vallabhu
10-29 12:23 PM
I like the idea I dont know if this is already discussed but one thought I would like to share
Because it is for sure that Congress will not Agree to give away GC with out wait time so we should show them some thing more attractive than just initial short term plan of investing on a home and getitng a GC what if some buys a home gets a GC and then sell it off for a 10-15 grand less prise I am ok to loose 15 Grand if I can get to apply 485 overnight.
We make it attractive and more meaning full for economy and to congreess by saying we will buy a home make payments for 3 to 5 years without delinquency to apply for 485.
Just a thought.
Because it is for sure that Congress will not Agree to give away GC with out wait time so we should show them some thing more attractive than just initial short term plan of investing on a home and getitng a GC what if some buys a home gets a GC and then sell it off for a 10-15 grand less prise I am ok to loose 15 Grand if I can get to apply 485 overnight.
We make it attractive and more meaning full for economy and to congreess by saying we will buy a home make payments for 3 to 5 years without delinquency to apply for 485.
Just a thought.
wallpaper #118 I am a Westie, 8 year old
chanduv23
06-28 01:29 PM
I heard that Fedex is going on strike in Nebraska in the month of July and will end their strike when retro kicks in?
Did anyone else hear this?? Can anyone post a valid link to this other than
OH OH OH OH Mathew site link????
:D :D :D :D :D
Did anyone else hear this?? Can anyone post a valid link to this other than
OH OH OH OH Mathew site link????
:D :D :D :D :D
unseenguy
08-16 09:15 PM
In 2000 December, I was travelling to Sydney from Mumbai Airport. I was held and later interviewed separately by a Tamil Speaking officer. Just because my name resembled like Srilankan Tamil. They wanted to ensure that I am not LTTE/or refugee travelling to Australia. Well, I was not offended. I just thought if these idiots have been careful before then would have avoided assasination of Rajiv Gandhi.
Sure. If its done in a respectable manner its fine with some humor and jokes added and officer can do his part to diffuse the frustration. But CBP officers in US are rude and its well known fact.
Indian customs officers are also no angels, Usually there is no profiling in India. I never ever faced a single question or treatment that was different than others. Nor did I see anyone being singled out.
When you frisk abdul kalam when you know he is ex president. When you frisk george fernandes when he has diplomatic passport , when you detain SRK when others are vouching for it, when you handcuff Gates. Its profiling. Once in a while incident that is done in respectable humorous way can be forgotten, not the rude ones. I am sure officer was damn rude to piss off srk.
Sure. If its done in a respectable manner its fine with some humor and jokes added and officer can do his part to diffuse the frustration. But CBP officers in US are rude and its well known fact.
Indian customs officers are also no angels, Usually there is no profiling in India. I never ever faced a single question or treatment that was different than others. Nor did I see anyone being singled out.
When you frisk abdul kalam when you know he is ex president. When you frisk george fernandes when he has diplomatic passport , when you detain SRK when others are vouching for it, when you handcuff Gates. Its profiling. Once in a while incident that is done in respectable humorous way can be forgotten, not the rude ones. I am sure officer was damn rude to piss off srk.
2011 WESTIE DOG STATUE (LS530)
BharatPremi
12-13 04:50 PM
It will be a waste of money. The US does not have to allow any immigration if it chooses so. Do you realize that getting a GC is not a right, but a privelege? It's a matter of grace and no court has jurisdiction to review if government says "no".
Good point. But point what we are discussing is whether the rules (per country based) made to process GC can be challenged in US Courts within its constitutional limits? If tomorrow US decides to shut down EB/FB we do not have problem. Certainly it has that right. But when US wishes to have those immigrants than do we (applicants - non -immigrants) have a right to challenge particular rule (here per country based limit) in Court?
Good point. But point what we are discussing is whether the rules (per country based) made to process GC can be challenged in US Courts within its constitutional limits? If tomorrow US decides to shut down EB/FB we do not have problem. Certainly it has that right. But when US wishes to have those immigrants than do we (applicants - non -immigrants) have a right to challenge particular rule (here per country based limit) in Court?
more...
