prioritydate
08-26 12:53 AM
:D
I received my Physical Green Card today.
CPO : 08/19/2008 (I received mail on 08/20/2008)
Approval Notice Date : 08/22/2008
LUD : 08/25/2008
Card Received Date : 08/25/2008
Heeee..... they approved my EAD card yesterday! :eek:
I received my Physical Green Card today.
CPO : 08/19/2008 (I received mail on 08/20/2008)
Approval Notice Date : 08/22/2008
LUD : 08/25/2008
Card Received Date : 08/25/2008
Heeee..... they approved my EAD card yesterday! :eek:
wallpaper infant heat rash pictures. to
SivaMayam
08-14 09:02 AM
Dear Friends,
I would greatly appreiciate if you all would be kind enough to include the service center which issued the receipts along the filing date in your postings.
Thanks
~S
I would greatly appreiciate if you all would be kind enough to include the service center which issued the receipts along the filing date in your postings.
Thanks
~S
trueguy
07-28 12:47 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.
You already see that happening. EB2-ROW with PD as early as Jan 2008 are getting approved. So they get their GC in less than 8 months (including all the stages).
EB3-ROW will never be current and hence no spillover to EB3-I. EB3-I is screwed up royally. EB3-I will get 3000 visas per year and that will not help move PD by one month even.
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.
You already see that happening. EB2-ROW with PD as early as Jan 2008 are getting approved. So they get their GC in less than 8 months (including all the stages).
EB3-ROW will never be current and hence no spillover to EB3-I. EB3-I is screwed up royally. EB3-I will get 3000 visas per year and that will not help move PD by one month even.
2011 When Your Child Has Heat Rash
danu2007
07-20 11:34 AM
pledging $100
more...
Googler
07-07 09:14 PM
she said "But we're prepared to talk to people about what happened here."
hope that means they are willing to talk about giving EAD. If we get EAD all the lawsuits will be withdrawn. The law does not say AOS applications should not be accepted when there are no visa numbers available, the law only says AOS cannot be approved when visa numbers are not available. USCIS internal regulations says they will not accept AOS applications when priority date is not current. by now its quite apparent that USCIS has broken a lot of there own internal regulations just to make sure the visa numbers are used up before july 2 2007. Then can easily accomodate the EAD for july filers. It all depends upon the pressure exerted on USCIS and DOS
Pitha -- the law says quite clearly that AOS applications cannot be filed if visa numbers are not available. Which is why IV was trying to get in an amendment that says AOS can be filed even when visa numbers are not available.
USCIS would fight a change in this tooth and nail -- cos as the Ombudsman has reported again and again in his annual reports -- when they spend a huge amount of time churning out EADs and APs, actual adjudications of green cards fall behind. Then there are the people (incl Ombudsman) who say that such interim benefits (EAD AP) should not be granted to such large numbers of people without security checks etc.
My guess is that this is precisely why USCIS didn't want the all current situation. They don't want to be stuck with 700K applications which have no hope of getting a greencard for years upon years, while they churn out EADs and APs for all those years.
Of course, one fix would be to increase the EAD time period to 3 yrs. Something they have been unwilling to do.
hope that means they are willing to talk about giving EAD. If we get EAD all the lawsuits will be withdrawn. The law does not say AOS applications should not be accepted when there are no visa numbers available, the law only says AOS cannot be approved when visa numbers are not available. USCIS internal regulations says they will not accept AOS applications when priority date is not current. by now its quite apparent that USCIS has broken a lot of there own internal regulations just to make sure the visa numbers are used up before july 2 2007. Then can easily accomodate the EAD for july filers. It all depends upon the pressure exerted on USCIS and DOS
Pitha -- the law says quite clearly that AOS applications cannot be filed if visa numbers are not available. Which is why IV was trying to get in an amendment that says AOS can be filed even when visa numbers are not available.
USCIS would fight a change in this tooth and nail -- cos as the Ombudsman has reported again and again in his annual reports -- when they spend a huge amount of time churning out EADs and APs, actual adjudications of green cards fall behind. Then there are the people (incl Ombudsman) who say that such interim benefits (EAD AP) should not be granted to such large numbers of people without security checks etc.
