shilpianand
08-10 05:49 PM
NSC processed our case and we mail that on june 30th , uscis recd. the same on 2-july-07
our recd. number starts from LIN 072275####
our recd. number starts from LIN 072275####
freakin_gc
12-29 03:05 PM
will someone will please explain my RFE in lay man words
Thanks
The labor certification submitted in support of your petition indicates that the minimum education requirement is "bachelor's degree in computer science, compluter Applications, Computer Information Systems, Electrical, Mechanical, Mathematcis, Physics or its foriegn Education Equivalent".It is noted that the beneficiary received a 3 year bachelor's degree in Mathementics.
However, the term "euivalent" is not defined. Please provide documentary evidence to establish the definition of "equivalent" as it was defined in your labor certification process. Such evidence may include , but is not limited to, a statement from the dol explaining the interpretation of the term as certified, copies of the petioner's recruitment documentation and/or evidence that no U.S. applicant's for the position who posses the same or similar qualification as the beneficiary wer disqualified from selection
Thanks
Thanks
The labor certification submitted in support of your petition indicates that the minimum education requirement is "bachelor's degree in computer science, compluter Applications, Computer Information Systems, Electrical, Mechanical, Mathematcis, Physics or its foriegn Education Equivalent".It is noted that the beneficiary received a 3 year bachelor's degree in Mathementics.
However, the term "euivalent" is not defined. Please provide documentary evidence to establish the definition of "equivalent" as it was defined in your labor certification process. Such evidence may include , but is not limited to, a statement from the dol explaining the interpretation of the term as certified, copies of the petioner's recruitment documentation and/or evidence that no U.S. applicant's for the position who posses the same or similar qualification as the beneficiary wer disqualified from selection
Thanks
bugs2007
06-10 01:07 PM
Hi,
I am sure you all have seen the bulletin:
F. EMPLOYMENT THIRD PREFERENCE VISA AVAILABILITY
Demand for numbers, primarily by USCIS for adjustment of status cases, will bring the entire Employment Third preference category to the annual numerical limit by the end of June. As a result, this category will become “unavailable” beginning in July and will remain so for the remainder of FY-2008. Such action will only be temporary, however, and Employment Third preference availability will return to the cut-off dates established for June in October, the first month of the new fiscal year.
Does this mean that all the numbers for EB3 have been used up, and there will be no more EB3 cases processed till Oct 2008, and hence the category is U;
or
Does it mean that they will continue to process the cases but the category is U for filing any new cases till Oct 2008?
Thank you.
I am sure you all have seen the bulletin:
F. EMPLOYMENT THIRD PREFERENCE VISA AVAILABILITY
Demand for numbers, primarily by USCIS for adjustment of status cases, will bring the entire Employment Third preference category to the annual numerical limit by the end of June. As a result, this category will become “unavailable” beginning in July and will remain so for the remainder of FY-2008. Such action will only be temporary, however, and Employment Third preference availability will return to the cut-off dates established for June in October, the first month of the new fiscal year.
Does this mean that all the numbers for EB3 have been used up, and there will be no more EB3 cases processed till Oct 2008, and hence the category is U;
or
Does it mean that they will continue to process the cases but the category is U for filing any new cases till Oct 2008?
Thank you.
yabadaba
08-27 01:05 PM
since this last month has been one of the most frustrating in terms of any movement from any standpoint...thought i d write another op ed
==================================================
Where is my Ellis Island?
America is more than a country. It is an idea. It is the idea of freedom, liberty and justice for all. It is the idea that an immigrant with the determination, skills and the ability to work hard can make it. He or she can single handedly change the course of their generations to come.
I first read Jeffery Archer's Kane and Abel when I was 13. One of the most powerful images that the book conjured up for me was the day young Abel Rosonovski after facing years of hardship and seeing the collapse of the Polish dynasty, manages to get to America. Archer describes is great detail how Abel looks at the Statue of Liberty with tears in his eyes. When he lands on Ellis Island there are two guards who make notations of everybody getting off the boat and following a medical exam he is welcomed into America. Not as a temporary worker, not given an H1B, not given a temporary asylum status, but is welcomed as a full fledged American Citizen into the United States of America.
