support in becoming an EB3 representative gosh gc_dreams needsa smoke or coffe or something) and as a friend i will say something
Please do not patronize me by asking me to take a nap.
Other than that you are one person on this forum who lets just say has my respect
Sorry if i said some thing wrong.
Your friend
MC
Mr Michael chertoff - do you know what happens when you act fresh with a gal.
You either get a slap or a kiss. I have not made up my mind about either way but you need to keep on your toes
You know i think i can see you as a friend (And no i donot need your support in becoming an EB3 representative gosh gc_dreams needsa smoke or coffe or something) and as a friend i will say something
Please do not patronize me by asking me to take a nap.
Other than that you are one person on this forum who lets just say has my respect
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
seahawks
10-04 09:24 AM
as far as I don't agree about the system where people who come in after us get their GC through labor substitution, and the system is being abused. I wish they would count years of stay in America, rather than anything else:)
more...
samay
08-07 12:27 PM
Hi
Is it ok to work part time (say 10 hrs a week) for a different company using EAD, while working for a primary company on H1B ?
Thanks
Yes.
Is it ok to work part time (say 10 hrs a week) for a different company using EAD, while working for a primary company on H1B ?
Thanks
Yes.
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
gc4me
03-27 08:56 AM
By Apr 26, if the LC Sub elimination becomes effective, will USCIS reject all pending LC Sub cases (I mean pending I-140, 485 etc using LC Sub) ?
Any idea, please reply. Or USCIS will continue processing them as usual?
Any idea, please reply. Or USCIS will continue processing them as usual?
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
TeddyKoochu
09-24 12:15 PM
This analysis is really excellent, how far do you foresee the EB2-I date going this year. Is there any hope for new people to file 485 this year? People who missed Jul 07 have waited long and can wait till next Sep in the hope that we will be able to file 485 this year.
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
breddy2000
09-24 06:09 PM
If you see the numbers for EB2 ROW there are still 7000 visas pending.
Offcourse many are from 2007 and 2008
How is it possible?Is it not EB2 ROW and EB1 was always current?
1997 1
1998 3
1999 1
2000 11
2001 47
2002 67
2003 69
2004 219
2005 493
2006 973
2007 1,531
2008 3,473
2009 262
Grand Total 7,150
Also EB1 has the following data
1997 4
1998 1
1999 0
2000 1
2001 32
2002 57
2003 32
2004 29
2005 41
2006 135
2007 537
2008 898
2009 710
Grand Total 2,477
Does this mean this data is not accurate as of date. So if it means that all of those applications are approved as of today there are no more EB2 ROW 485 applications pending for FY 2010 apart from the recently filed in PERM stage?
Offcourse many are from 2007 and 2008
How is it possible?Is it not EB2 ROW and EB1 was always current?
1997 1
1998 3
1999 1
2000 11
2001 47
2002 67
2003 69
2004 219
2005 493
2006 973
2007 1,531
2008 3,473
2009 262
Grand Total 7,150
Also EB1 has the following data
1997 4
1998 1
1999 0
2000 1
2001 32
2002 57
2003 32
2004 29
2005 41
2006 135
2007 537
2008 898
2009 710
Grand Total 2,477
Does this mean this data is not accurate as of date. So if it means that all of those applications are approved as of today there are no more EB2 ROW 485 applications pending for FY 2010 apart from the recently filed in PERM stage?
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
yabadaba
07-04 09:51 AM
Kitty Eisele
keisele@npr.org
two approaches to media coverage
macaca is trying to make the human element point.
others are trying make use of the scandal type issue (the way i have written it)
the main thing is to encourage the reporters to touch on this story. it does not matter what sort of publicity we get.... we need to keep pursuing this with all the energy we can muster.
keisele@npr.org
two approaches to media coverage
macaca is trying to make the human element point.
others are trying make use of the scandal type issue (the way i have written it)
the main thing is to encourage the reporters to touch on this story. it does not matter what sort of publicity we get.... we need to keep pursuing this with all the energy we can muster.
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
ramus
06-28 08:37 PM
If USCIS do reject application without notice then we should file a big law suite...AILA will be with us..
Folks.
It might be a cruel joke that USCIS plays on us.
They can do whatever they want.
For heaven's sake, lets just accept it, and hope for the best.
Folks.
It might be a cruel joke that USCIS plays on us.
They can do whatever they want.
For heaven's sake, lets just accept it, and hope for the best.