Macaca
07-04 08:23 AM
U.S. Withdraws Offer of 60,000 Job-Based Visas, Angering Immigration Lawyers By JULIA PRESTON (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html) New York Times, July 4, 2007
Immigration lawyers raised unusually irate protests yesterday after the State Department and the immigration service abruptly withdrew tens of thousands of job-based visas they had offered last month to foreign professionals hoping to become permanent residents in the United States.
The outcry was provoked by a terse announcement on Monday in which the State Department said it would not grant any more visas for the 2007 fiscal year to foreigners applying to become permanent residents based on their job skills. That notice reversed one the department had issued on June 13 announcing a two-month window starting July 2 for aspiring, high-skilled immigrants from around the world to present applications for visas known as green cards.
The State Department said the 60,000 visas it had expected to offer would no longer be available because of “sudden backlog reduction efforts” by Citizenship and Immigration Services, the federal agency that processes applications for the visas offered by the department.
In a statement yesterday, the American Immigration Lawyers Association accused the two agencies of perpetrating a “hoax” and a “bait and switch” against hopeful legal immigrants who played by the book.
“Here people followed the rules and did everything right, yet without warning or explanation the door was slammed in their faces,” said Kathleen Campbell Walker, the president of the association.
To apply, immigrants must undergo medical examinations and assemble documents to prove their job skills and show that a United States employer has sponsored them. Foreigners must be in the United States when they present their applications, which are processed on a first-come, first-served basis.
Because of backlogs for employment-based visas, foreigners have had to wait many years just to be allowed to file their applications.
Thousands of medical and technology professionals, including many working here on temporary visas, scrambled for weeks to get their documents together, in some cases canceling travel plans, in order to file their applications on Monday, the first day of the window. The State Department and the immigration agency closed the window without accepting a single application.
“I am concerned that such action may violate the law and could threaten the integrity of our immigration system,” Representative Zoe Lofgren, Democrat of California who is chairwoman of the House Judiciary subcommittee on immigration, wrote in letters yesterday to Michael Chertoff, the secretary of homeland security, and Condoleezza Rice, the secretary of state. Ms. Lofgren warned that the federal government could face costly litigation because of its change of course.
The State Department said it would begin accepting applications on Oct. 1 for 2008 visas. On July 30, the immigration agency will raise its processing fees by an average of 66 percent.
Immigration lawyers raised unusually irate protests yesterday after the State Department and the immigration service abruptly withdrew tens of thousands of job-based visas they had offered last month to foreign professionals hoping to become permanent residents in the United States.
The outcry was provoked by a terse announcement on Monday in which the State Department said it would not grant any more visas for the 2007 fiscal year to foreigners applying to become permanent residents based on their job skills. That notice reversed one the department had issued on June 13 announcing a two-month window starting July 2 for aspiring, high-skilled immigrants from around the world to present applications for visas known as green cards.
The State Department said the 60,000 visas it had expected to offer would no longer be available because of “sudden backlog reduction efforts” by Citizenship and Immigration Services, the federal agency that processes applications for the visas offered by the department.
In a statement yesterday, the American Immigration Lawyers Association accused the two agencies of perpetrating a “hoax” and a “bait and switch” against hopeful legal immigrants who played by the book.
“Here people followed the rules and did everything right, yet without warning or explanation the door was slammed in their faces,” said Kathleen Campbell Walker, the president of the association.
To apply, immigrants must undergo medical examinations and assemble documents to prove their job skills and show that a United States employer has sponsored them. Foreigners must be in the United States when they present their applications, which are processed on a first-come, first-served basis.
Because of backlogs for employment-based visas, foreigners have had to wait many years just to be allowed to file their applications.
Thousands of medical and technology professionals, including many working here on temporary visas, scrambled for weeks to get their documents together, in some cases canceling travel plans, in order to file their applications on Monday, the first day of the window. The State Department and the immigration agency closed the window without accepting a single application.
“I am concerned that such action may violate the law and could threaten the integrity of our immigration system,” Representative Zoe Lofgren, Democrat of California who is chairwoman of the House Judiciary subcommittee on immigration, wrote in letters yesterday to Michael Chertoff, the secretary of homeland security, and Condoleezza Rice, the secretary of state. Ms. Lofgren warned that the federal government could face costly litigation because of its change of course.
The State Department said it would begin accepting applications on Oct. 1 for 2008 visas. On July 30, the immigration agency will raise its processing fees by an average of 66 percent.
va_il
07-12 09:39 PM
I wonder how you guys feel with the latest developments ... you changed your plans or your sourness to US has subsided?