Today, things are not the same. I agree that I did not have to endure years of civil war or ethnic strife, but my reason for moving to the US was just like every American's grandfather, great grandfather or great-great grandfather. In essence it was to ensure a better life for me and for my future generations. My great grandchild will someday talk about how her grandfather moved here, put himself through graduate school and tried to build a better life. Her story will be the same as every other American's.
However, today I saw a letter being circulated by the anti immigration groups asking their congressman to oppose a bill proposed by Rep. John Shadegg of Arizona. This bill provides relief to millions of us who are stuck in limbo because of the worst set of immigration policies for educated immigrants in the civilized world. What makes me rethink my American dream is not that restrictionists like Lou Dobbs are against this bill but because what is being circulated is plain lies.
They claim that persons on H1B does not pay taxes, bring in millions of family members and produce thousands of “anchor babies.” This is the same set of lies being touted by Tancredo and his creed. Under the H1-B visa we are not exempt from any taxes that are charged by the IRS. In fact most sensible and informed law-makers have agreed that this is almost discriminatory because under a work visa we cannot avail of any benefit that the social security program provides for.
The other thing that makes me question my decision of being in America is the anchor babies’ statement. This statement reeks of xenophobia. It goes against everything that this country stands for. It is a slap in the face for the drafters of the 14th amendment. If my baby is an anchor baby, then every single American is also an anchor baby. By calling American children of immigrants "anchor babies" these restrictionists have defiled the entire premise of America. In immigrant circles, where people understand the process of immigration, this is seen as the "maccaca" moment for organizations like Numbers USA.
Its time the restrictionists and the American public decide once and for all what they want from the immigrants. If you do not want us here, provide Tancredo and his creed with the tools to go ahead and build a mile high wall on the southern border, eliminate all temporary visa programs and close down any legal avenues for people to come here.
If you consider that we provide value, subsidize your taxes by paying into the Social Security program, are an important part of your community and that we help stimulate the economy through taxes and buying power, then provide Rep. John Shadegg with the power to pass the Skill Bill.
In any case end our misery and let us know what you want. This way we can go about our lives.
yabadaba
IV member
==================
published on Dec 20
http://news.ncmonline.com/news/view_article.html?article_id=7b1a82abac88e4509c386 03143688521
==========
==================================================
Where is my Ellis Island?
America is more than a country. It is an idea. It is the idea of freedom, liberty and justice for all. It is the idea that an immigrant with the determination, skills and the ability to work hard can make it. He or she can single handedly change the course of their generations to come.
I first read Jeffery Archer's Kane and Abel when I was 13. One of the most powerful images that the book conjured up for me was the day young Abel Rosonovski after facing years of hardship and seeing the collapse of the Polish dynasty, manages to get to America. Archer describes is great detail how Abel looks at the Statue of Liberty with tears in his eyes. When he lands on Ellis Island there are two guards who make notations of everybody getting off the boat and following a medical exam he is welcomed into America. Not as a temporary worker, not given an H1B, not given a temporary asylum status, but is welcomed as a full fledged American Citizen into the United States of America.
Today, things are not the same. I agree that I did not have to endure years of civil war or ethnic strife, but my reason for moving to the US was just like every American's grandfather, great grandfather or great-great grandfather. In essence it was to ensure a better life for me and for my future generations. My great grandchild will someday talk about how her grandfather moved here, put himself through graduate school and tried to build a better life. Her story will be the same as every other American's.
However, today I saw a letter being circulated by the anti immigration groups asking their congressman to oppose a bill proposed by Rep. John Shadegg of Arizona. This bill provides relief to millions of us who are stuck in limbo because of the worst set of immigration policies for educated immigrants in the civilized world. What makes me rethink my American dream is not that restrictionists like Lou Dobbs are against this bill but because what is being circulated is plain lies.
