spam
02-12 01:11 AM
I have sent letters for wife and I to WH. And will get few more through friends. What is the significance of sending the copies to IV ?
wallpaper god quotes about faith.
gk_2000
03-26 09:15 PM
Here I will summarize why we are unable to work with each another
Agreed 100% Porters will eat everything, there will be no movement.
By this and a later post MC is showing openly brazen attitude toward EB3 applicants. Such posts should be first of all, banned from IV and I am going to report all such posts.
Based on Visa Bulletin report, it seems like massive retrogression is likely for EB3 as well as EB2 :( for the rest of the year. Many have ported and some hibernating applications are now active. :(
You wouldn't show this :( expression if it were YOUR hibernating application. Also see if Mr. Nathan's comment below would apply to you
When I said that there should be one Item in IV agenda to Ban Porting, everyone got mad.
I still say that they should be allowed to port but should go back in line. they are disturbing the balance. I am not against them, if they were EB2 candidates why they didnt file on EB2 category at first, if now they think they are qualified then they should start new process.
BTW. they will create a big retrogression for EB2 then EB2 people have to port to EB3
Red dots are welcome.
Thanks
This is the brazen post I was talking about earlier. Even MC himself acknowledges that this post is "unhelpful", and he is deliberately doing this. This gives a negative impression of how serious this person is. I would urge him to buck up and learn to work with everyone, and quit watching "balance" from his sole viewpoint
I have done some study and can understand not many are porting. But there are few.
But if we raise our voice against porting, they will raise theirs with double the intensity against spillovers. So I dont think we should throw stones on their houses, when ours are made of glass. Moreoever if we see the statistics, there is a HUGE # of EB2 applicants in 2007 onwards I think. Unless we all act together, its not going anywhere.
I know many cases where newer applicants applied in EB2 and were much lesser in hierarchy than their bosses who are in EB3 and waiting. I think we must respect that, and more importantly as soon as raise our voice, they will not keep quite, right. You would also not keep quite if in their shoes.
Best will be if IV comes up with some programs to reduce this backlogs.
This is an "us vs them" argument. Not upto the standard desirable from IV point of view
People with EB3 applications should be allowed to port. But these should be EB3 applications which were genuinely applied and not substitute labor which opened during July 2007 fiasco.
Because a EB3 application with substitute labor in July 2007 has a priority date of 2002,2003,2004,2005 or even 2006. Where as a genuinely applied Eb2 prior to that, had the qualifications / job requirements before July 2007 and they are still waiting.
USCIS should realize their mistake in 2007, it encouraged a pay to play scheme, which is putting genuine people at great disadvantage.
Porting like any option was started with a good intention, but because of loop holes it has lost its meaning. There are people who landed in this country during the July 2007 fiasco, paid for the labor and have green cards in their hands now.
Or at least provide the same level of stringent requirements to port like (EB2-->EB1) . Technically a EB3 can port to EB1 also, but porting to EB2 is easier. That way Eb3's can consume Eb1 number and stop spill over to Eb2.
L1A is another one, where people qualify as global project managers with very minimal effort, could have less experience than a EB3 or in some cases they have reported to people in EB3 queue here from 2002 and are ahead of the EB3 within 6 months.
Understand the realities here: IV is struggling to make even the most legitimate views heard and you are sitting and talking away as if USCIS and lawmakers are your servant. Go for the ONE thing to wish for that will solve all troubles, because you have only one chance.
You wont talk about this crap/crab if you are on the receiving end.
Good dialogue. Ironic how it applies to so many posts here arguing in the opposite direction
The CRAB STORY also applies to EB3. Whenever somebody talks about spillover to EB2, all the EB3s are against spillover and making comments that it's not happening this year. It feels like EB3s do not want EB2s to get GCs. If porting is legit, then spillover is also legit and EB3s need to accept that.