BTW we used to read a story in our childhood .. Grapes that are not reachable to you are always sour ... the moment you can reach them they suddenly become delicious :)
BTW we used to read a story in our childhood .. Grapes that are not reachable to you are always sour ... the moment you can reach them they suddenly become delicious :)
more...
mbartosik
12-13 11:48 PM
Mark,
what say you?
In some states the courts are "Courts of equity and law" or is it "Courts of law and equity", in other words the court has a mandate to enforce fairness within the bounds of the law (NY State is one such state). This derives from English law. However, I do not believe that is the case for federal court.
If the courts were courts only of fairness, equity, what's right, etc., yes, indeed then I think that we would win. But the courts are courts of law. In our case the federal courts are courts of federal law. Congress writes those laws, and the courts are free to interpret those law but not change them. The courts can also throw out a law (this is often appealed to Supreme court). The Supreme court's job is to interpret the constitution, and to define how the lower courts must interpret the law, or to throw back the law to Congress.
We have next to no chance in lower courts.
Even if we appealed through courts up to Supreme court, and win we would loss because Congress would still be free to change the law to restrict in other ways, possibly with the same effect. In the mean time we would alienate those law makers on our side. Also USCIS would be free to stop ALL EB immigration, while the Congress decided how to rewrite the law.
In our case there is no interpretation other than the mess that we are in is the law. So the Supreme court would have to find that the law was against the constitution, which I highly doubt that it is.
Even if the supreme court found that the law was against the constitution, Congress could enact another similar law (akin to minimum sentence), that merely fitted within the framework of the constitution but achieved the same end result. A recent example of this was when the Supreme court found that Gitmo detainees must be given a right to review of their detention. The detainees were not immediately released because they were detained without review and against the constitution, no, Congress simply passed a law allowing review by military tribunal, that complied with the Constitution, and the detainees remained detained, with a totally meaningless review (not allowed to see evidence against them etc.).
Thus the branch of government that we need to convince is Congress (which by the way I think the Constitution or an amendment gives the right to government immigration).
I'm not saying do not fight, just fight smart.
To me fighting smart means going to the law makers, politely, and persuasively. It is not aggressive, it is not radical, but it is fighting wisely. So I don't think that we are backing down in the face of things that are wrong, I think that we are standing up, but intelligently, and fighting where we can win.
It is Congress that ultimately decides, the Supreme court can only say to them, "sorry, not in compliance, try again".
what say you?
In some states the courts are "Courts of equity and law" or is it "Courts of law and equity", in other words the court has a mandate to enforce fairness within the bounds of the law (NY State is one such state). This derives from English law. However, I do not believe that is the case for federal court.
If the courts were courts only of fairness, equity, what's right, etc., yes, indeed then I think that we would win. But the courts are courts of law. In our case the federal courts are courts of federal law. Congress writes those laws, and the courts are free to interpret those law but not change them. The courts can also throw out a law (this is often appealed to Supreme court). The Supreme court's job is to interpret the constitution, and to define how the lower courts must interpret the law, or to throw back the law to Congress.
We have next to no chance in lower courts.
Even if we appealed through courts up to Supreme court, and win we would loss because Congress would still be free to change the law to restrict in other ways, possibly with the same effect. In the mean time we would alienate those law makers on our side. Also USCIS would be free to stop ALL EB immigration, while the Congress decided how to rewrite the law.
In our case there is no interpretation other than the mess that we are in is the law. So the Supreme court would have to find that the law was against the constitution, which I highly doubt that it is.
Even if the supreme court found that the law was against the constitution, Congress could enact another similar law (akin to minimum sentence), that merely fitted within the framework of the constitution but achieved the same end result. A recent example of this was when the Supreme court found that Gitmo detainees must be given a right to review of their detention. The detainees were not immediately released because they were detained without review and against the constitution, no, Congress simply passed a law allowing review by military tribunal, that complied with the Constitution, and the detainees remained detained, with a totally meaningless review (not allowed to see evidence against them etc.).
Thus the branch of government that we need to convince is Congress (which by the way I think the Constitution or an amendment gives the right to government immigration).