They claim that persons on H1B does not pay taxes, bring in millions of family members and produce thousands of “anchor babies.” This is the same set of lies being touted by Tancredo and his creed. Under the H1-B visa we are not exempt from any taxes that are charged by the IRS. In fact most sensible and informed law-makers have agreed that this is almost discriminatory because under a work visa we cannot avail of any benefit that the social security program provides for.
The other thing that makes me question my decision of being in America is the anchor babies’ statement. This statement reeks of xenophobia. It goes against everything that this country stands for. It is a slap in the face for the drafters of the 14th amendment. If my baby is an anchor baby, then every single American is also an anchor baby. By calling American children of immigrants "anchor babies" these restrictionists have defiled the entire premise of America. In immigrant circles, where people understand the process of immigration, this is seen as the "maccaca" moment for organizations like Numbers USA.
Its time the restrictionists and the American public decide once and for all what they want from the immigrants. If you do not want us here, provide Tancredo and his creed with the tools to go ahead and build a mile high wall on the southern border, eliminate all temporary visa programs and close down any legal avenues for people to come here.
If you consider that we provide value, subsidize your taxes by paying into the Social Security program, are an important part of your community and that we help stimulate the economy through taxes and buying power, then provide Rep. John Shadegg with the power to pass the Skill Bill.
In any case end our misery and let us know what you want. This way we can go about our lives.
yabadaba
IV member
==================
published on Dec 20
http://news.ncmonline.com/news/view_article.html?article_id=7b1a82abac88e4509c386 03143688521
==========
more...
rajpatelemail
02-07 11:27 PM
i am going to marry my sister's daughter.. Sweet girl
All the girls are not like that. ;)
anyway my comments are about the crazy, career oriented, tradition less girls. And most of teh US girls are like that. Ofcourse not 100%, there may be few jewels..
All the girls are not like that. ;)
anyway my comments are about the crazy, career oriented, tradition less girls. And most of teh US girls are like that. Ofcourse not 100%, there may be few jewels..
ashutrip
06-20 01:09 PM
Mine was filed in Feb 07. My lawyer has opened an inquiry and its pending too
Atalanta sucks
Atalanta sucks
more...
pappu
08-01 05:10 PM
would really like to reflect my thoughts, experience & opinion in writing, but please do note: i don`t have a journalisim background.
Thanks for the help. Journalism background is not really needed. All we need is some good writing skills to make the article impactful.
Thanks for the help. Journalism background is not really needed. All we need is some good writing skills to make the article impactful.
lonedesi
08-11 12:58 PM
Wondering how many members who answered in the poll that they are victims of slow processing actually got to participate and join in this campaign. People who mailed out letters & DHS Form 7001, please post so that we can motivate others to join this campaign.
more...
Caliber
03-03 03:51 PM
But he is kind of busy with other important issues and our issue is not that important for him reason may be we are not his vote bank and will get to the curve of getting the GC when we are very close to our graves. Saburi
I understand your pain Saburi. With a PD of Oct 02 itself, I feel being tortured, depressed. When Obama came, I had some hope. But now, no more hopes...
I understand your pain Saburi. With a PD of Oct 02 itself, I feel being tortured, depressed. When Obama came, I had some hope. But now, no more hopes...
anindya1234
07-12 04:53 PM
Submitted Rep Lofgren's letter along with the article on Murthy website. They said they will get back to me.
more...
sanjay
06-11 10:13 PM
hara aam jaada khaoge to gas ho jayega. waise hi bahut gas hai paadu sucksena ko.
I don't know if the words used above were intentional or some one being sarcastic but club first three words and you get a complete different meaning in Hindi.
Guys, a request though, don't use foul words in public forum.
I don't know if the words used above were intentional or some one being sarcastic but club first three words and you get a complete different meaning in Hindi.
Guys, a request though, don't use foul words in public forum.
flthere
08-12 02:13 PM
I'd say that some small-medium companies either in India or the 50-50 US bodyshops will happily ask the prospective-H1b to pay up Rs. 1,00,000 towards Schumer's fees :D
Anyways, most of these bodyshops in US collect H1b fees from the applicants in India, right ?