Porting was always there and porting must not be more than 300/quarter this year (other wise EB2 PD dates would have retrogressed or gone back). Porting was not something started in FY2011 or FY2010. However, I do accept that the frequency of EB3-EB2 porting has increased slightly due to more US companies outsourcing IT jobs (bad economy -> more outsourcing to reduce costs{check the stock of CTSH!} -> demand for consultants -> resulting in firms like CTSH and small consulting companies agreeing to EB3-EB2 porting to keep talent). Outsourcing will not always result in all the US jobs to completely move to outsourced countries (I guess smart people in this forum already know that).
There will be spillover this year and EB2 PD reaching DEC 2006 by end of FY2011 is a real possiblity. There is no need for EB2s to get all worked up when somebody ports or EB3s to get worked up when somebody talks about spillover. There is GC pie for everybody. Just be patient or do something to solve fundamental problems with GC process ( by participating in IV campaign).
-CinBoy
"all the EB3s are against spillover and making comments that it's not happening this year. It feels like EB3s do not want EB2s to get GCs."
are you yourself convinced of this? I highly doubt.
Agreed 100% Porters will eat everything, there will be no movement.
By this and a later post MC is showing openly brazen attitude toward EB3 applicants. Such posts should be first of all, banned from IV and I am going to report all such posts.
Based on Visa Bulletin report, it seems like massive retrogression is likely for EB3 as well as EB2 :( for the rest of the year. Many have ported and some hibernating applications are now active. :(
You wouldn't show this :( expression if it were YOUR hibernating application. Also see if Mr. Nathan's comment below would apply to you
When I said that there should be one Item in IV agenda to Ban Porting, everyone got mad.
I still say that they should be allowed to port but should go back in line. they are disturbing the balance. I am not against them, if they were EB2 candidates why they didnt file on EB2 category at first, if now they think they are qualified then they should start new process.
BTW. they will create a big retrogression for EB2 then EB2 people have to port to EB3
Red dots are welcome.
Thanks
This is the brazen post I was talking about earlier. Even MC himself acknowledges that this post is "unhelpful", and he is deliberately doing this. This gives a negative impression of how serious this person is. I would urge him to buck up and learn to work with everyone, and quit watching "balance" from his sole viewpoint
I have done some study and can understand not many are porting. But there are few.
But if we raise our voice against porting, they will raise theirs with double the intensity against spillovers. So I dont think we should throw stones on their houses, when ours are made of glass. Moreoever if we see the statistics, there is a HUGE # of EB2 applicants in 2007 onwards I think. Unless we all act together, its not going anywhere.
I know many cases where newer applicants applied in EB2 and were much lesser in hierarchy than their bosses who are in EB3 and waiting. I think we must respect that, and more importantly as soon as raise our voice, they will not keep quite, right. You would also not keep quite if in their shoes.
Best will be if IV comes up with some programs to reduce this backlogs.
This is an "us vs them" argument. Not upto the standard desirable from IV point of view
People with EB3 applications should be allowed to port. But these should be EB3 applications which were genuinely applied and not substitute labor which opened during July 2007 fiasco.
Because a EB3 application with substitute labor in July 2007 has a priority date of 2002,2003,2004,2005 or even 2006. Where as a genuinely applied Eb2 prior to that, had the qualifications / job requirements before July 2007 and they are still waiting.
USCIS should realize their mistake in 2007, it encouraged a pay to play scheme, which is putting genuine people at great disadvantage.
Porting like any option was started with a good intention, but because of loop holes it has lost its meaning. There are people who landed in this country during the July 2007 fiasco, paid for the labor and have green cards in their hands now.
Or at least provide the same level of stringent requirements to port like (EB2-->EB1) . Technically a EB3 can port to EB1 also, but porting to EB2 is easier. That way Eb3's can consume Eb1 number and stop spill over to Eb2.
L1A is another one, where people qualify as global project managers with very minimal effort, could have less experience than a EB3 or in some cases they have reported to people in EB3 queue here from 2002 and are ahead of the EB3 within 6 months.
Understand the realities here: IV is struggling to make even the most legitimate views heard and you are sitting and talking away as if USCIS and lawmakers are your servant. Go for the ONE thing to wish for that will solve all troubles, because you have only one chance.
You wont talk about this crap/crab if you are on the receiving end.
