royus77
08-11 10:58 PM
If there is a non-controversial immi. law change attempt I will donate $500. I will also bring my friends and the total may exceed $2000. We all willing to donate but only if we know that there is good chance of passing.
If there is an attempt to push ideas like recapture, forget it. It will not pass in this economy. I do not want to waste my money and time on those kind of ideas.
IMHO. Not to find fault with anyone. Please do not mistake me.
what is the percentage you are looking ? 50 -50 ?I know thousands of people who can write a check for 10K to support any law that can give them a GC in the next 3-6 months..
If there is an attempt to push ideas like recapture, forget it. It will not pass in this economy. I do not want to waste my money and time on those kind of ideas.
IMHO. Not to find fault with anyone. Please do not mistake me.
what is the percentage you are looking ? 50 -50 ?I know thousands of people who can write a check for 10K to support any law that can give them a GC in the next 3-6 months..
wallpaper Grumman F-14B Tomcat
.soulty
02-16 07:16 AM
this is why you shouldnt post images before the due time, people dont give up, its an all level 3d battle, dosent matter how good or bad your skills are, this is so you can develop your skills, i m sure thirdworldman wasnt good straight off the bat, he had to start somewhere too and now his skills are pretty good but im sure he could even tell you when he started people wiped the floor with him, his image is great but its not impossible, the texturing and lighting is what sets it off the rest is some simple modelled geometry.
everyone keep at it, and find a angle to your image which will make yours original.
:thumb:
everyone keep at it, and find a angle to your image which will make yours original.
:thumb:
Bhargav Goswami
07-13 12:41 PM
Sheela Murthy is not my lawyer but I often check out her office's website as it is quite informative. If she's written a well thought our letter to Chertoff - it's to our benefit...we should welcome any ally we can instead of turning them away.
Some of you who've so viciously attacked her please get a life or get medical help. Why such pain???
Some of you who've so viciously attacked her please get a life or get medical help. Why such pain???
2011 Grumman F-14 Tomcat Low Pass !
MDix
03-10 02:33 PM
From July-07 fiasco DOS and USICS work very closely on VB, I am referring to USCI and DOS. And USCIS is the one who influence DOS decision.
Since you chose to not to answer my question, I assume you have no idea what you are talking about.
Please ignore MDix.
Since you chose to not to answer my question, I assume you have no idea what you are talking about.
Please ignore MDix.
more...
wandmaker
10-10 01:07 PM
Just to avoid all this , You can say I'm a US citizen and move on. They cannot ask for any verification can they?
If verified, you would end up in eating ham burger.
If verified, you would end up in eating ham burger.
ramus
07-03 08:41 PM
Thanks for your contribution..
In all 400$ to date.
In all 400$ to date.
more...
sanju
02-18 07:17 PM
How to convert from Legal to Illegal?;)
How about if I tell USCIS I am born here and never applied for Birth Certificate?
that's why you name is champu.
.
How about if I tell USCIS I am born here and never applied for Birth Certificate?
that's why you name is champu.
.
2010 The Grumman F-14 Tomcat 3D
sapota
08-15 04:55 PM
Surprised by visa bulletin mentioning cutoff dates for EB1, EB2 & EB3 ROW & philipines instead of U.
Does this mean EB1, EB2 & EB3 ROW cases are not backlogged ? (i.e USCIS approved all it could on July1st 2007 but still visa numbers left?)
Or were these cases waiting for FBI check so could not use up visa numbers??
Either way, in a month or so (after all July VB cases are entered into database, USCIS would know its true backlog). Wish it would announce such a backlog number and make realistic predictions for when cases will be approved.
Given the recent announcement from whitehouse regarding expedited FBI checks, maybe there is some light at the end of the tunnel.
But hey, lets keep pushing, we dont want hope to be a mirage do we.
Does this mean EB1, EB2 & EB3 ROW cases are not backlogged ? (i.e USCIS approved all it could on July1st 2007 but still visa numbers left?)
Or were these cases waiting for FBI check so could not use up visa numbers??
Either way, in a month or so (after all July VB cases are entered into database, USCIS would know its true backlog). Wish it would announce such a backlog number and make realistic predictions for when cases will be approved.