I'm not saying do not fight, just fight smart.
To me fighting smart means going to the law makers, politely, and persuasively. It is not aggressive, it is not radical, but it is fighting wisely. So I don't think that we are backing down in the face of things that are wrong, I think that we are standing up, but intelligently, and fighting where we can win.
It is Congress that ultimately decides, the Supreme court can only say to them, "sorry, not in compliance, try again".
2010 You get 2 quot;Westie Dogquot; Dollar
tikka
07-03 06:30 PM
85 and counting...
http://digg.com/politics/Rep_Lofgren_Issues_Statement_on_Updated_Visa_Bulle tin/who
and counting...
http://digg.com/politics/Rep_Lofgren_Issues_Statement_on_Updated_Visa_Bulle tin/who
and counting...
more...
django.stone
07-24 09:16 PM
If this is indeed true, isn't it unfair to issue visas to Feb 2006 dates at a Consulate while people with 2005 dates are waiting for AOS. Can this be challenged in court?
hair Strawberry River Westies
001.jpg "Westies")
_TrueFacts
09-04 06:10 PM
Since you dont have your GC details filled in your profile, I would assume your interest in this website is not related to immigration.
...
If what I think you are is what you are, then its people like you who are responsible for the rise of these kind of politicians.
gimme_GC2006,
My interest leads me into this forum and my immigration is directly related to my country India.
Do you agree that YSR was a gunda, a land grabber, political killer who amassed huge amounts of illegal wealth and land, never ever seen in the history of AP? You claim that you are not a supporter of any one. If that is the case then give due credit where required and criticize and condemn when it’s appropriate.
If not give me reasons to say why he is not so. I never said in my posts that I am for TDP. This has become very famous excuse to put up saying that the other person/party is also involved in corruption.
I am for corruption free India where politicians do not get involved in radical politics.
I am providing you with numerous links to prove my point.
...
If what I think you are is what you are, then its people like you who are responsible for the rise of these kind of politicians.
gimme_GC2006,
My interest leads me into this forum and my immigration is directly related to my country India.
Do you agree that YSR was a gunda, a land grabber, political killer who amassed huge amounts of illegal wealth and land, never ever seen in the history of AP? You claim that you are not a supporter of any one. If that is the case then give due credit where required and criticize and condemn when it’s appropriate.
If not give me reasons to say why he is not so. I never said in my posts that I am for TDP. This has become very famous excuse to put up saying that the other person/party is also involved in corruption.
I am for corruption free India where politicians do not get involved in radical politics.
I am providing you with numerous links to prove my point.
more...
eb3_nepa
05-10 05:27 PM
Thanks for the clarification. Actually what i meant was, we did highlight to the lawmakers at some point that the points based system is better. I know it was never IV's policy to ask for a points based system.
And yes if the system worked fine, the US is definitely better than aus and canada combined. Money and everything wise. I guess someone on here correctly pointed out that it is the sheer volume of immigrants combined with the fact that there is no real incentive to speed things up. The employer is happy coz there is no need to raise wages and new h1's can always be hired, the immigration attorneys are happy coz they make money due to slowness, the American techie population is happy coz there is no mass influx of tech workers to "drive the wages lower", Anti-immigrant organizations are happy coz once again no mass influx which may lead to "chain migration", the Apartment industry is happy coz if u cant buy u HAVE to rent, and lastly UCSIS/DOL people are happy coz they get more time to review each case. If there is no point to granting you the GC faster why will they? You will pay the same amt of tax b4 and after ur GC. Now in the Canadian system, there is a Fixed Path AND it is QUICK. Both have to go hand in hand. Like one of my friends pointed out, in the US ur spouse cannot work and ur uncertain. In the UK/AUS/Canada, you make less money but we are more secure coz you can both work and we can buy a house etc. Once again this sounds like a broken record, but it is true.