Good dialogue. Ironic how it applies to so many posts here arguing in the opposite direction
The CRAB STORY also applies to EB3. Whenever somebody talks about spillover to EB2, all the EB3s are against spillover and making comments that it's not happening this year. It feels like EB3s do not want EB2s to get GCs. If porting is legit, then spillover is also legit and EB3s need to accept that.
Porting was always there and porting must not be more than 300/quarter this year (other wise EB2 PD dates would have retrogressed or gone back). Porting was not something started in FY2011 or FY2010. However, I do accept that the frequency of EB3-EB2 porting has increased slightly due to more US companies outsourcing IT jobs (bad economy -> more outsourcing to reduce costs{check the stock of CTSH!} -> demand for consultants -> resulting in firms like CTSH and small consulting companies agreeing to EB3-EB2 porting to keep talent). Outsourcing will not always result in all the US jobs to completely move to outsourced countries (I guess smart people in this forum already know that).
There will be spillover this year and EB2 PD reaching DEC 2006 by end of FY2011 is a real possiblity. There is no need for EB2s to get all worked up when somebody ports or EB3s to get worked up when somebody talks about spillover. There is GC pie for everybody. Just be patient or do something to solve fundamental problems with GC process ( by participating in IV campaign).
-CinBoy
"all the EB3s are against spillover and making comments that it's not happening this year. It feels like EB3s do not want EB2s to get GCs."
are you yourself convinced of this? I highly doubt.
needhelp!
03-06 05:16 PM
Section 6: Time Limits for Agencies to Act on Requests Section 6 of the Open Government Act has two provisions that address time limits for complying with FOIA requests, and the consequences of failing to do so. Significantly, this section does not take effect until one year after the date of enactment and will apply to FOIA requests �filed on or after that effective date.� Accordingly, agencies have until December 31, 2008 to take any necessary steps to prepare for the implementation of this Section.
First, section 6(a) of the Open Government Act amends 5 U.S.C. � 552(a)(6)(A) which gives the statutory time period for processing FOIA requests, and includes criteria for when that time period begins to run and when that time period may be suspended or �tolled.� Specifically, section 6(a) provides that the statutory time period commences �on the date on which the request is first received by the appropriate component of the agency, but in any event not later than ten days after the request is first received by any component of the agency that is designated in the agency�s regulations under this section to receive requests.� This provision addresses the situation where a FOIA request is received by a component of an agency that is designated to receive FOIA requests, but is not the proper component for the request at issue. In such a situation, the component that receives the request in error � provided it is a component of the agency that is designated by the agency�s regulations to receive requests � has ten working days within which to forward the FOIA request to the appropriate agency component for processing. Once the FOIA request has been forwarded and received by the appropriate agency component � which must take place within ten working days � the statutory time period to respond to the request commences.
Section 6(a) further provides for those circumstances when an agency may toll the statutory time period. Specifically, an agency �may make one request to the requester for information and toll� the statutory time period �while it is awaiting such information that it has reasonably requested from the requester.� The agency may also toll the time period �if necessary to clarify with the requester issues regarding fee assessment.� There is no limit given for the number of times an agency may go back to a requester to clarify issues regarding fee assessments � which sometimes may need to be done in stages as the records are being located and processed. In both situations, section 6(a) specifies that the requester�s response to the agency�s request �ends the tolling period.�
Second, section 6(b) addresses compliance with the FOIA�s time limits by amending 5 U.S.C. � 552(a)(4)(A), the provision addressing fees. Section 6(b) adds a clause to that provision providing that �[a]n agency shall not assess search fees (or in the case of a [favored] requester [i.e., one who qualifies as an educational or noncommercial scientific institution, or as a representative of the news media] duplication fees) . . . if the agency fails to comply with any time limit under paragraph (6), if no unusual or exceptional circumstances (as those terms are defined for purposes of (6)(B) and (C), respectively) apply to the processing of the request.�
As noted in the language of the new provision, the terms �unusual circumstances� and �exceptional circumstances� are existing terms in the FOIA. �Unusual circumstances� occur when there is a need to search or collect records from field offices, or other establishments; when there is a need to search for and examine a voluminous amount of records; or when there is a need for consultation with another agency or with more than two components within the same agency. Unlike �unusual circumstances,� �exceptional circumstances� are not affirmatively defined in the FOIA, but the FOIA does provide that �exceptional circumstances� cannot include �a delay that results from a predictable agency workload of requests . . . unless the agency demonstrates reasonable progress in reducing its backlog of pending requests.� 5 U.S.C. � 552(a)(6)(C)(ii). In addition, the statute provides that the �[r]efusal by a person to reasonably modify the scope of a request, or arrange an alternative time frame for processing the request . . . shall be considered as a factor in determining whether exceptional circumstances exist.� Id. at � 552(a)(6)(C)(iii).
