petepatel
08-13 07:28 AM
I just received the email this morning.
for Spouse only. Pending for the primary applicant yet
Applied on July 1, Receipt July 3 and Soft LUD July 8:)
for Spouse only. Pending for the primary applicant yet
Applied on July 1, Receipt July 3 and Soft LUD July 8:)
wallpaper We Love Yellow !
amitjoey
07-09 04:57 PM
Please use the resources already available, there is a write up, also there is a pdf and a html version by english_august.
godspeed
02-12 03:33 PM
bump
2011 Nicole Richie Hairstyles
sankap
07-09 09:34 PM
Supreet:
Based on my extensive research on the topic:
1. You can safely take the 1099 contract offer on EAD. In case of an EVL RFE, your recruiting company (the one giving you paycheck) should be able to give you an EVL. As I've noted below, the job need *not* be "permanent," unlike what others have mentioned on this forum. The EVL needs to only mention your job title, duties, and start date, not salary (unless specifically asked for). You do *not* need to provide any paystubs.
2. For salary received on 1099, you'll file taxes as "self-employed." IRS website has extensive resources on filing as self-employed vs. LLC.
3. Under corp-to-cop arrangement, you need to have a tax ID. Many clients/"bodyshoppers" will only consider a C2C arrangement. You can either do this by setting up your own LLC OR by incorporating (as a C-corp or S-Corp--again refer to IRS website or PM me if you need more info) OR through another corporation (e.g., on someone holding your H1B (you being their W2 employee)--not needed in your case). You can file your taxes as a "Self-employed" on any of these options, and can also claim deductions on job-related expenses (e.g., mileage, travel+lodging if you're traveling out of town)--so these options are monetarily better than being on W2, which is working not as self-employed.
4. You're never needed to "file AC21." First, no USCIS resource mentions procedure for that. Second, you're are *not* required by USCIS to inform them of every job change if you're invoking AC21.
Bottom line: Go ahead with this opportunity on 1099, report this income as "Self-employed," deducting any job-related expenses, and ensure that the recruiting company will give you an EVL *if* needed. I'm *guessing* that if self-employed, you can also write your own EVL (stating start date as your W2-job layoff date and a "projected" yearly income, if asked for). In that case, registering your company with the county (~$20) or opening an LLC (~$400) may help. Last, no need to "file AC21" or inform the USCIS of your job change, since it's not required.
Thanks so much everyone for your replies. I am planning to go for this job, I guess it will be better to be self-employed rather than unemployed.
However, a few follow up questions.
1. I realize on 1099 I will not have any pay stubs or offer letter (as pointed by someone). How can I respond to a Employment Verification RFE? What documentory proof will I need to answer the RFE?
2. If I can get an offer letter for 'Contract to Hire' will that be an appropriate response to any potential EVL RFE? Will it be ok if the full time joing date is say 3 months from now? First 6 months on 1099 and then full time hire?
3. Is it better to go corp-to-corp through another vendor instead of 1099? That way I can have pay stubs/offer letter through a vendor company which will produce my pay stubs (even though I will lose about 20% of my billing rate)?
Just an additional detail, my job duties are going to be exactly same as what was approved on my labor.
Your help is highly appreciated.
Thanks!!
- S
Based on my extensive research on the topic:
1. You can safely take the 1099 contract offer on EAD. In case of an EVL RFE, your recruiting company (the one giving you paycheck) should be able to give you an EVL. As I've noted below, the job need *not* be "permanent," unlike what others have mentioned on this forum. The EVL needs to only mention your job title, duties, and start date, not salary (unless specifically asked for). You do *not* need to provide any paystubs.
2. For salary received on 1099, you'll file taxes as "self-employed." IRS website has extensive resources on filing as self-employed vs. LLC.
3. Under corp-to-cop arrangement, you need to have a tax ID. Many clients/"bodyshoppers" will only consider a C2C arrangement. You can either do this by setting up your own LLC OR by incorporating (as a C-corp or S-Corp--again refer to IRS website or PM me if you need more info) OR through another corporation (e.g., on someone holding your H1B (you being their W2 employee)--not needed in your case). You can file your taxes as a "Self-employed" on any of these options, and can also claim deductions on job-related expenses (e.g., mileage, travel+lodging if you're traveling out of town)--so these options are monetarily better than being on W2, which is working not as self-employed.