Given the recent announcement from whitehouse regarding expedited FBI checks, maybe there is some light at the end of the tunnel.
But hey, lets keep pushing, we dont want hope to be a mirage do we.
more...
belmontboy
03-21 04:48 PM
There is no requirement for any company to sponsor green cards for any employee. A job is granted to you based on requirement of the company. Once that requirement no longer exists, the company can (and should) lay off the employee. This applies to H1 extensions and filing of GC.
GC filing is completely based on the company needing your service. Unless you totally excel and become indispensible to the company, they do not need to keep you. This is unlike a secure Govt. job in most 3rd world countries.
The conclusion is that this list would include ALL COMPANIES IN THE WORLD (and some Govts jobs). However, the list is not of rogue companies but simply companies that are run well.
Speaking generally, companies have no requirement to provide other benefits like health insurance, 401k, options...etc. But why do most companies offer these? - They do so to attract top talent. That's how a company distinguishes itself from its competitors.
Applying for GC has become one of the incentives.
A company offering GC incentive during hiring, but withholding it, would amount to unethical practice. And is certainly bound to lose its top talents (specifically immigrant ones)
GC filing is completely based on the company needing your service. Unless you totally excel and become indispensible to the company, they do not need to keep you. This is unlike a secure Govt. job in most 3rd world countries.
The conclusion is that this list would include ALL COMPANIES IN THE WORLD (and some Govts jobs). However, the list is not of rogue companies but simply companies that are run well.
Speaking generally, companies have no requirement to provide other benefits like health insurance, 401k, options...etc. But why do most companies offer these? - They do so to attract top talent. That's how a company distinguishes itself from its competitors.
Applying for GC has become one of the incentives.
A company offering GC incentive during hiring, but withholding it, would amount to unethical practice. And is certainly bound to lose its top talents (specifically immigrant ones)
hair Tags: F-14 Tomcat Cockpit
mi2
01-17 03:43 PM
Setup through my bank.
Good job IV!
Good job IV!
more...
Jaime
09-10 12:44 PM
Your children grew up in the U.S. as Americans, and are going to college, but they "age out" and thus become uninelligible to obtain a green card through you! - Your family gets into grave danger of being split up, or else choose to uproot the entire family and take them to your home country, which to them is a strange foreign land where they have no friends.
hot of the Grumman F-14 Tomcat
feedfront
09-21 12:23 PM
Hi Guys,
I am in tough spot. I was laid off from my GC sponsoring employer (A) in 2008 and joined another employer B . I did not do a AC21 notification. My dates are current and now I received an RFE to provide employment letter from current employer. The exact words of RFE are as follows:
"Submit a letter of employment attesting to applicant's current employment. This letter should be written on the company's official letterhead, citing the date the applicant began working, if a permanent full time position, the position offered, the position the applicant is currently working and the salary offered. Include corroborating evidence such as recent pay stubs, income tax returns, with all W2s or other evidence as appropriate. "
Now I am not working for original GC employer. I don't have a problem providing above from my current employer B. But whether the EVL should also mention that I am not working for GC sponsoring employer and that my current employers job profile is in same classification as previous based on AC21. Do I mention about the AC21 also in the letter? My current employer's attorneys are not that great but my current employer only wants me to use their own attorney.
Now here is the situation:
I have a job offer from another employer (Employer C) and they are in the middle of doing a H-1 transfer. In fact by tomorrow they will file the H1 paperwork. Now I don't know whether I should provide the letter from my potential new employer C . In that case, I won't be able to provide W2 or pay stubs until I join them. I have an opportunity to use my own attorney here (like murthy, Ron Gothcer..)
OR
should I provide a letter from my current employer using their attorneys and whether or not I should mention about AC21 in the employment letter.
Also they sent the RFE to my previous employer's attorney even though my current employer's attorney had sent the new G-28 forms. Can my current attorney respond to the RFE or will the response get rejected because USCIS still has old attorney on file.
Thanks.
Don't worry too much, just follow the instructions and respond. Well, I will suggest to use your current employer and their attorney as paperword will be smooth, efficient and fast.
You can hold your H1 transfer for a week or two till you don't respond.
I think your attorney (whoever you pick to work on RFE) will definitely mention AC-21 to keep it issueless.