Section 6(b) therefore precludes an agency from assessing search fees (or in the case of �favored� requesters, duplication fees), if the agency fails to comply with the FOIA�s time limits, unless �unusual� or �exceptional� circumstances �apply to the processing of the request.�
Finally, section 6(b) amends 5 U.S.C. � 552(a)(6)(B)(ii), which discusses notification to requesters regarding the time limits and the option of arranging an alternative time frame for processing, by directing agencies �[t]o aid the requester� by making �available its FOIA Public Liaison, who shall assist in the resolution of any disputes between the requester and the agency.� This provision incorporates an existing aspect of Executive Order 13,392.
The Department of Justice will be providing guidance to agencies in the near future on section 6.
First, section 6(a) of the Open Government Act amends 5 U.S.C. � 552(a)(6)(A) which gives the statutory time period for processing FOIA requests, and includes criteria for when that time period begins to run and when that time period may be suspended or �tolled.� Specifically, section 6(a) provides that the statutory time period commences �on the date on which the request is first received by the appropriate component of the agency, but in any event not later than ten days after the request is first received by any component of the agency that is designated in the agency�s regulations under this section to receive requests.� This provision addresses the situation where a FOIA request is received by a component of an agency that is designated to receive FOIA requests, but is not the proper component for the request at issue. In such a situation, the component that receives the request in error � provided it is a component of the agency that is designated by the agency�s regulations to receive requests � has ten working days within which to forward the FOIA request to the appropriate agency component for processing. Once the FOIA request has been forwarded and received by the appropriate agency component � which must take place within ten working days � the statutory time period to respond to the request commences.
Section 6(a) further provides for those circumstances when an agency may toll the statutory time period. Specifically, an agency �may make one request to the requester for information and toll� the statutory time period �while it is awaiting such information that it has reasonably requested from the requester.� The agency may also toll the time period �if necessary to clarify with the requester issues regarding fee assessment.� There is no limit given for the number of times an agency may go back to a requester to clarify issues regarding fee assessments � which sometimes may need to be done in stages as the records are being located and processed. In both situations, section 6(a) specifies that the requester�s response to the agency�s request �ends the tolling period.�
Second, section 6(b) addresses compliance with the FOIA�s time limits by amending 5 U.S.C. � 552(a)(4)(A), the provision addressing fees. Section 6(b) adds a clause to that provision providing that �[a]n agency shall not assess search fees (or in the case of a [favored] requester [i.e., one who qualifies as an educational or noncommercial scientific institution, or as a representative of the news media] duplication fees) . . . if the agency fails to comply with any time limit under paragraph (6), if no unusual or exceptional circumstances (as those terms are defined for purposes of (6)(B) and (C), respectively) apply to the processing of the request.�
As noted in the language of the new provision, the terms �unusual circumstances� and �exceptional circumstances� are existing terms in the FOIA. �Unusual circumstances� occur when there is a need to search or collect records from field offices, or other establishments; when there is a need to search for and examine a voluminous amount of records; or when there is a need for consultation with another agency or with more than two components within the same agency. Unlike �unusual circumstances,� �exceptional circumstances� are not affirmatively defined in the FOIA, but the FOIA does provide that �exceptional circumstances� cannot include �a delay that results from a predictable agency workload of requests . . . unless the agency demonstrates reasonable progress in reducing its backlog of pending requests.� 5 U.S.C. � 552(a)(6)(C)(ii). In addition, the statute provides that the �[r]efusal by a person to reasonably modify the scope of a request, or arrange an alternative time frame for processing the request . . . shall be considered as a factor in determining whether exceptional circumstances exist.� Id. at � 552(a)(6)(C)(iii).