4. You're never needed to "file AC21." First, no USCIS resource mentions procedure for that. Second, you're are *not* required by USCIS to inform them of every job change if you're invoking AC21.
Bottom line: Go ahead with this opportunity on 1099, report this income as "Self-employed," deducting any job-related expenses, and ensure that the recruiting company will give you an EVL *if* needed. I'm *guessing* that if self-employed, you can also write your own EVL (stating start date as your W2-job layoff date and a "projected" yearly income, if asked for). In that case, registering your company with the county (~$20) or opening an LLC (~$400) may help. Last, no need to "file AC21" or inform the USCIS of your job change, since it's not required.
Thanks so much everyone for your replies. I am planning to go for this job, I guess it will be better to be self-employed rather than unemployed.
However, a few follow up questions.
1. I realize on 1099 I will not have any pay stubs or offer letter (as pointed by someone). How can I respond to a Employment Verification RFE? What documentory proof will I need to answer the RFE?
2. If I can get an offer letter for 'Contract to Hire' will that be an appropriate response to any potential EVL RFE? Will it be ok if the full time joing date is say 3 months from now? First 6 months on 1099 and then full time hire?
3. Is it better to go corp-to-corp through another vendor instead of 1099? That way I can have pay stubs/offer letter through a vendor company which will produce my pay stubs (even though I will lose about 20% of my billing rate)?
Just an additional detail, my job duties are going to be exactly same as what was approved on my labor.
Your help is highly appreciated.
Thanks!!
- S
more...
gc28262
08-24 10:19 PM
Thats incorrect...Lot of major corporations hire from different locations in the world...I have several friends working at a s/w giant in Seattle area who were directly hired in Russia, India, Singapore, etc...
I think that is an exception. Majority of corporations won't hire from overseas.
I think that is an exception. Majority of corporations won't hire from overseas.
madhuvj
09-16 05:50 PM
Guys
We are doing this to help everyone. Especially, those whose PD is still current as per September VB, if you act with in next 5-10 days, you have a chance. if you can individually file a law suit when your PD is current.Since my guess is, the lawsuit we are working on in this thread, will take some time to shape up. But this is a Biggie, we want to create a big impact. Meanwhile, folks who are out there waiting since 2001,2002.... you can follow the links that i pasted in my previous message. People have won lawsuit very similar to the one we are talking about. I can even paste some of the I-485 lawsuits filed because of unreasonable and unnecessary delays, when PD is current.
Here you go
http://boards.immigration.com/showpost.php?p=1876734&postcount=15992
http://boards.immigration.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=17596&d=1221222486
We are doing this to help everyone. Especially, those whose PD is still current as per September VB, if you act with in next 5-10 days, you have a chance. if you can individually file a law suit when your PD is current.Since my guess is, the lawsuit we are working on in this thread, will take some time to shape up. But this is a Biggie, we want to create a big impact. Meanwhile, folks who are out there waiting since 2001,2002.... you can follow the links that i pasted in my previous message. People have won lawsuit very similar to the one we are talking about. I can even paste some of the I-485 lawsuits filed because of unreasonable and unnecessary delays, when PD is current.
Here you go
http://boards.immigration.com/showpost.php?p=1876734&postcount=15992
http://boards.immigration.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=17596&d=1221222486
more...
ragz4u
05-02 10:45 AM
The �SKIL� Bill
Short Title: Securing Knowledge Innovation and Leadership (SKIL)
Title I � Access to High Skilled Foreign Workers
Section 101. H-1B Visa Holders
Exempts professionals who have earned advanced degrees (e.g. Master�s degree or higher) from accredited United States universities and those who have been awarded a medical specialty certification based on post-doctoral training and experience in the United States from the annual H-1B cap.
Section 102. Market-Based Visa Limits
Raises the H-1B (specialty occupation) cap from 65,000 to 115,000 and creates a flexible system that adjusts with the market.
Title II � Retaining Foreign Workers Educated in the United States
Section 201. United States Educated Immigrants.
Exempts U.S.-educated professionals with advanced degrees and those who have been awarded a medical specialty certification based on post-doctoral training and experience in the United States from the annual green card (i.e. immigrant visa) cap.
Exempts professionals who have earned advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering or math, and who worked in the U.S. for at least three years in a related field, from the immigrant visa cap.