My guess is that this is precisely why USCIS didn't want the all current situation. They don't want to be stuck with 700K applications which have no hope of getting a greencard for years upon years, while they churn out EADs and APs for all those years.
Of course, one fix would be to increase the EAD time period to 3 yrs. Something they have been unwilling to do.
dealsnet
04-22 08:12 AM
I am pasting his 3 remarkable postings. We can see his courage to face the destiny. He thinks about his family, and see them settle in a stable country before his end. He is saying good bye to IV readers on his last post.
Gurus,
I have a unique position. couple of weeks back I was told that have fatal cancer and won't live pass 4-6 months. After recovering from initial shock I am wondering if my wife will be able to continue her american dream or she will have to head home after me.
I have filed 485 with approved 140 back in june, 2007 with PD of March, 2003
Please help.
Mehul
Let me answer that. I am from Fiji but I was born in India so I am stuck with rest of you and for my family going back is not an option. Fiji is very hostile to indians living there so for us it's here or nowhere. May be india is an option but we have very few distant relatives in India as both of our parents has passed away.
Though it is a big shock for me and my family, I have to get over it and think about their survival after me.
My apologies if I have given the impression as GC greedy but I can understand how difficult it is for someone to understand how is life without something you can call a "Home"
Thank you all for your help and support but I have made peace with my fate. I have pancreas cancer with VERY poor pragnosis and trust me I took 5 different opinions with the some of the best hospitals in US and Europe.
Regarding my family, something is working out in Sweden and probably all of us will move there permanently in 1-2 months. We have some relatives living there.
Thanks again for all you help. You guys really made us feel we are not alone.
Good luck and Good Bye.
Mehul
The news is terrible...
But I admire the courage he showed during his difficult times.
I agree with you dealsnet. We, the members of IV, should take up this issue and try to help his family.
ArkBird, any ideas how we can help?
Gurus,
I have a unique position. couple of weeks back I was told that have fatal cancer and won't live pass 4-6 months. After recovering from initial shock I am wondering if my wife will be able to continue her american dream or she will have to head home after me.
I have filed 485 with approved 140 back in june, 2007 with PD of March, 2003
Please help.
Mehul
Let me answer that. I am from Fiji but I was born in India so I am stuck with rest of you and for my family going back is not an option. Fiji is very hostile to indians living there so for us it's here or nowhere. May be india is an option but we have very few distant relatives in India as both of our parents has passed away.
Though it is a big shock for me and my family, I have to get over it and think about their survival after me.
My apologies if I have given the impression as GC greedy but I can understand how difficult it is for someone to understand how is life without something you can call a "Home"
Thank you all for your help and support but I have made peace with my fate. I have pancreas cancer with VERY poor pragnosis and trust me I took 5 different opinions with the some of the best hospitals in US and Europe.
Regarding my family, something is working out in Sweden and probably all of us will move there permanently in 1-2 months. We have some relatives living there.
Thanks again for all you help. You guys really made us feel we are not alone.
Good luck and Good Bye.
Mehul
The news is terrible...
But I admire the courage he showed during his difficult times.
I agree with you dealsnet. We, the members of IV, should take up this issue and try to help his family.
ArkBird, any ideas how we can help?
more...
dontcareanymore
07-28 12:48 AM
1) First of all this is not the response to just the quoted post, but many on the same lines, especially from delax and others.
2)I believe that that whole process is so screwed up that it is never fair and never will be. Irrespective of what Eb3s hope for and try , Eb2 folks are going to get their GCs and Eb3s will have to wait until stars align for them.
3) I don't really care one way or other , because what you wish,hope or try to do will have no bearing on the outcome.
<Those who think 2 year EADs are because of your letters , stay in the dreamland - ignorance is bliss >
4) I am really happy for Eb2 folks (No way jealous) , just pissed by some attitude here.
Now that I have the disclaimers out of the way, Here is what I have to say:
Why the heck you never made the argument that "law is law" and "There is no compassion" before law crap when you were retrogressed ?
What happened to what law says , when attempts were made to grab visas from ROW with the same "It is not fair" argument ?