I have also switched my employer and not filed AC-21. I've been sent RFE and that's what my attorney will do (I assume). I had asked him before (after switching job) if I needed to file AC21 letter. He said it's not mandatory and added that it can be handled if any RFEs are issued. Well, I did not send AC21 because he was asking for fee and I did not want to DIY project on such important. He's my previous employer's attorney.
I think for these RFEs you don't need great attorney as case is not complex. I think anything will work as long as you've not misused any GC's requirements.
Good Luck!
I am in tough spot. I was laid off from my GC sponsoring employer (A) in 2008 and joined another employer B . I did not do a AC21 notification. My dates are current and now I received an RFE to provide employment letter from current employer. The exact words of RFE are as follows:
"Submit a letter of employment attesting to applicant's current employment. This letter should be written on the company's official letterhead, citing the date the applicant began working, if a permanent full time position, the position offered, the position the applicant is currently working and the salary offered. Include corroborating evidence such as recent pay stubs, income tax returns, with all W2s or other evidence as appropriate. "
Now I am not working for original GC employer. I don't have a problem providing above from my current employer B. But whether the EVL should also mention that I am not working for GC sponsoring employer and that my current employers job profile is in same classification as previous based on AC21. Do I mention about the AC21 also in the letter? My current employer's attorneys are not that great but my current employer only wants me to use their own attorney.
Now here is the situation:
I have a job offer from another employer (Employer C) and they are in the middle of doing a H-1 transfer. In fact by tomorrow they will file the H1 paperwork. Now I don't know whether I should provide the letter from my potential new employer C . In that case, I won't be able to provide W2 or pay stubs until I join them. I have an opportunity to use my own attorney here (like murthy, Ron Gothcer..)
OR
should I provide a letter from my current employer using their attorneys and whether or not I should mention about AC21 in the employment letter.
Also they sent the RFE to my previous employer's attorney even though my current employer's attorney had sent the new G-28 forms. Can my current attorney respond to the RFE or will the response get rejected because USCIS still has old attorney on file.
Thanks.
Don't worry too much, just follow the instructions and respond. Well, I will suggest to use your current employer and their attorney as paperword will be smooth, efficient and fast.
You can hold your H1 transfer for a week or two till you don't respond.
I think your attorney (whoever you pick to work on RFE) will definitely mention AC-21 to keep it issueless.
I have also switched my employer and not filed AC-21. I've been sent RFE and that's what my attorney will do (I assume). I had asked him before (after switching job) if I needed to file AC21 letter. He said it's not mandatory and added that it can be handled if any RFEs are issued. Well, I did not send AC21 because he was asking for fee and I did not want to DIY project on such important. He's my previous employer's attorney.
I think for these RFEs you don't need great attorney as case is not complex. I think anything will work as long as you've not misused any GC's requirements.
Good Luck!
more...
house CAW5-cockpit.
anjs
08-10 09:56 PM
I am in for this.
anjs
anjs
tattoo THE MODERN FIGHTER COCKPIT
alisa
01-18 09:41 PM
I have been unable to access that powerpoint.
Could something please be posted here.
Could something please be posted here.
more...
pictures 1/48 F-14 Tomcat Cockpit Set
jsb
07-16 08:07 AM
Interesting that I did fingerprinting only in 2007 Nov/Dec after applying for I485 during the July 2007 fiasco. I have not received any fingerprinting notice since then. Guess I made an impression with my fingers. :)
I wonder why people are getting fingerprinting notices every year? I read a couple of cases about it.
Getting my EAD renewed, even though i am not on it. Renewal Package sent to USCIS.
Getting my AP renewed. Our company Attorney does it even though i don't use it and i am on H-1. Renewal Package Sent to USCIS.
Getting my H-1 renewed as it expires this Oct 10. Finished my 6yrs on H-1. Renewal Package Sent to USCIS.
If i get my I485 Approved in August, then USCIS gets all the money from the renewals that were sent for my case.
Your company should be quite rich to keep paying for EAD's and AP's you don't need, with their periodical extensions, and also for your H1 renewals....
I wonder why people are getting fingerprinting notices every year? I read a couple of cases about it.
Getting my EAD renewed, even though i am not on it. Renewal Package sent to USCIS.