And yes if the system worked fine, the US is definitely better than aus and canada combined. Money and everything wise. I guess someone on here correctly pointed out that it is the sheer volume of immigrants combined with the fact that there is no real incentive to speed things up. The employer is happy coz there is no need to raise wages and new h1's can always be hired, the immigration attorneys are happy coz they make money due to slowness, the American techie population is happy coz there is no mass influx of tech workers to "drive the wages lower", Anti-immigrant organizations are happy coz once again no mass influx which may lead to "chain migration", the Apartment industry is happy coz if u cant buy u HAVE to rent, and lastly UCSIS/DOL people are happy coz they get more time to review each case. If there is no point to granting you the GC faster why will they? You will pay the same amt of tax b4 and after ur GC. Now in the Canadian system, there is a Fixed Path AND it is QUICK. Both have to go hand in hand. Like one of my friends pointed out, in the US ur spouse cannot work and ur uncertain. In the UK/AUS/Canada, you make less money but we are more secure coz you can both work and we can buy a house etc. Once again this sounds like a broken record, but it is true.
hot The Dawg Haus, Pearl#39;s Westies
webm
02-12 12:51 PM
Looks fresh and some positive movement for India EB3 ROW..this time atleast...:)
Go India EB3 Go...
Thanks to IV...
---------
PD:Oct'01
Go India EB3 Go...
Thanks to IV...
---------
PD:Oct'01
more...
house Robert Pattinson is a westie
_TrueFacts
09-04 11:13 AM
Mr. CHANDV23.....You should have been aware that when you are logged in with your alias(aka _TrueFacts) it turns "Green dot" beside your ID. Your other ID "CHANDUV23" turns blue if you do not use it...
Still making me laugh the hell lot trying to prove your point by hiding behind your real Identity. Why not accept that you are indeed "CHANDUV23" Hahaha...
I guess this is what is called "Wolf in Sheep clothes"
breddy2000,
This is a online public forum..it does not matter if CHANDUV23 and _TrueFacts are same or not.
Do you have any point against YSR who was "corrupt, factionist gunda, land grabber who has killed numerous people” never ever seen in the history of AP.
Still making me laugh the hell lot trying to prove your point by hiding behind your real Identity. Why not accept that you are indeed "CHANDUV23" Hahaha...
I guess this is what is called "Wolf in Sheep clothes"
breddy2000,
This is a online public forum..it does not matter if CHANDUV23 and _TrueFacts are same or not.
Do you have any point against YSR who was "corrupt, factionist gunda, land grabber who has killed numerous people” never ever seen in the history of AP.
tattoo bei den Westies quot;of White
kondur_007
07-23 03:15 PM
Thanks !! I had a quick question ..the rules for the spillover, is that a law or does that depend on USCIS or DOS ?
In other words can they change the rules for spillover once again ..say next year ?
Hmmm...that's the question everyone is asking and I tried to read the actual law on this. I am not a lawyer, but what I can interpret is this: The law does not say anything about the "primary handle". In other words, if there is a spill over, should it be confined to the categories or to the countries... (which is a 'stronger' limit: per country or the category?) and this issue is not addressed specifically and that's why DOS has decided to interprete it differently now....
So in short, you are right: it is purely an interpretation from someone in DOS and it may change
I still feel there is small hope for EB3-ww and maybe even EB3-I ...majority of the EB2 cases were filed during july fiasco ..what if they have not been processed yet ? i.e. they will keep moving the dates fwd till it becomes current (if that still does not use up the visas) ..then they would move EB3-ww dates fwd ..once again this is wishing and dreaming :)
That is actually a wishful thinking, and eventhough a long shot, it is possible with USCIS (anything is possible with them:p)
But remember, if they use up this year's numbers by sept, they will retrogress everything again till the end of next fiscal year and that buys them another year to process those applications (without the worry of dealing with any new 485s due to retrogression)
They will think several hundred times before making EB2 current, because that will mean a new round of applications (everyone with PDs in 2006 have filed their 485 already any way, and so current advancing of the dates was a calculated move not to allow any new filing).
But as I said above, anything is possible with USCIS:p
Good Luck to all of us...
In other words can they change the rules for spillover once again ..say next year ?
Hmmm...that's the question everyone is asking and I tried to read the actual law on this. I am not a lawyer, but what I can interpret is this: The law does not say anything about the "primary handle". In other words, if there is a spill over, should it be confined to the categories or to the countries... (which is a 'stronger' limit: per country or the category?) and this issue is not addressed specifically and that's why DOS has decided to interprete it differently now....