Exempts spouse and minor children of professionals from the employment-based cap. Under current law, only about fifty percent of employment-based visas go to actual workers.
Section 202. Immigrant Visa Backlog Reduction.
Raises the immigrant visa (i.e. green card) cap from 140,000 to 290,000 and allows unused visas to fall forward annually.
Exempts aliens of extraordinary ability, and outstanding researchers and professors from the annual green card limit.
Section 203. Student Visa Reform.
Many employers seek to hire U.S. educated students full-time upon graduation, and this change would enable the employer to start the green card process while the foreign worker is on a student visa (F-1) during Optional Practical Training (OPT). Codifies OPT; which will allow U.S. educated foreign students to work in their field for up to two years after graduation.
Section 204. L-1 Visa Holders Subject to Visa Backlog.
Allows an extension of an L-1 (intracompany transfer) visa beyond the fifth or seventh year if the individual has a green card application pending and is simply caught in the green card backlog. This extension is currently allowed for H-1B (specialty occupation) visa holders, but not for L-1 visa holders.
Section 205. Retaining Workers Subject to Green Card Backlog.
Allows foreign workers who have started the green card process, but who are subject to green card backlogs, to pay a $500.00 supplemental fee to file an application to adjust status. This change would enable foreign workers to remain in the U.S. until the green card becomes available.
Title III � Business Facilitation Through Immigration Reform
Section 301. Streamlining the Adjudication Process for Established Employers.
Requires the creation of a pre-certification program that streamlines the adjudication process, and reduces paperwork burdens, for employers who file multiple applications and who have no history of fraud or abuse. Pre-certification would allow those employers to file a petition on a separate review track and not submit repetitive organizational documentation.
Section 302. Providing Premium Processing of Employment-Based Visa Petitions.
Requires USCIS to allow employers to file a �premium processing� fee for expedited adjudication of employment-based immigrant petitions, as well as for administrative appeals of any decision on an employment-based immigrant petition.
Section 303. Eliminating Procedural Delays in Labor Certification Process.
Requires the Department of Labor to process all applications filed prior to the electronic PERM system within six months of enactment. Clarifies the Department of Labor�s process in providing prevailing wage determinations and requires the Department of Labor to establish a website to post open job orders.
Title IV. Miscellaneous
Section 401. Completion of Background and Security Checks.
Requires that no immigration application may be approved until the appropriate background and security checks are completed and any allegations of fraud have been resolved.
Section 402. Visa Revalidation.
Allows temporary workers who have not violated their status to renew their visa from within the United States.
Section 403. Severability.
Clarifies that if any part of this act is determined to be invalid it will have no effect on the remainder of the provisions.
Short Title: Securing Knowledge Innovation and Leadership (SKIL)
Title I � Access to High Skilled Foreign Workers
Section 101. H-1B Visa Holders
Exempts professionals who have earned advanced degrees (e.g. Master�s degree or higher) from accredited United States universities and those who have been awarded a medical specialty certification based on post-doctoral training and experience in the United States from the annual H-1B cap.
Section 102. Market-Based Visa Limits
Raises the H-1B (specialty occupation) cap from 65,000 to 115,000 and creates a flexible system that adjusts with the market.
Title II � Retaining Foreign Workers Educated in the United States
Section 201. United States Educated Immigrants.
Exempts U.S.-educated professionals with advanced degrees and those who have been awarded a medical specialty certification based on post-doctoral training and experience in the United States from the annual green card (i.e. immigrant visa) cap.
Exempts professionals who have earned advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering or math, and who worked in the U.S. for at least three years in a related field, from the immigrant visa cap.
Exempts spouse and minor children of professionals from the employment-based cap. Under current law, only about fifty percent of employment-based visas go to actual workers.
Section 202. Immigrant Visa Backlog Reduction.
Raises the immigrant visa (i.e. green card) cap from 140,000 to 290,000 and allows unused visas to fall forward annually.
Exempts aliens of extraordinary ability, and outstanding researchers and professors from the annual green card limit.
Section 203. Student Visa Reform.
Many employers seek to hire U.S. educated students full-time upon graduation, and this change would enable the employer to start the green card process while the foreign worker is on a student visa (F-1) during Optional Practical Training (OPT). Codifies OPT; which will allow U.S. educated foreign students to work in their field for up to two years after graduation.