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
iv_only_hope
07-25 06:42 PM
I dont know what this means. He said previously EB3 backlog is massive. So assuming40 percent of indians would give 160,000. Out of those assuming 50 percent for EB2 would give 80,000. Question: Is eb2:eb3 ration 50% ??
"I think that the numbers are generally accurate, but I disagree with the conclusion. In large part, I rely on what I was told in a conversation with the State Department officer responsible for calculating cutoff dates. He told me that the Indian E2 cutoff date is going to retrogress back to late 2002 or early 2003 in October. He said that the Indian E2 backlog is MASSIVE.
Looking at the total number of people who have filed AOS applications, or who have been reported as documentarily qualified to consular posts, we see a group of at least 400,000. This was as of a couple of months ago, after much of this year's quota had been used. I'm told that between 40% and 45% of the people in the known backlog are chargeable to India - and most of those are E2".
"I think that the numbers are generally accurate, but I disagree with the conclusion. In large part, I rely on what I was told in a conversation with the State Department officer responsible for calculating cutoff dates. He told me that the Indian E2 cutoff date is going to retrogress back to late 2002 or early 2003 in October. He said that the Indian E2 backlog is MASSIVE.
Looking at the total number of people who have filed AOS applications, or who have been reported as documentarily qualified to consular posts, we see a group of at least 400,000. This was as of a couple of months ago, after much of this year's quota had been used. I'm told that between 40% and 45% of the people in the known backlog are chargeable to India - and most of those are E2".
girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14%
Macaca
06-27 06:52 AM
this depends on the number of approvals and not on the number of applications received. Even if there are tons of applications received, unless there are enough approvals happening simultaneously, dates would not retrogress in the middle of the month.
USCIS had approvals before dates moved. USCIS knows the number of such approvals.
These approvals are getting GC before approval of current applicants. If earlier approvals use up quotas, retrogression does not have to wait for current approvals.
USCIS had approvals before dates moved. USCIS knows the number of such approvals.
These approvals are getting GC before approval of current applicants. If earlier approvals use up quotas, retrogression does not have to wait for current approvals.
hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11%
gsc999
07-24 05:43 PM
Just amazing. No wonder e'one thinks this is an Indian forum.
onemoredesi
06-21 07:39 PM
Hey guys,
I think this issue is being blown out of proportion. Its not that easy to get approved using labor substitution. Recently, I came across a pre approved labor but could not use it..just because the skills that are mentioned and what I work in do not match..
Let us say if my pending labor is filed as a Programmer Analyst with experience in Java, J2EE, etc and the pre approved labor is a VB/ASP position then I cannot use it, even if I fake VB/ASP experience. This is because, my pending applicaiton will be pulled when my I140 is applied and the 2 applications do not match.. That itself will raise a red flag.
People who are using labor substitution needs to be extremely lucky to have found a pre-approved labor in their field of work and with a PD which is current..
My strong opinion is that Labor Substitution is not at all the reason for our problems..My Labor still unapproved is 2003 PD and I did my Master's here but my company did not file my application in eb2..I have been looking for a pre approved labor which is before 2003... came across two, but could not use either of them..
Just my 2 cents!
1MoreDesi
I think this issue is being blown out of proportion. Its not that easy to get approved using labor substitution. Recently, I came across a pre approved labor but could not use it..just because the skills that are mentioned and what I work in do not match..
Let us say if my pending labor is filed as a Programmer Analyst with experience in Java, J2EE, etc and the pre approved labor is a VB/ASP position then I cannot use it, even if I fake VB/ASP experience. This is because, my pending applicaiton will be pulled when my I140 is applied and the 2 applications do not match.. That itself will raise a red flag.
People who are using labor substitution needs to be extremely lucky to have found a pre-approved labor in their field of work and with a PD which is current..
My strong opinion is that Labor Substitution is not at all the reason for our problems..My Labor still unapproved is 2003 PD and I did my Master's here but my company did not file my application in eb2..I have been looking for a pre approved labor which is before 2003... came across two, but could not use either of them..
Just my 2 cents!
1MoreDesi
cps060
03-20 06:49 AM
Once the three years pass, is it possible to re-apply for the PR card again ?
Also if the entire 5 years pass & someone's PR expires, can he/she re-apply for PR ? If so, are all steps like Police check etc to be done again ?
Also if the entire 5 years pass & someone's PR expires, can he/she re-apply for PR ? If so, are all steps like Police check etc to be done again ?
No comments:
Post a Comment