So in short, you are right: it is purely an interpretation from someone in DOS and it may change
I still feel there is small hope for EB3-ww and maybe even EB3-I ...majority of the EB2 cases were filed during july fiasco ..what if they have not been processed yet ? i.e. they will keep moving the dates fwd till it becomes current (if that still does not use up the visas) ..then they would move EB3-ww dates fwd ..once again this is wishing and dreaming :)
That is actually a wishful thinking, and eventhough a long shot, it is possible with USCIS (anything is possible with them:p)
But remember, if they use up this year's numbers by sept, they will retrogress everything again till the end of next fiscal year and that buys them another year to process those applications (without the worry of dealing with any new 485s due to retrogression)
They will think several hundred times before making EB2 current, because that will mean a new round of applications (everyone with PDs in 2006 have filed their 485 already any way, and so current advancing of the dates was a calculated move not to allow any new filing).
But as I said above, anything is possible with USCIS:p
Good Luck to all of us...
more...
pictures RC95617 Westie
Macaca
07-04 08:23 AM
U.S. Withdraws Offer of 60,000 Job-Based Visas, Angering Immigration Lawyers By JULIA PRESTON (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html) New York Times, July 4, 2007
Immigration lawyers raised unusually irate protests yesterday after the State Department and the immigration service abruptly withdrew tens of thousands of job-based visas they had offered last month to foreign professionals hoping to become permanent residents in the United States.
The outcry was provoked by a terse announcement on Monday in which the State Department said it would not grant any more visas for the 2007 fiscal year to foreigners applying to become permanent residents based on their job skills. That notice reversed one the department had issued on June 13 announcing a two-month window starting July 2 for aspiring, high-skilled immigrants from around the world to present applications for visas known as green cards.
The State Department said the 60,000 visas it had expected to offer would no longer be available because of “sudden backlog reduction efforts” by Citizenship and Immigration Services, the federal agency that processes applications for the visas offered by the department.
In a statement yesterday, the American Immigration Lawyers Association accused the two agencies of perpetrating a “hoax” and a “bait and switch” against hopeful legal immigrants who played by the book.
“Here people followed the rules and did everything right, yet without warning or explanation the door was slammed in their faces,” said Kathleen Campbell Walker, the president of the association.
To apply, immigrants must undergo medical examinations and assemble documents to prove their job skills and show that a United States employer has sponsored them. Foreigners must be in the United States when they present their applications, which are processed on a first-come, first-served basis.
Because of backlogs for employment-based visas, foreigners have had to wait many years just to be allowed to file their applications.
Thousands of medical and technology professionals, including many working here on temporary visas, scrambled for weeks to get their documents together, in some cases canceling travel plans, in order to file their applications on Monday, the first day of the window. The State Department and the immigration agency closed the window without accepting a single application.
“I am concerned that such action may violate the law and could threaten the integrity of our immigration system,” Representative Zoe Lofgren, Democrat of California who is chairwoman of the House Judiciary subcommittee on immigration, wrote in letters yesterday to Michael Chertoff, the secretary of homeland security, and Condoleezza Rice, the secretary of state. Ms. Lofgren warned that the federal government could face costly litigation because of its change of course.
The State Department said it would begin accepting applications on Oct. 1 for 2008 visas. On July 30, the immigration agency will raise its processing fees by an average of 66 percent.
Immigration lawyers raised unusually irate protests yesterday after the State Department and the immigration service abruptly withdrew tens of thousands of job-based visas they had offered last month to foreign professionals hoping to become permanent residents in the United States.
The outcry was provoked by a terse announcement on Monday in which the State Department said it would not grant any more visas for the 2007 fiscal year to foreigners applying to become permanent residents based on their job skills. That notice reversed one the department had issued on June 13 announcing a two-month window starting July 2 for aspiring, high-skilled immigrants from around the world to present applications for visas known as green cards.
The State Department said the 60,000 visas it had expected to offer would no longer be available because of “sudden backlog reduction efforts” by Citizenship and Immigration Services, the federal agency that processes applications for the visas offered by the department.
In a statement yesterday, the American Immigration Lawyers Association accused the two agencies of perpetrating a “hoax” and a “bait and switch” against hopeful legal immigrants who played by the book.
“Here people followed the rules and did everything right, yet without warning or explanation the door was slammed in their faces,” said Kathleen Campbell Walker, the president of the association.