What is the yardstick for EB2 ? It is just what your employer says it is. I know so many in body shops with Eb2 apps while others languish in Eb3 queue.
You can't extend the logic to all EB1 categories. At least in some of the EB categories one has to have published research work in peer reviewed journals.
Will give you an example :
Know some one who came here as postdoc with PHD in life sciences (zoology) and self filed for GC EB1and now runs an Indian grocery just after being in job for less than a year. How do you justify that GC is in the interest of US than a person who is working in a company for 10 years ?
It is true that the original number is broken up equally among all categories but the INA clearly states that if the demand within a category is not sufficient to use up all the visas in that category then the excess should be made available without any regard to country limit in that category. Here's a fact from the July bulletin - not an opinion:
There have been questions raised regarding the way numbers have been provided to the China and India in the Employment Second preference categories beginning in April. Section 202(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act states that if total demand for visas in an Employment preference category is insufficient to use all available visa numbers in that category in a calendar quarter, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limit. (For example: If the second preference annual limit were 40,000, number use by “All Other Countries” were estimated to be only 25,000, and the China/India combined number use based on their per-country limits were 6,000, then there would be 9,000 numbers unused. Those 9,000 numbers could then be made available to China and India applicants without regard to their per-country limits.)
I dont buy the argument that length of wait (as implied in the letter) should determine eligibility for approval disregarding the clear categorization established by law AFTER the initial handout is made on an equal basis. I have always maintained that any logic used to justify shifting visas between EB2 and EB3 purely based on the length of wait can also easily be used between EB2 and EB1. The fact that EB1 has never retrogressed does not matter. Unfortunately LAW is an absolute entity - there is no compassionate interpretation in civil and common law.
If a EB3-2002 is approved before EB2-2004 purely based on length of wait and ignoring the categorization after the initial handout then the same logic or rationale can be used to approve EB2-2004 before EB1-2007 by 'holding back' the visa from the EB1 candidate and giving it to EB2.
I dont think either of us is interested in going down the path of EB2 versus EB3 but to the extent this letter implies/attempts to do that, it is detrimental to the functioning of this group. Cheers
2)I believe that that whole process is so screwed up that it is never fair and never will be. Irrespective of what Eb3s hope for and try , Eb2 folks are going to get their GCs and Eb3s will have to wait until stars align for them.
3) I don't really care one way or other , because what you wish,hope or try to do will have no bearing on the outcome.
<Those who think 2 year EADs are because of your letters , stay in the dreamland - ignorance is bliss >
4) I am really happy for Eb2 folks (No way jealous) , just pissed by some attitude here.
Now that I have the disclaimers out of the way, Here is what I have to say:
Why the heck you never made the argument that "law is law" and "There is no compassion" before law crap when you were retrogressed ?
What happened to what law says , when attempts were made to grab visas from ROW with the same "It is not fair" argument ?
What is the yardstick for EB2 ? It is just what your employer says it is. I know so many in body shops with Eb2 apps while others languish in Eb3 queue.
You can't extend the logic to all EB1 categories. At least in some of the EB categories one has to have published research work in peer reviewed journals.
Will give you an example :
Know some one who came here as postdoc with PHD in life sciences (zoology) and self filed for GC EB1and now runs an Indian grocery just after being in job for less than a year. How do you justify that GC is in the interest of US than a person who is working in a company for 10 years ?
It is true that the original number is broken up equally among all categories but the INA clearly states that if the demand within a category is not sufficient to use up all the visas in that category then the excess should be made available without any regard to country limit in that category. Here's a fact from the July bulletin - not an opinion:
There have been questions raised regarding the way numbers have been provided to the China and India in the Employment Second preference categories beginning in April. Section 202(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act states that if total demand for visas in an Employment preference category is insufficient to use all available visa numbers in that category in a calendar quarter, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limit. (For example: If the second preference annual limit were 40,000, number use by “All Other Countries” were estimated to be only 25,000, and the China/India combined number use based on their per-country limits were 6,000, then there would be 9,000 numbers unused. Those 9,000 numbers could then be made available to China and India applicants without regard to their per-country limits.)