Section 204. L-1 Visa Holders Subject to Visa Backlog.
Allows an extension of an L-1 (intracompany transfer) visa beyond the fifth or seventh year if the individual has a green card application pending and is simply caught in the green card backlog. This extension is currently allowed for H-1B (specialty occupation) visa holders, but not for L-1 visa holders.
Section 205. Retaining Workers Subject to Green Card Backlog.
Allows foreign workers who have started the green card process, but who are subject to green card backlogs, to pay a $500.00 supplemental fee to file an application to adjust status. This change would enable foreign workers to remain in the U.S. until the green card becomes available.
Title III � Business Facilitation Through Immigration Reform
Section 301. Streamlining the Adjudication Process for Established Employers.
Requires the creation of a pre-certification program that streamlines the adjudication process, and reduces paperwork burdens, for employers who file multiple applications and who have no history of fraud or abuse. Pre-certification would allow those employers to file a petition on a separate review track and not submit repetitive organizational documentation.
Section 302. Providing Premium Processing of Employment-Based Visa Petitions.
Requires USCIS to allow employers to file a �premium processing� fee for expedited adjudication of employment-based immigrant petitions, as well as for administrative appeals of any decision on an employment-based immigrant petition.
Section 303. Eliminating Procedural Delays in Labor Certification Process.
Requires the Department of Labor to process all applications filed prior to the electronic PERM system within six months of enactment. Clarifies the Department of Labor�s process in providing prevailing wage determinations and requires the Department of Labor to establish a website to post open job orders.
Title IV. Miscellaneous
Section 401. Completion of Background and Security Checks.
Requires that no immigration application may be approved until the appropriate background and security checks are completed and any allegations of fraud have been resolved.
Section 402. Visa Revalidation.
Allows temporary workers who have not violated their status to renew their visa from within the United States.
Section 403. Severability.
Clarifies that if any part of this act is determined to be invalid it will have no effect on the remainder of the provisions.
2010 Nicole Richie in a DSquared2
vdlrao
05-07 06:26 AM
Hi,
Can you please let me know how long its taking for ccanadian PR.
Thanks.
Can you please let me know how long its taking for ccanadian PR.
Thanks.
more...
Sachin_Stock
09-23 02:18 PM
Another basic information. I-140 needs to be approved on its own merit. Once it is approved, the dates would be ported. There's no such extra-scrutiny added related to "porting" exercise as such.
hair Nicole Richie in a Zandra
kumar1
06-26 12:14 PM
You stole words from my mouth. Do not tell them that you have EAD.
The trick is to say that you have unrestricted work authorization, i.e., can work for any employer without needing additional sponsorship. Stating that you have an EAD may be confusing to some and they may just take the easy way out by not pursuing further, or, wilfully rejecting to avoid any kind of complications later on that could jeopardize the specific project by suddennly being unable to work.
The trick is to say that you have unrestricted work authorization, i.e., can work for any employer without needing additional sponsorship. Stating that you have an EAD may be confusing to some and they may just take the easy way out by not pursuing further, or, wilfully rejecting to avoid any kind of complications later on that could jeopardize the specific project by suddennly being unable to work.
more...
BharatPremi
03-26 01:55 PM
Nma check is history now. After filed I-485, and 180 days passed, name check is not a factor for GC. If your NC is pending, still they issue you a GC.
Are you not reading news papers???????????
It is on main web page of IV.. How come I can be ignorant even if I wanted to be?:)
Yes, it would "improve" Name Check with coparision to what we have observed so far. But it still have following loop holes and flaws.
Reference:
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/files/Mocanu_New_USCIS_NC_Procedures.pdf
Now I generally read and analyze. Do not just read.:)
(1)180 days period is from the "Date of FBI Name Check initiation. It is not
from 485 receipt date. Nobody knows when USCIS will initiate FBI Name
Check. So I see a big playground for USCIS to play if it decides to play.
What if uSCIS sends FBI name check initiation after 2 years of 485 receipt?
Do we have a way to know or keep an eye on USCIS about this? At least I
do not know and if somebody has the information please share it.