To apply, immigrants must undergo medical examinations and assemble documents to prove their job skills and show that a United States employer has sponsored them. Foreigners must be in the United States when they present their applications, which are processed on a first-come, first-served basis.
Because of backlogs for employment-based visas, foreigners have had to wait many years just to be allowed to file their applications.
Thousands of medical and technology professionals, including many working here on temporary visas, scrambled for weeks to get their documents together, in some cases canceling travel plans, in order to file their applications on Monday, the first day of the window. The State Department and the immigration agency closed the window without accepting a single application.
“I am concerned that such action may violate the law and could threaten the integrity of our immigration system,” Representative Zoe Lofgren, Democrat of California who is chairwoman of the House Judiciary subcommittee on immigration, wrote in letters yesterday to Michael Chertoff, the secretary of homeland security, and Condoleezza Rice, the secretary of state. Ms. Lofgren warned that the federal government could face costly litigation because of its change of course.
The State Department said it would begin accepting applications on Oct. 1 for 2008 visas. On July 30, the immigration agency will raise its processing fees by an average of 66 percent.
dresses if someone offered one to me.
reachinus
07-31 01:09 PM
Think you are too busy to answer my question. Anyway thanks for your time and reply atleat for 1 time.
Hello Atty, Hope you can reply to my question as well. Please let me know if I should contact the CBP and tell them about this or just ignore.
Thanks for your time in advance.
Hello Atty, Hope you can reply to my question as well. Please let me know if I should contact the CBP and tell them about this or just ignore.
Thanks for your time in advance.
more...
makeup Westies in Toto Black,
sroyc
09-24 02:06 PM
Read any visa bulletin. It's in there.
SROYC,
Can you give me USCIS or any other authentic Doc/link which states ICMP share is 7% of 28.6% ? In years I have not found such doc. Therefore, assuming USCIS works fairly :D I had to divide 28.6% by 5 - equal share for each country within particular category.
Yes, there are many other factors we will have to factor in like incoming flow of applications, swith over count, spillover at the end of the year.
SROYC,
Can you give me USCIS or any other authentic Doc/link which states ICMP share is 7% of 28.6% ? In years I have not found such doc. Therefore, assuming USCIS works fairly :D I had to divide 28.6% by 5 - equal share for each country within particular category.
Yes, there are many other factors we will have to factor in like incoming flow of applications, swith over count, spillover at the end of the year.
girlfriend Photo : Westie Cairn dogs
chanduv23
03-16 01:07 PM
Verify with another lawyer also, basically your experience starts only after you graduate (after getting your degree and not after finishing college ie say you completed ur degree in may 2000 and recieved your degree in Dec 2000, your experience prior to Dec 2000 may not count)
Do verify this with a good lawyer.
Do verify this with a good lawyer.
hairstyles Mon westie tant attendu .
smuggymba
01-14 08:55 AM
I think the other intersting point is - Does the employer provide any benefits to the beneficiary/employee?
Almost no desi dalla provides medical insurance to its employees...it will be interesting how USCIS handles this and whether they will make it a point or not?
Almost no desi dalla provides medical insurance to its employees...it will be interesting how USCIS handles this and whether they will make it a point or not?
m306m
02-14 01:48 PM
lazycis/hopefulgc I am willing to send $10 as a token of support for your initiative. I am impressed by your confidence and conviction. Let us form a new group and we will definitely get moral support from all good IV members. Personally I dont want to be plaintiff as I have too much to loose. But I support your group. Waiting for your direction.
I am willing to contribute $10 to get solid legal advice on this and I am willing to contribute a lot more in a lawsuit IF and ONLY IF there is a strong legal basis for it. I have voted NO on the poll, I would prefer we take a more conciliatory approach to USCIS. As the saying goes "You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar." Having said that, if IV were to go ahead with the lawsuit, I could be counted on to contribute financially.
I appreciate IV for its efforts. Happy V'Day.
I am willing to contribute $10 to get solid legal advice on this and I am willing to contribute a lot more in a lawsuit IF and ONLY IF there is a strong legal basis for it. I have voted NO on the poll, I would prefer we take a more conciliatory approach to USCIS. As the saying goes "You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar." Having said that, if IV were to go ahead with the lawsuit, I could be counted on to contribute financially.
I appreciate IV for its efforts. Happy V'Day.