Infy, TCS, Satyam etc., will hire more janitors to bring their H1b/L1 % in US :D Or even buyout janitorial services companies :)
Anyways, most of these bodyshops in US collect H1b fees from the applicants in India, right ?
Infy, TCS, Satyam etc., will hire more janitors to bring their H1b/L1 % in US :D Or even buyout janitorial services companies :)
more...
bkn96
11-25 08:39 PM
Ron Gotcher Latest ' ImmInfo Newsletter' states clearly 485 denial is illegal
***********
CIS issuing illegal AOS denials based on I-140 revocations
Recently, the CIS has been issuing denials ofadjustment of status applications in cases where the applicant has an approved I-140, and an AOS application pending for more than 180 days, but the petitioning employer has attempted to revoke the approved I-140.
These denials are patently illegal. They violate both CIS policy and statutory law. Both statutory law and explicit CIS policy are clear on this subject: An employer may not revoke an approved I-140 petition after an adjustment of status application has
been pending for at least 180 days. While we have not seen denials of any of our cases, we have seen a number of such denials by applicants who have contacted our office to assist them with filing motions to reconsider. It is shocking that the CIS
continues to issue denials even after the first MTRs were submitted. They are issuing these denials with full knowledge that there is no legal basis for what they are doing and that their actions violate existing law.
Anyone who receives such a denial must file a motion to reconsider immediately. The CIS has said that they are processing MTRs within 60 days. If the MTR does not result in a reversal of the denial within 60 days, the applicant should proceed in US District Court immediately to see a reversal. Immediate action is necessary to prevent the accumulation of unlawful presence following the denial.
*************************
***********
CIS issuing illegal AOS denials based on I-140 revocations
Recently, the CIS has been issuing denials ofadjustment of status applications in cases where the applicant has an approved I-140, and an AOS application pending for more than 180 days, but the petitioning employer has attempted to revoke the approved I-140.
These denials are patently illegal. They violate both CIS policy and statutory law. Both statutory law and explicit CIS policy are clear on this subject: An employer may not revoke an approved I-140 petition after an adjustment of status application has
been pending for at least 180 days. While we have not seen denials of any of our cases, we have seen a number of such denials by applicants who have contacted our office to assist them with filing motions to reconsider. It is shocking that the CIS
continues to issue denials even after the first MTRs were submitted. They are issuing these denials with full knowledge that there is no legal basis for what they are doing and that their actions violate existing law.
Anyone who receives such a denial must file a motion to reconsider immediately. The CIS has said that they are processing MTRs within 60 days. If the MTR does not result in a reversal of the denial within 60 days, the applicant should proceed in US District Court immediately to see a reversal. Immediate action is necessary to prevent the accumulation of unlawful presence following the denial.
*************************
ilwaiting
04-25 10:52 AM
Well, It might make the PD's retrogress bit further. but atleast it would give people fair treatment.
It may not help at all.
Chances are once you make the arrival date as the priority date, USCIS/DOS would set the cut-off dates to reflect the earlier PD's. For example if it is now May 2001, it could retrogress to May 1995. I don't see any gains there.
It may not help at all.
Chances are once you make the arrival date as the priority date, USCIS/DOS would set the cut-off dates to reflect the earlier PD's. For example if it is now May 2001, it could retrogress to May 1995. I don't see any gains there.
more...
ItIsNotFunny
12-17 03:24 PM
I think most of the members in this forum updated their data, at least from EB3 India I am sure. If you guys can pull data according to PD from administration console, you should be able get some valuable data to show. I wondered why this has not been done so far??? million dollar question???
Do we have any data available from FOIA request? Anyone?
Do we have any data available from FOIA request? Anyone?
raysaikat
01-06 04:31 PM
...he encountered a couple of a folks from some universities & concludes that those universities are just crappy....
By the way, since when 100's of students mean a couple of folks? So far I have taught about 100 such students. And I and my colleagues have been observing problems with such students for over last 5 years or more (about 1000 students). These are not anomalies, rather statistically significant observations.