Getting my AP renewed. Our company Attorney does it even though i don't use it and i am on H-1. Renewal Package Sent to USCIS.
Getting my H-1 renewed as it expires this Oct 10. Finished my 6yrs on H-1. Renewal Package Sent to USCIS.
If i get my I485 Approved in August, then USCIS gets all the money from the renewals that were sent for my case.
Your company should be quite rich to keep paying for EAD's and AP's you don't need, with their periodical extensions, and also for your H1 renewals....
dresses 09GrummanF14TomcatCockpit
Sakthisagar
08-11 02:23 PM
Most of the Eb3's are either working for big companies who won't do GC in EB2 or not qualified for eb2 ( so called 3 year degree ) and enjoying all these years when they know clearly eb3 is not going any where ...what in the world prevent them to move up the ladder and porting their PDs ...They dont want to take any risk and just show their frustation in internet forums
As some one in the forum quoted "There is a path of joy and there is the path of pleasure. Pondering on them, the wise (eb1 ,pre-approved labor and eb2 inorder ) chooses the path of joy; the fool takes the path of pleasure."
The Path of joy is not that.. Path of Joy is meditation, not this mundane eb1 eb2, this is the problem when the brain is completely with the modern day theories. when you open you bottle in the evening and when you whistle and flirt with girls, there you go you are at the path of pleasure. understand the things first in correct sense. dont speak senseless.
As some one in the forum quoted "There is a path of joy and there is the path of pleasure. Pondering on them, the wise (eb1 ,pre-approved labor and eb2 inorder ) chooses the path of joy; the fool takes the path of pleasure."
The Path of joy is not that.. Path of Joy is meditation, not this mundane eb1 eb2, this is the problem when the brain is completely with the modern day theories. when you open you bottle in the evening and when you whistle and flirt with girls, there you go you are at the path of pleasure. understand the things first in correct sense. dont speak senseless.
more...
makeup F14 Tomcat Cockpit pictures from entertainment photos on webshots
ajay
04-13 10:12 AM
A very useful piece of information has been brought to our attention by shiankuraaf.
Thank you very much!
http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/LPR08.shtm
Table 6 Persons Obtaining Legal Permanent Resident Status by Type and Major Class of Admission: Fiscal Years 1999 to 2008
http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/YrBk04Im.shtm
Table 4 Immigrants admitted by type and selected class of admission: fiscal years 1986-2004
Employment-based preferences (Total Number)
Year QUOTA ISSUED Unused/Excessively used
1986 140000 56617 83383
1987 140000 57519 82481
1988 140000 58727 81273
1989 140000 57741 82259
1990 140000 58192 81808
1991 140000 59525 80475
1992 140000 116198 23802
1993 140000 147012 -7012
1994 140000 123291 16709
1995 140000 85336 54664
1996 140000 117499 22501
1997 140000 90607 49393
1998 140000 77517 62483
1999 140000 56678 83322
2000 140000 106642 33358
2001 140000 178702 -38702
2002 140000 173814 -33814
2003 140000 81727 58273
2004 140000 155330 -15330
2005 140000 246877 -106877
2006 140000 159081 -19081
2007 140000 162176 -22176
2008 140000 166511 -26511
Sum total of the differences from 1986 to 2008: 626,681. Vow!!!
So when looked between the period of 1986 and 2008,
there were a total of 626,681 un-used visa numbers that can be re-captured.
This is based on the BIG assumption that the yearly quota for EB categories is 140,000 from 1986 to 2008.
Does anybody know how to verify this important assumption online --a link to a gov website perhaps?
It would be good to verify when the law specifying 140,000 visa numbers per year was passed and
what were the criteria for visa number usage prior to the existence of the law.
It is clearly a well prepared format and nobody has brought this kind of helpful information to our group. We would need people like you and I am sure I will also support this if we are aggressively pursuing it. But again as somebody here said in this discussion that we should be careful about the seriousness of the situation being counted by the lawmakers.
Kudos to you.