BharatPremi
07-13 11:14 AM
Home appreciation in Canada is strong and sustainable. The recent anomoly of soaring prices in the US, all experts agree, was driven by loose lending policies, and the sorts of bad loans that are simply not permitted in Canada. As a result, they are now not experiencing the same depreciation that is being felt in many US cities.
Housing prices in Canada do of course vary tremendously. And go through cycles. Vancouver is very expensive. Toronto is close on its heels. But to suggest homes don't increase value in Canada is perhaps the dumbest of the many dumb things you've said here.
I mean here we are in the middle of what all economists argue is a gloomy US housing market and you try and come up with nonsensical criticisms of the Canadian housing market.
Where do you get these utterly baseless comments? Use facts when you make an argument. They are more helpful to readers than rants without substance.
Disseminate real information. Information that you can bring to light that may actually enlighten me and many others.
Ranting? Well that's rather less helpful.
That was a symbolic example. I meant to say that in Canada Housing is just meant housing not the investment. Here in capitalist market housing is never been a housing alone , prime motto to have housing is investment. If we might be debating this 3 years back on this forum ( In booming Real Estate market, yep, US GC Process was sucker then too :) ) you would not have anything against US real estate market to argue about. And that's the point. Housing market here too has cycles and if you wait out patiently you would have appreciation in a scale that normal Canadian may have to dream about.
And that is the point. If lending industry seems to be loosely controlled to you in the USA then yes there are ways to deal with it. You have to learn them. In Canada, in your terms, so called "Good loans" has kept Canadian economy "Welfare economy" only. To progress dynamically any country should have economy to be able to have kicks in, and USA market has that capacity. Today you are ranting about bad housing in USA... agreed, but seeing your signature, it seems that you never want to leave USA and with your claim "to love USA", I believe you will still be around here for years debating with me.. (wait, let me go grab a cup of cofee.:) .. I also need "Dynamic Kick" to debate with you) , I will be able to show you how much appreciation average american can have on average home. Did not you hear NPR yesterday? Housing market is coming back. Now housing is always the prime factor in any economy and so I choose that example. More or less it is true for every industry except oil in Canada. And mind that this forum is not to prove where the housing is better and so I do not want to go into minute statistical detail but most people in Canada and USA except yourself would agree with me.
Housing prices in Canada do of course vary tremendously. And go through cycles. Vancouver is very expensive. Toronto is close on its heels. But to suggest homes don't increase value in Canada is perhaps the dumbest of the many dumb things you've said here.
I mean here we are in the middle of what all economists argue is a gloomy US housing market and you try and come up with nonsensical criticisms of the Canadian housing market.
Where do you get these utterly baseless comments? Use facts when you make an argument. They are more helpful to readers than rants without substance.
Disseminate real information. Information that you can bring to light that may actually enlighten me and many others.
Ranting? Well that's rather less helpful.
That was a symbolic example. I meant to say that in Canada Housing is just meant housing not the investment. Here in capitalist market housing is never been a housing alone , prime motto to have housing is investment. If we might be debating this 3 years back on this forum ( In booming Real Estate market, yep, US GC Process was sucker then too :) ) you would not have anything against US real estate market to argue about. And that's the point. Housing market here too has cycles and if you wait out patiently you would have appreciation in a scale that normal Canadian may have to dream about.
And that is the point. If lending industry seems to be loosely controlled to you in the USA then yes there are ways to deal with it. You have to learn them. In Canada, in your terms, so called "Good loans" has kept Canadian economy "Welfare economy" only. To progress dynamically any country should have economy to be able to have kicks in, and USA market has that capacity. Today you are ranting about bad housing in USA... agreed, but seeing your signature, it seems that you never want to leave USA and with your claim "to love USA", I believe you will still be around here for years debating with me.. (wait, let me go grab a cup of cofee.:) .. I also need "Dynamic Kick" to debate with you) , I will be able to show you how much appreciation average american can have on average home. Did not you hear NPR yesterday? Housing market is coming back. Now housing is always the prime factor in any economy and so I choose that example. More or less it is true for every industry except oil in Canada. And mind that this forum is not to prove where the housing is better and so I do not want to go into minute statistical detail but most people in Canada and USA except yourself would agree with me.
No comments:
Post a Comment