And, by the way, (almost) all these students join Indian consulting companies after graduation, which means (at least those) consulting companies care nothing about the quality of the employees. Banning H1-B access to such consulting companies will be of desirable, indeed.
By the way, since when 100's of students mean a couple of folks? So far I have taught about 100 such students. And I and my colleagues have been observing problems with such students for over last 5 years or more (about 1000 students). These are not anomalies, rather statistically significant observations.
And, by the way, (almost) all these students join Indian consulting companies after graduation, which means (at least those) consulting companies care nothing about the quality of the employees. Banning H1-B access to such consulting companies will be of desirable, indeed.
more...
chandsri81
05-14 10:35 AM
thanks! thats encouraging..they already gave us a conditional approval last week asking for some documents, which I sent immediately. They didn't even open my documents for a week, and then the underwriter came back asking for some more things including this I94..these people are crazy! Today's my deadline and i still haven't heard anything
I will let you know if they refuse the give us a loan..thanks again for the help!
I will let you know if they refuse the give us a loan..thanks again for the help!
485Mbe4001
08-13 04:22 PM
We have a one month window to push for HR 5882, let us focus on that. if it doesnt work then we have no hope. at this rate EB3 will not even move 6 months per year. In retrospect every minor gain for the EB community has had major implications to EB 3 and the backlog as a whole (just venting a bit, dont want to drag it into a big discussion). I remember last year there were many who were saying 'now that we have EAD and AP we are good', this year many will realize the additional pain of renewals and waiting.
Oh's site mentions the following (per country limit is both family and EB based)
"The numerical limits for FY-2008 are as follows: (a) Worldwide Family-sponsored preference limit: 226,000, (b) Worldwide Employment-based preference limit: 162,704. Under the INA Section 202(A), the per-country limit is fixed at 7% of the family and employment annual limits. For FY-2008 the per-country limit is 27,209. The dependent area annual limit is 2%, or 7,774.
"
Oh's site mentions the following (per country limit is both family and EB based)
"The numerical limits for FY-2008 are as follows: (a) Worldwide Family-sponsored preference limit: 226,000, (b) Worldwide Employment-based preference limit: 162,704. Under the INA Section 202(A), the per-country limit is fixed at 7% of the family and employment annual limits. For FY-2008 the per-country limit is 27,209. The dependent area annual limit is 2%, or 7,774.
"
mrajatish
04-25 09:52 AM
This makes a lot of sense and so does the fact that GC wait times for EB immigrants be considered as part of citizenship waittime after 140 is appoved. However, let us do this in parts, let us get the basics right before we build a castle.
Without simple effective legislations like filing for 485, increase in total numbers etc, we are talking about inhuman suffering for everyone.
I came in 1999, my friend came in 2000, he has GC, I am in 140 stage, is that fair, of course not. But then life is not fair in lots of things, and we got make things work for us.
Let us concentrate on our agenda for the time being.
Without simple effective legislations like filing for 485, increase in total numbers etc, we are talking about inhuman suffering for everyone.
I came in 1999, my friend came in 2000, he has GC, I am in 140 stage, is that fair, of course not. But then life is not fair in lots of things, and we got make things work for us.
Let us concentrate on our agenda for the time being.
gcisadawg
02-09 10:05 AM
This, effectively, means that if the girl stops earning for any reason such as pregnancy or is unable to earn, she immediately forfeits the right to send money to her parents. This is the most illogical statement I have ever heard.
And it also means that for any reason, if a girl remains a house wife, she has no right to send any money to the parents like you, as the earning member, do.
This is the very strange attitude that may get a marriage in trouble.
Did I even say husband shouldn't send money to his parents from his earnings?
But shouldn't that be also need-based? How come it is the right of the husband to send any amount of money he wants to his parents without the wife complaining and how come it becomes a case of "taking for granted" when a non-earning wife wants to send money to her folks in need? This is a hypothetical situation and nothing to do with OP's case.
And then how is it we, husbands, are the first ones to start complaining when our wives don't get a share of our in-laws property following their demise?