(2) "If 485 Otherwise is processable" then USCIS can go ahead without
waiting for NC check... What if USCIS decides to keep 100000 cases on
rack eating dust just by not moving the processing date for particular
service center? This you can see right now.. USCIS is making Texas slow
day by day not moving processing date. I remember Texas was ahead
with comparison to Nebraska around May to August 2007. If this happens your case is no more "processable".. Yes you can say that you are not stuck in NC queue but you will be stuck. USCIS may come up with altogether different startegy... To align processing times with FBI processing and FBI NC initiation. That may screw the things further.
Are you not reading news papers???????????
It is on main web page of IV.. How come I can be ignorant even if I wanted to be?:)
Yes, it would "improve" Name Check with coparision to what we have observed so far. But it still have following loop holes and flaws.
Reference:
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/files/Mocanu_New_USCIS_NC_Procedures.pdf
Now I generally read and analyze. Do not just read.:)
(1)180 days period is from the "Date of FBI Name Check initiation. It is not
from 485 receipt date. Nobody knows when USCIS will initiate FBI Name
Check. So I see a big playground for USCIS to play if it decides to play.
What if uSCIS sends FBI name check initiation after 2 years of 485 receipt?
Do we have a way to know or keep an eye on USCIS about this? At least I
do not know and if somebody has the information please share it.
(2) "If 485 Otherwise is processable" then USCIS can go ahead without
waiting for NC check... What if USCIS decides to keep 100000 cases on
rack eating dust just by not moving the processing date for particular
service center? This you can see right now.. USCIS is making Texas slow
day by day not moving processing date. I remember Texas was ahead
with comparison to Nebraska around May to August 2007. If this happens your case is no more "processable".. Yes you can say that you are not stuck in NC queue but you will be stuck. USCIS may come up with altogether different startegy... To align processing times with FBI processing and FBI NC initiation. That may screw the things further.
hot When Nicole Richie attended
pt326bc
10-01 04:25 PM
Hi,
Can someone explain the process of using AC21 for self employment? I have searched the web without much luck. If someone can throw some light on this topic along with how to deal with issues that come up with AC21 and self employment I would really appreciate it.
Thanks in advance
Check out www.shusterman.com and it has a section on AC 21 180 day portability. There you will find all the USCIS memos regarding this topic (starting from 2001 to 2003 and the 2 memos in 2005). The last memo from December 2005 addresses the issue and the way I understand it, it means you can have self employment while waiting for the final approval. But you still have to have an employer at the time of final approval of I 485 in the job category mentioned in LC and I 140.
Regards.
Can someone explain the process of using AC21 for self employment? I have searched the web without much luck. If someone can throw some light on this topic along with how to deal with issues that come up with AC21 and self employment I would really appreciate it.
Thanks in advance
Check out www.shusterman.com and it has a section on AC 21 180 day portability. There you will find all the USCIS memos regarding this topic (starting from 2001 to 2003 and the 2 memos in 2005). The last memo from December 2005 addresses the issue and the way I understand it, it means you can have self employment while waiting for the final approval. But you still have to have an employer at the time of final approval of I 485 in the job category mentioned in LC and I 140.
Regards.
more...
house Nicole Richie has been spotted
pappu
05-04 10:48 AM
on
http://www.aila.org/RecentPosting/RecentPostingList.aspx
is a comparison chart for skil bill. Is there any way we can get that. it will help us analyse this better.
(Chart comparing the SKIL Bill, introduced by Senator Cornyn (R-TX) on May 3, 2006, to other Senate bills, including the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006. Chart prepared by the American Council on International Personnel for the Compete America coalition, of which AILA is a member. AILA Doc. No. 06050461.)
http://www.aila.org/RecentPosting/RecentPostingList.aspx
is a comparison chart for skil bill. Is there any way we can get that. it will help us analyse this better.
(Chart comparing the SKIL Bill, introduced by Senator Cornyn (R-TX) on May 3, 2006, to other Senate bills, including the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006. Chart prepared by the American Council on International Personnel for the Compete America coalition, of which AILA is a member. AILA Doc. No. 06050461.)
tattoo The starlet teamed her dress
GC_Applicant
07-20 01:12 AM
Great job people.
This is the least that everyone benefitted from july VB should do.
Waiting to hear further instructions on how to send $100.
Thanks
This is the least that everyone benefitted from july VB should do.
Waiting to hear further instructions on how to send $100.