Section 6(b) therefore precludes an agency from assessing search fees (or in the case of �favored� requesters, duplication fees), if the agency fails to comply with the FOIA�s time limits, unless �unusual� or �exceptional� circumstances �apply to the processing of the request.�
Finally, section 6(b) amends 5 U.S.C. � 552(a)(6)(B)(ii), which discusses notification to requesters regarding the time limits and the option of arranging an alternative time frame for processing, by directing agencies �[t]o aid the requester� by making �available its FOIA Public Liaison, who shall assist in the resolution of any disputes between the requester and the agency.� This provision incorporates an existing aspect of Executive Order 13,392.
The Department of Justice will be providing guidance to agencies in the near future on section 6.
2011 quotes about god and love.
ramus
09-04 01:06 PM
To add to this.. Some will think that something good just going to happen since next year is election.. Not sure what makes them think that..
Some are extremely negative-- They will say doesn't matter what you guys do,nothing will happen.
People just don't want to soil their hands in cleaning their house but want others to do it for them.
Lot of people consider it below dignity to do something about GC related stuff, many just want to live they way they are, no ambitions, no motivation to work towards a change.
Some are extremely negative-- They will say doesn't matter what you guys do,nothing will happen.
People just don't want to soil their hands in cleaning their house but want others to do it for them.
Lot of people consider it below dignity to do something about GC related stuff, many just want to live they way they are, no ambitions, no motivation to work towards a change.
more...
sanju
04-10 05:01 PM
I have no problem with IV. I enjoy this forum and I really liked the that they did the rally last year and the flower campaign. I would like to do something about this whole situation (see my idea for The Two Cents Campaign (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=24962)). I just have problems parting with money :) without knowing what I'll get.
You want to throw money at things without knowing what it will get you. And then we'll see about sorry asses. Have fun doing that.
ok, so u like the concept of rally. Well, that's a good starting point. You know how much money is needed/spent to do a rally. I attended Sept-2007 rally. So I could see how much money was needed. It was made possible for people like me who contributed, and the rally would have not happened if it were for 2 cents people like you who want to see the balance sheet and EPS (earning per share) :p before moving your a$$. Its not about throwing money at a problem, its about seeing these guys in action and knowing from experience their passion, energy and willingness to work on my issues. You will never know because you were not there. I can try to make you understand but still you will never know. But as I said earlier, I am in no mood to spoon feed you or anyone like you anymore. For now, I would ok even if folks like you would just drop dead.
.
You want to throw money at things without knowing what it will get you. And then we'll see about sorry asses. Have fun doing that.
ok, so u like the concept of rally. Well, that's a good starting point. You know how much money is needed/spent to do a rally. I attended Sept-2007 rally. So I could see how much money was needed. It was made possible for people like me who contributed, and the rally would have not happened if it were for 2 cents people like you who want to see the balance sheet and EPS (earning per share) :p before moving your a$$. Its not about throwing money at a problem, its about seeing these guys in action and knowing from experience their passion, energy and willingness to work on my issues. You will never know because you were not there. I can try to make you understand but still you will never know. But as I said earlier, I am in no mood to spoon feed you or anyone like you anymore. For now, I would ok even if folks like you would just drop dead.
.
sheela
06-25 04:31 PM
They hushed up and approved my EAD in 20 days. Why ???? 'cos So they don't hit Jun'30 and give 2 years. They wanted to milk another 680 from me so they hushed up and sent me the 1 year EAD in 20 days.
What is the effective date of new EAD?. Does it start from the expiration date of old/current EAD or from the date of approval of new EAD ?