And tell me then, following a divorce why are there laws which require you to split your net worth evenly with your non-working ex-wife? Is that acceptable to you then or you want to put forth an argument that "hey, we don't have a child and she is no longer my wife and so I am not obligated to give her a dime"
My stand is based on the premise that a man is financially responsible for his wife and his kids and not to wife's parents! The point I was making is about a completely non working spouse. It is not about a wife that leaves workforce for medical reason temporarily.
Let us not confuse the responsibility towards a man's wife and kids with that of in-laws!
Using the same token, a man shouldn't expect/demand any property/cash from in-laws!
I'm perfectly OK with humanitarian and need based help. What crosses the line, according to me, is that 'taking for granted' attitude!
If the brother in OP's story is taking care of his parents, then this situation wouldn't have occurred. Look at it other way. If the man's parents are in need of money, it is better to ask the man instead of their son-in-law!
A man taking a stand and be done with it has a better chance of saving a marriage than a man caving to the demand and building resentment. Hey, if a man is willing to please his in-laws in all possible ways, then who are we to stop him! Let him enjoy!!
And it also means that for any reason, if a girl remains a house wife, she has no right to send any money to the parents like you, as the earning member, do.
This is the very strange attitude that may get a marriage in trouble.
Did I even say husband shouldn't send money to his parents from his earnings?
But shouldn't that be also need-based? How come it is the right of the husband to send any amount of money he wants to his parents without the wife complaining and how come it becomes a case of "taking for granted" when a non-earning wife wants to send money to her folks in need? This is a hypothetical situation and nothing to do with OP's case.
And then how is it we, husbands, are the first ones to start complaining when our wives don't get a share of our in-laws property following their demise?
And tell me then, following a divorce why are there laws which require you to split your net worth evenly with your non-working ex-wife? Is that acceptable to you then or you want to put forth an argument that "hey, we don't have a child and she is no longer my wife and so I am not obligated to give her a dime"
My stand is based on the premise that a man is financially responsible for his wife and his kids and not to wife's parents! The point I was making is about a completely non working spouse. It is not about a wife that leaves workforce for medical reason temporarily.
Let us not confuse the responsibility towards a man's wife and kids with that of in-laws!
Using the same token, a man shouldn't expect/demand any property/cash from in-laws!
I'm perfectly OK with humanitarian and need based help. What crosses the line, according to me, is that 'taking for granted' attitude!
If the brother in OP's story is taking care of his parents, then this situation wouldn't have occurred. Look at it other way. If the man's parents are in need of money, it is better to ask the man instead of their son-in-law!
A man taking a stand and be done with it has a better chance of saving a marriage than a man caving to the demand and building resentment. Hey, if a man is willing to please his in-laws in all possible ways, then who are we to stop him! Let him enjoy!!
pappu
08-10 10:48 AM
No. It is true to some extent that we are paying more taxes.
Take my case for example. My kid is not an American citizen. She moved with us when she was a baby and H-4 status. So she cannot obtain social security number that is good for "authorized to work". Without the SSN, we were not eligible for certain child tax credit, which was hundreds of dollars. I tried ITIN but I got a formal response from IRS that the child needs to have a SSN to be eligible for the credit.
If you ever filed your tax return yourself and have a kid, you will know what I mean.
good point which has been overlooked.
thus one can say lack of social security numbers for spouse and kids of a high skilled immigrant waiting for gc causes sevaral administrative and taxation issues.
Take my case for example. My kid is not an American citizen. She moved with us when she was a baby and H-4 status. So she cannot obtain social security number that is good for "authorized to work". Without the SSN, we were not eligible for certain child tax credit, which was hundreds of dollars. I tried ITIN but I got a formal response from IRS that the child needs to have a SSN to be eligible for the credit.
If you ever filed your tax return yourself and have a kid, you will know what I mean.
good point which has been overlooked.
thus one can say lack of social security numbers for spouse and kids of a high skilled immigrant waiting for gc causes sevaral administrative and taxation issues.
No comments:
Post a Comment