Thanks
more...
pictures Diane Kruger#39;s Yellow Dress
gk_2000
02-17 03:05 PM
Well, it goes beyond that. This is a "complicated story with no sub titles".
IV website is a board where people of all kinds visit and there is no control over stuff. Just go to any blog site - we see 100 rants and crazy comments as against a few wise talk.
I guess we have to live with it and keep pushing people. Sometimes loud and sometimes gently.
My friend, it is to "push the people" that I am saying all this. How best can we push? Through word of mouth, or thru full campaign?
Another idea: How about restructuring the forums?
In the home page, we promote only those discussions that are important to all, like advocacy.
In next tab, we take on the discussions that are based on individual problems
And all else, can go to the third tab
Also on home page, the following items (just some examples of general interest matter):
- Advocacy day. Donations received vs required.
- Big red button: Donate
- Some links to recent news items on immigration
Home page should have text content that introduces IV, its activities, and a small lecture on why skilled immigration is important
IV website is a board where people of all kinds visit and there is no control over stuff. Just go to any blog site - we see 100 rants and crazy comments as against a few wise talk.
I guess we have to live with it and keep pushing people. Sometimes loud and sometimes gently.
My friend, it is to "push the people" that I am saying all this. How best can we push? Through word of mouth, or thru full campaign?
Another idea: How about restructuring the forums?
In the home page, we promote only those discussions that are important to all, like advocacy.
In next tab, we take on the discussions that are based on individual problems
And all else, can go to the third tab
Also on home page, the following items (just some examples of general interest matter):
- Advocacy day. Donations received vs required.
- Big red button: Donate
- Some links to recent news items on immigration
Home page should have text content that introduces IV, its activities, and a small lecture on why skilled immigration is important
dresses Nicole Richie and Mischa
thomachan72
05-23 08:25 AM
You seem to be acting more in your interest than larger good of the members of this community. You have been quietly browsing all this time and suddenly became a member and starting whining and complaining of what IV is doing. You don't need to get hyperactive and start freaking out. Relax and do what IV is requesting you to do at this time. There are a lot of items & issues IV is working on and they have prioritized some of them as very important which affects the larger members of this group. These important ones are what they are concentrating for now. If you do not like what IV is doing, you are more then welcome to move on and do what pleases you. But please stop discouraging & instigating other members with your stupid comments.
I apologize if the post sounded discouraging / instigating to members. I do completely support IV team, particularly because it is a collective decision made by a dedicated group which certainly would be much more wise than what I think with my limited awareness on this whole issue. Yes indeed as somebody pointed out--if the backlog is removed completely there would not be a need for H1b 3 year renewal.
I apologize if the post sounded discouraging / instigating to members. I do completely support IV team, particularly because it is a collective decision made by a dedicated group which certainly would be much more wise than what I think with my limited awareness on this whole issue. Yes indeed as somebody pointed out--if the backlog is removed completely there would not be a need for H1b 3 year renewal.
more...
makeup and Nicole Richie all
dish
12-10 01:31 PM
I had read on the other forums about people receiving phone-calls from USCIS with enquiries about the employer, client, wages etc. They introduce themselves as USCIS personnel and take sensitive information from people. Could they be imposters from the Anti-Immi Side. I do urge caution not to give any Info on the phone. If USCIS wanted info from the H1B holder, they would have done it through regular mail.
girlfriend get Nicole Richie#39;s yellow
kondur_007
07-28 01:04 PM
Sorry to read blaming debates between eb3 and eb2. Insted of blaming, it is better to take some action. Based on current practice by DOS, EB3-I will be like this for ever, unless more number opens up by any legislative changes. As per law, each EB catagories are allowed to have 40K visas. As demand for EB2 is more, (paricularly by In,Ch) one can not expect any flow from EB2 to EB3 . This is law one can not change it.