What is the effective date of new EAD?. Does it start from the expiration date of old/current EAD or from the date of approval of new EAD ?
more...
days_go_by
03-08 05:09 PM
based on country of origin, why even aus? is it because their spouses are more productive than our spouses? or is it because most aus are white,
2010 God Quotes
walking_dude
09-04 12:41 PM
We are not asking for any special rights or entitlement. We are not doing anthing illegal. We are just petitioning the government to treat us - fairly - in the spirit of the founding charter of this nation, Declaration of Independence - That all men are created equal, and deserve equal chances in the Pursuit of Happiness.
No one can harm us for rallying to our cause. Our actions are protected by the First ammendment which gives Freedom of Speech and Expression to even the non-citizens.
No one can harm us for rallying to our cause. Our actions are protected by the First ammendment which gives Freedom of Speech and Expression to even the non-citizens.
more...
yabadaba
11-08 12:13 PM
our dose of daily macaca
Hi Nycgal369,
I am not your buddy :-)
That's nothing new that Dems are pro amnesty. I am not arguing against that. Nancy Pelosi already said something in that regard I think. What I refute is the argument portrayed by misinformed members that the shift in power was caused significantly by the anti illegal alien position. It is not true. That's all I am saying.
Contrary to belief of some members, I am not disappointed with this. I will continue to be your Ombudsman as usual and report everything, probably you will hear more good news for those who believe that amnesty is the way to go. Facts are facts. I am not here to defend any side.
Thanks,
The Ombudsman
"Your dose of daily reality"
Hi Nycgal369,
I am not your buddy :-)
That's nothing new that Dems are pro amnesty. I am not arguing against that. Nancy Pelosi already said something in that regard I think. What I refute is the argument portrayed by misinformed members that the shift in power was caused significantly by the anti illegal alien position. It is not true. That's all I am saying.
Contrary to belief of some members, I am not disappointed with this. I will continue to be your Ombudsman as usual and report everything, probably you will hear more good news for those who believe that amnesty is the way to go. Facts are facts. I am not here to defend any side.
Thanks,
The Ombudsman
"Your dose of daily reality"
hair god quotes about hope.
tnite
07-05 11:10 AM
Just called USCIS and told her that My application was mailed on Jun 28th and it got delivered on July 02. I also told her that my PD is May 2003 (hence i'm eligible to file in June)..
She told me that since i mailed it in June and this Notice goes into effect in July 02 my application WILL NOT be rejected... She asked me to wait for receipt notice :)
GOING CRAZZZZZZZZZZZYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
Anything received on july 2nd is history.it doesn't matter when you sent it.what matters is when USCIS received it.
I spoke to a cust. rep and she did tell me that all apps received on and after july 2nd will be returned. To be sure , she put me through an immigration officer (I am still listening to the music)
She told me that since i mailed it in June and this Notice goes into effect in July 02 my application WILL NOT be rejected... She asked me to wait for receipt notice :)
GOING CRAZZZZZZZZZZZYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
Anything received on july 2nd is history.it doesn't matter when you sent it.what matters is when USCIS received it.
I spoke to a cust. rep and she did tell me that all apps received on and after july 2nd will be returned. To be sure , she put me through an immigration officer (I am still listening to the music)
more...
saimrathi
07-05 08:51 AM
Wow, that sucks..
my app reached USCIS on July 2nd. I called up USCIS, the lady read the July Bulletin update word by word and then told me that my application will be rejected and the original documents will be sent back. She did not have an answer on how soon this will happen.
my app reached USCIS on July 2nd. I called up USCIS, the lady read the July Bulletin update word by word and then told me that my application will be rejected and the original documents will be sent back. She did not have an answer on how soon this will happen.
hot Heschel quotes – God, Man,
pmmo
07-02 02:45 PM
I could not believe it either. My PD is August 2003 and EB3 from India. I have read many stories where people seem to have got GC when their PD is not current. In some cases, it appears they keep quiet about, but in some cases people seem to have corrected the situation to avoid any future complication, for example, if one decides to become U.S.Citizen at any point. It is just frustrating to think that I probably need to spend a lot of money on an attorney and go through the mental stress in resolving this because of probably an error some foolish clerk at USCIS made.
more...
house quotes about god being in
skv
09-25 11:48 AM
I have had all good experiences with fragoment till now, and I have been dealing with them for a couple of years now. They were very professional i should say. Again I work for one of the top 3 financial firms , and my employer has fragomen as preferred law firm.