I dont buy the argument that length of wait (as implied in the letter) should determine eligibility for approval disregarding the clear categorization established by law AFTER the initial handout is made on an equal basis. I have always maintained that any logic used to justify shifting visas between EB2 and EB3 purely based on the length of wait can also easily be used between EB2 and EB1. The fact that EB1 has never retrogressed does not matter. Unfortunately LAW is an absolute entity - there is no compassionate interpretation in civil and common law.
If a EB3-2002 is approved before EB2-2004 purely based on length of wait and ignoring the categorization after the initial handout then the same logic or rationale can be used to approve EB2-2004 before EB1-2007 by 'holding back' the visa from the EB1 candidate and giving it to EB2.
I dont think either of us is interested in going down the path of EB2 versus EB3 but to the extent this letter implies/attempts to do that, it is detrimental to the functioning of this group. Cheers
2010 heat rash on babies pictures.
vallabhu
07-02 08:56 AM
Jul 2, 2007 7:50 AM
At local FedEx facility
LINCOLN, NE
At local FedEx facility
LINCOLN, NE
more...
dehradoon
10-08 05:45 PM
I applied for the first time in 2001, and then in 2005 (due to relocation) and ended up at the backlog center. Another relocation and now my PD is March 2007, and these recent wannabes want Perm approved in 1 month, I-140 premium processing in few days and then onto I-485 which should be current with no retrogression. Amen !! When do you want the USCIS to bend over for you?
:D ... couldn't stop laughing, the gov't should move the H1B quote to 250K/year and keep the GC to 140K/year, US will then get over a million people in the next 4 years.
forward looking scenario -
If nothing happens in the next 4 years then everyone who's here would still be here talking the same things as right now (with their bewildered hope of getting thru), the difference being all the 2005-2007 would also be old timers then, That would really change their perception.
Hey, this is just an opinion. nothing to debate on .... pure speculation. if you want me to give the full disclosure on forward looking scneario I can get that done but I'll have to rip it off some analysts comments :cool:
:D ... couldn't stop laughing, the gov't should move the H1B quote to 250K/year and keep the GC to 140K/year, US will then get over a million people in the next 4 years.
forward looking scenario -
If nothing happens in the next 4 years then everyone who's here would still be here talking the same things as right now (with their bewildered hope of getting thru), the difference being all the 2005-2007 would also be old timers then, That would really change their perception.
Hey, this is just an opinion. nothing to debate on .... pure speculation. if you want me to give the full disclosure on forward looking scneario I can get that done but I'll have to rip it off some analysts comments :cool:
hair baby heat rashes
reddymjm
06-07 09:18 AM
reddymjm,
I thought that we have to send our I-485 applications to NSC regardless of which state you are from.
Is that not true? How come your friend sent it to TSC?
Also, what do you mean by "Nebraska had a 6 day lag till Jan 1st"?
Thanks.
It depends on where ur I140 approval came from. What I mean by lag is they receive the application on 1st jun, they are working on assigning the lin # after 6 days. If they were at the same pace they should start working on the new I485 recived on Jun 1st today.
I thought that we have to send our I-485 applications to NSC regardless of which state you are from.
Is that not true? How come your friend sent it to TSC?
Also, what do you mean by "Nebraska had a 6 day lag till Jan 1st"?
Thanks.
It depends on where ur I140 approval came from. What I mean by lag is they receive the application on 1st jun, they are working on assigning the lin # after 6 days. If they were at the same pace they should start working on the new I485 recived on Jun 1st today.
more...
amsgc
08-25 12:57 AM
Is it possible for an administrative fix at the USCIS where the H-1B worker doesn't fall out of status immediately on losing his/her job? Or would such a provision require a law to be passed by the Congress?
A grace period of say 3 months to look for a job, or to pack up and leave, would relieve the pressure on the laid off H-1B worker and reduce incidents of system abuse.
If this can be done at the USCIS, perhaps we can write to the Obudsman and also to the USCIS director/associate directors. This is an important issue in this economy. I will be happy to draft a letter.
A grace period of say 3 months to look for a job, or to pack up and leave, would relieve the pressure on the laid off H-1B worker and reduce incidents of system abuse.