Thank you very much!
http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/LPR08.shtm
Table 6 Persons Obtaining Legal Permanent Resident Status by Type and Major Class of Admission: Fiscal Years 1999 to 2008
http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/YrBk04Im.shtm
Table 4 Immigrants admitted by type and selected class of admission: fiscal years 1986-2004
Employment-based preferences (Total Number)
Year QUOTA ISSUED Unused/Excessively used
1986 140000 56617 83383
1987 140000 57519 82481
1988 140000 58727 81273
1989 140000 57741 82259
1990 140000 58192 81808
1991 140000 59525 80475
1992 140000 116198 23802
1993 140000 147012 -7012
1994 140000 123291 16709
1995 140000 85336 54664
1996 140000 117499 22501
1997 140000 90607 49393
1998 140000 77517 62483
1999 140000 56678 83322
2000 140000 106642 33358
2001 140000 178702 -38702
2002 140000 173814 -33814
2003 140000 81727 58273
2004 140000 155330 -15330
2005 140000 246877 -106877
2006 140000 159081 -19081
2007 140000 162176 -22176
2008 140000 166511 -26511
Sum total of the differences from 1986 to 2008: 626,681. Vow!!!
So when looked between the period of 1986 and 2008,
there were a total of 626,681 un-used visa numbers that can be re-captured.
This is based on the BIG assumption that the yearly quota for EB categories is 140,000 from 1986 to 2008.
Does anybody know how to verify this important assumption online --a link to a gov website perhaps?
It would be good to verify when the law specifying 140,000 visa numbers per year was passed and
what were the criteria for visa number usage prior to the existence of the law.
It is clearly a well prepared format and nobody has brought this kind of helpful information to our group. We would need people like you and I am sure I will also support this if we are aggressively pursuing it. But again as somebody here said in this discussion that we should be careful about the seriousness of the situation being counted by the lawmakers.
Kudos to you.
girlfriend Grumman F-14 Tomcat cockpit.
Jaime
09-10 03:49 PM
"We don't sponsor" - The favorite new phrase of most companies' HR department employees. Most of the times they don't even know what that means, but the H1-B visa has gotten such a bad rap for being so cumbersome, unjust, cruel, expensive and difficult that companies just don't want to deal with it anymore. Ask any current international student how many times this unfairness has driven them to tears. That's why they are going back home to compete against the U.S.!!!
hairstyles F-14 Tomcat! modelplane1.png
webm
12-15 11:48 AM
Well said Chandu..it's true..
paskal
07-03 09:51 AM
...that the system is severely backlogged and needs repair but to say it is unfair to limit the number of immigrants from one country does not make sense. Removing the per country limit would allow one or two countries to dominate the EB system because their high populations allow them to produce more skilled labor. So removing the per country limit would remove the "bias" off these countries and move it to the ones with lower populations; so, in essence the discrimination would be reversed? Maybe a point-based system that incorporates a per country score would be better?
i think it's an interesting discussion, but what would you say to the argument that if immigration artificially inflates the numbers of small countries beyond their real populations and ends up penalizing larger countries. in other words it creates and artificial distribution favoring certain parts of the world...is that really the goal? is is good? s it fair? it's a monopoly in the reverse way- excess opportunity for an individual from certain countries.
when the quotas were originally made, they had exactly that idea- and the motive was explicitly racist. times have changed. so should the antiquated laws.
i think it's an interesting discussion, but what would you say to the argument that if immigration artificially inflates the numbers of small countries beyond their real populations and ends up penalizing larger countries. in other words it creates and artificial distribution favoring certain parts of the world...is that really the goal? is is good? s it fair? it's a monopoly in the reverse way- excess opportunity for an individual from certain countries.
when the quotas were originally made, they had exactly that idea- and the motive was explicitly racist. times have changed. so should the antiquated laws.
kumarc123
03-12 10:43 AM
$25 a month is reasonable. What people want it GC in $25 in less than 6 months. Somehow these same guys do not mind paying lawyers $700 for EAD filing which they could do themselves. In other words they trust lawyers who are clearly have a self interest in you not getting a GC but will not trust one of your kind because these guys think their crummy $25 is being flinched.
At least the money is put to some use and results are tangible, how about the results in here?
Refer to my posts.
IV core needs to explain!
At least the money is put to some use and results are tangible, how about the results in here?
Refer to my posts.
IV core needs to explain!
No comments:
Post a Comment