I work for the Wall Street Investment Bank, I don't see any reason why Fragomen is a bad one, most of the banks deals with them.
Bad for some people, doesn't mean it's universal for everyone, for that matter that can happen to any law firm. :-):)
I work for the Wall Street Investment Bank, I don't see any reason why Fragomen is a bad one, most of the banks deals with them.
Bad for some people, doesn't mean it's universal for everyone, for that matter that can happen to any law firm. :-):)
tattoo The quote relates to his
snram4
01-14 07:24 PM
There are always exception in the constitution. For example for US president and Vice President only US Born citizens are eligible. In a way you can argue that is also discriminatory.
If anyone thinks country quota is violating law he can easily challenge that. Green card process is not by merrit. Labor and I140 process is not selecting best candidate. That is just checking whether the position exist and the person is eligibe for that. All of the eligible candidates will get. If no country quota then FIFO process will be applied. It is just cutting the line and not selecting best candidates. So company or country will not have any impact on who gets green card first
It seems changing country quota is difficult. But if cap for GC is increased and exempt dependents then no need to remove the country quota
If law is not consistent with constitution, Federal supreme court can revert it. it is not question of fair or unfair. The point is is it violating constitution?
If anyone thinks country quota is violating law he can easily challenge that. Green card process is not by merrit. Labor and I140 process is not selecting best candidate. That is just checking whether the position exist and the person is eligibe for that. All of the eligible candidates will get. If no country quota then FIFO process will be applied. It is just cutting the line and not selecting best candidates. So company or country will not have any impact on who gets green card first
It seems changing country quota is difficult. But if cap for GC is increased and exempt dependents then no need to remove the country quota
If law is not consistent with constitution, Federal supreme court can revert it. it is not question of fair or unfair. The point is is it violating constitution?
more...
pictures quotes on god
satishku_2000
06-09 07:10 PM
That is right. But same country quota is there in EB system also. So in point system also 80% of people will get same quality of people as current system. But advantage is process delay will be eliminated.
I think people should read the legislation completely and understand before they comment on the proposed system.
With the existing system people will wait for their turn , In the proposed new system the application gets trashed and one cannot apply for 3 more years if one can not make it in the year he or she applied.
What are the rules governing the new system when more people get highest score than the available green cards per country . It would be another lottery . This can not be a merit based system unless they remove country caps.
I think people should read the legislation completely and understand before they comment on the proposed system.
With the existing system people will wait for their turn , In the proposed new system the application gets trashed and one cannot apply for 3 more years if one can not make it in the year he or she applied.
What are the rules governing the new system when more people get highest score than the available green cards per country . It would be another lottery . This can not be a merit based system unless they remove country caps.
dresses quotes about god being in
GCard_Dream
03-21 02:48 PM
... but only after they have issued a greencard to each one of us. :D
I propose to dissolve USCIS. No matter what USCIS failed in all respects of appeasing
1. Indians
2. Chinese
3. Mexicans
4. ROW
5. Philippines
6. EB1
7. EB2 - NOW
8. EB2
9. EB3
10. EB4
11. EB5
I propose to dissolve USCIS. No matter what USCIS failed in all respects of appeasing
1. Indians
2. Chinese
3. Mexicans
4. ROW
5. Philippines
6. EB1
7. EB2 - NOW
8. EB2
9. EB3
10. EB4
11. EB5
more...