If this can be done at the USCIS, perhaps we can write to the Obudsman and also to the USCIS director/associate directors. This is an important issue in this economy. I will be happy to draft a letter.
hot heat rash on face.
immi_twinges
07-11 01:17 PM
There are some very good quotes from
American x presidents , socialists and authors
These should be included because Americans are more aware of them and its a symbol that we respect the American leaders thoughts and aspirations.
I have posted them on the other thread.
American x presidents , socialists and authors
These should be included because Americans are more aware of them and its a symbol that we respect the American leaders thoughts and aspirations.
I have posted them on the other thread.
more...
house hair heat rash pictures. heat
sujith1
07-21 01:01 PM
Received on July 11 and LUD on 15th
tattoo Please note, the heat rash in
arun_ramani
02-01 02:36 PM
Contributed $100 for Advocacy day. I will also inform few of my friends who can also contribute.
Best Wishes,
Arun
Best Wishes,
Arun
more...
pictures 0 Comments on Heat rash!
coolcat
06-12 11:13 AM
No, I didn't get my receipt yet. I called my lawyer and she said that the checks haven't cleared yet. It's taking toooo long. I don't know what's going on. Anybody in the same situation?
Filed on June 1st. Still waiting for receipt.
Filed on June 1st. Still waiting for receipt.
dresses Nappy Rash; Heat Rash;
arrarrgee
07-06 04:55 PM
I think even fake flowers would do...given what we all have to go thru...guys send these and save few dollars :p
Those are FAKE flowers!!!
Send real ones!!
Those are FAKE flowers!!!
Send real ones!!
more...
makeup rash baby. heat rash on
BMS
07-03 10:17 AM
I am ready to contibute
girlfriend Kim#39;s cure for a heat rash:
desi3933
06-27 02:00 PM
I asked my employer if they would tune the clauses to "1 yr after EAD" but they said NO - "it will be 1 yr after GC"
They also told me over phone that they have the capability of revoking
140 and complaining against me to INS if i try to leave before getting the actual GC.
Can they do that - after 6 months they lose that control - Right ??
Employer can revoke I-140 anytime until I-485 is approved. After 180 calendar days of I-485 filing date, employee can continue I-485 seeking AC-21 protection . Employee must have open permanent job offer from another employer. The new job must be same or similar.
>> complaining against me to INS if i try to leave before getting the actual GC.
LoL. He is not even aware of the law. Employee is required join AFTER getting the green card, not before.
Not a legal advice.
----------------------------------
Green Card holder since May 2002
desi3933 at gmail.com
They also told me over phone that they have the capability of revoking
140 and complaining against me to INS if i try to leave before getting the actual GC.
Can they do that - after 6 months they lose that control - Right ??
Employer can revoke I-140 anytime until I-485 is approved. After 180 calendar days of I-485 filing date, employee can continue I-485 seeking AC-21 protection . Employee must have open permanent job offer from another employer. The new job must be same or similar.
>> complaining against me to INS if i try to leave before getting the actual GC.
LoL. He is not even aware of the law. Employee is required join AFTER getting the green card, not before.
Not a legal advice.
----------------------------------
Green Card holder since May 2002
desi3933 at gmail.com
hairstyles images heat rashes in adults. heat rash pictures in adults. heat rash
neelu8
02-24 09:14 AM
I just contributed $200. Will try to participate in the event as well. Thanks and good luck!
Your receipt number for this payment is: 4408-9307-9825-0138.
Your receipt number for this payment is: 4408-9307-9825-0138.
bebar
06-14 03:31 PM
They are not personal checks. So there is no way for me to find if the checks were cashed or not. But attorney said, it takes minimum two weeks. But it looks like many have gotten their receipts.
Are you checks cashed?
Are you checks cashed?
neelu
05-23 01:02 PM
Just started calling.
Started with New Hampshire senators (state where I live). The person from senator Gregg's office interestingly heard to what I said and took my message and details. Said that he would pass it on to the Senator.
The person from senator Sununu's office wasn't bad either.
Started with New Hampshire senators (state where I live). The person from senator Gregg's office interestingly heard to what I said and took my message and details. Said that he would pass it on to the Senator.
The person from senator Sununu's office wasn't bad either.
No comments:
Post a Comment