Now I am coming to important point to take some action by EB3-I. The law says, 7% country quota will be applied in each prefrence catagory if worldwide demand for visas is more than supply in that catagory. But the law does not set any time frame. Therefore, the real threat for EB3-I is EB3-ROW. As per current practice, untill EB3-ROW become "current" EB3-I will get only 3000 visas per year. What happen if EB3-ROW never become "current" for next 50 years? EB3-I will be stuck in 2001 or 2002 for ever. To add my point, let us imagine a hypothetical case. Lets say in 2010 about 1 million ROW guys neend EB3 visa number. All has PD 2010. EB3-In will be stuck in 2001 till one million EB-ROW with PD 2010 recives GC. In nut shell, a EB3-ROW with latest PD will be given more preference than EB3-In with PD 2001. As current practice does not set any time limit, new flow of applications keeps retrogressed countries stuck for ever. This point has to be conveyed to DOS and USCIS to change the practice. Applications receviced in one fiscal year has to be cleared (grant GC) to process the application from next year. This way new applications from ROW will not stuck the retrogreesd countries for ever.
This is exactly I have been trying to communicate for a long time.
I said this in my previous posts:
Following is my post from May:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=18876
Then I said it again:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=19058&page=2
Then I said it again and again:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=261937#post261937
And I urge again, this is not the "fight between EB2 and EB3" but a reality that something needs to be done for EB3. Although I am not EB3 myself, I have many frieds stuck in EB3, and it is very unfair to them and their families to wait several years in line.
Now I am coming to important point to take some action by EB3-I. The law says, 7% country quota will be applied in each prefrence catagory if worldwide demand for visas is more than supply in that catagory. But the law does not set any time frame. Therefore, the real threat for EB3-I is EB3-ROW. As per current practice, untill EB3-ROW become "current" EB3-I will get only 3000 visas per year. What happen if EB3-ROW never become "current" for next 50 years? EB3-I will be stuck in 2001 or 2002 for ever. To add my point, let us imagine a hypothetical case. Lets say in 2010 about 1 million ROW guys neend EB3 visa number. All has PD 2010. EB3-In will be stuck in 2001 till one million EB-ROW with PD 2010 recives GC. In nut shell, a EB3-ROW with latest PD will be given more preference than EB3-In with PD 2001. As current practice does not set any time limit, new flow of applications keeps retrogressed countries stuck for ever. This point has to be conveyed to DOS and USCIS to change the practice. Applications receviced in one fiscal year has to be cleared (grant GC) to process the application from next year. This way new applications from ROW will not stuck the retrogreesd countries for ever.
This is exactly I have been trying to communicate for a long time.
I said this in my previous posts:
Following is my post from May:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=18876
Then I said it again:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=19058&page=2
Then I said it again and again:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=261937#post261937
And I urge again, this is not the "fight between EB2 and EB3" but a reality that something needs to be done for EB3. Although I am not EB3 myself, I have many frieds stuck in EB3, and it is very unfair to them and their families to wait several years in line.
hairstyles Nicole Richie in Kate Moss
pandu_hawaldar
02-01 10:12 AM
Good decision buddy. Everybody goes to India and likes it there, but only few can decide to go back for good. Hopefully everything turns out to be smoother for you.
tonyHK12
11-19 04:22 PM
Question to IV core...
After receiving the standard email respose from the congressman/senator...I am wondering are they even aware about the legal immigrants. All we are getting the standard template which is talking about only illegals and DREAM.
No mention about legals ?
Yes generally these replies come in from one of their workers, maybe even a trainee.
Thats why IV wants everyone to call back the Senator/US Reps office mentioning the email response, and ask why our problems were not addressed (legal immigrants) and that you need more clarifications. Typically they have a person handling immigration issues.
mentioning only the two we are campaigning for right now:
1. Employment based Visa recapture
2. Protecting children of legal immigrants from aging out regime
this is even more important than just sending an email
Better yet if you can meet if not call in the next 7-10 days.
After receiving the standard email respose from the congressman/senator...I am wondering are they even aware about the legal immigrants. All we are getting the standard template which is talking about only illegals and DREAM.
No mention about legals ?
Yes generally these replies come in from one of their workers, maybe even a trainee.
Thats why IV wants everyone to call back the Senator/US Reps office mentioning the email response, and ask why our problems were not addressed (legal immigrants) and that you need more clarifications. Typically they have a person handling immigration issues.
mentioning only the two we are campaigning for right now:
1. Employment based Visa recapture
2. Protecting children of legal immigrants from aging out regime
this is even more important than just sending an email
Better yet if you can meet if not call in the next 7-10 days.
techskill
08-18 01:08 PM
I think IV core shud take the matter with USCIS or the concerned people.
No comments:
Post a Comment