makeup quotes about god
ues_nyc13
02-22 12:50 PM
Hey I have the same issue - did you have any issues to get ur visa stamped for company A. I am leaving the country for a 2week vacation and have to get my visa stamped. I never joined compnay B even though the visa transfer was approved last august. I am still working for company A. A reply would be appreciated. Thanks
girlfriend Inspired Quotes - God Cares
chanduv23
12-01 01:55 PM
I did not want to initiate that discussion because it may be a long one, but let me share my experience:
My recommendation is that folks take an MBA only if you already have a firm position in mind that you want to go for an executive or upper management position in the future. That line of thought is specially applicable when you are paying the whole thing from your own pocket !!! Before working in a management position or taking the MBA, I did not know how much I liked the idea of becoming a CIO or CEO. I tought I knew it, but until you actually experiment it, as many things in life you don't know for sure. Well, after completing 50% of the program I realized that was not my short or mid-term goal to work as an executive reading accounting net income balance sheets or maketing professional, even if I had the GC handy.
In my personal opinion, taking an MBA merely to enhance your project management when you are PAYING FROM YOUR OWN POCKET it may be a very bad strategy. If others are paying for you, of course that is fine, but it is not the case for many of us. I had only one or two courses related to project management anyway.
If you just want to enhance your project management skills, you might want to invest in way more direct courses such as PMP, ITIL, Microsoft Operations Framework. You should be able to complete those with a fraction of the cost and time of an MBA and probably achieve more return and knowledge than what the MBA can offer you when it comes to project management.
For those who are sure you want to read balance sheets, work with marketing analysis and go away from the hands-on experience, then MBA may be right for you.
I don't want to discourage you, but there are documents out there showing that MBA's are overrated and the importance of it is under scrutiny. Since I already found offers from multiple employers who were willing to pay 100% (if you are a qualified professional like us, it is not difficult to find employers willing to pay for it once you can change jobs) personally I thought I could wait a little longer to get the MBA and invest in IT certifications now paying from my own pocket.
Just my humble opinion.
Agree with you, it is always about knowledge, information, contacts, and ability to adapt rather than investing on high cost education unless you have someone else paying or u r stinking rich or u get a scholarship.
My recommendation is that folks take an MBA only if you already have a firm position in mind that you want to go for an executive or upper management position in the future. That line of thought is specially applicable when you are paying the whole thing from your own pocket !!! Before working in a management position or taking the MBA, I did not know how much I liked the idea of becoming a CIO or CEO. I tought I knew it, but until you actually experiment it, as many things in life you don't know for sure. Well, after completing 50% of the program I realized that was not my short or mid-term goal to work as an executive reading accounting net income balance sheets or maketing professional, even if I had the GC handy.
In my personal opinion, taking an MBA merely to enhance your project management when you are PAYING FROM YOUR OWN POCKET it may be a very bad strategy. If others are paying for you, of course that is fine, but it is not the case for many of us. I had only one or two courses related to project management anyway.
If you just want to enhance your project management skills, you might want to invest in way more direct courses such as PMP, ITIL, Microsoft Operations Framework. You should be able to complete those with a fraction of the cost and time of an MBA and probably achieve more return and knowledge than what the MBA can offer you when it comes to project management.
For those who are sure you want to read balance sheets, work with marketing analysis and go away from the hands-on experience, then MBA may be right for you.
I don't want to discourage you, but there are documents out there showing that MBA's are overrated and the importance of it is under scrutiny. Since I already found offers from multiple employers who were willing to pay 100% (if you are a qualified professional like us, it is not difficult to find employers willing to pay for it once you can change jobs) personally I thought I could wait a little longer to get the MBA and invest in IT certifications now paying from my own pocket.
Just my humble opinion.
Agree with you, it is always about knowledge, information, contacts, and ability to adapt rather than investing on high cost education unless you have someone else paying or u r stinking rich or u get a scholarship.
hairstyles quotes about god and love. i
AllVNeedGcPc
01-12 01:07 PM
...I will donate minimum $100 for the cause.
altima723
05-31 08:54 AM
Transaction id - 91D81471MT536442Y
Amount - $100
Amount - $100
gneerajg
07-18 12:50 PM
They will definitely accept the copies of the check. The reason I applied my I-140 in May 07 and didn't got any receipt and I intend to file PPS for which I require copy of I-140 but when I talked to the customer service they suggested me this solution and after that I got my check photocopies from my employer
No comments:
Post a Comment