pappu
04-09 03:31 PM
Visa Bulletin for May 2010 (http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4805.html)
wallpaper Hawaiian tattoos originated in
amitjoey
07-03 04:17 PM
Thanks titu1972, mhb, sbindval, gsc999, tapukakababa, divakarr for your contributions.
Jaime
09-10 01:36 PM
Your spouse gets an H1-B him/herself for a higher-paying job than yours, but the job is in another city - Your spouse cannot get the job, because you are not allowed to move. The only option is to split the family up or reject the job offer and supplemental income.
2011 Hawaiian Flower Tattoo Designs
coolmanasip
03-10 01:05 PM
Change of employer does not imply your use of the AC21.....the rule does not require you to notify USCIS....so in many cases, if you do not notify them, it is likely that they will never know and approve your GC. But, if they issue an RFE and if your sponsoring employer gives you the offer for future job you should be okay..........you may only have to work for them for at least a little bit after you got your GC....
more...
ndbhatt
02-15 01:26 PM
now what the hell is ROW and ICMP ?
ROW = Rest Of World
ICMP = India, China, Mexico and Phillipines
ROW = Rest Of World
ICMP = India, China, Mexico and Phillipines
virald
07-18 12:54 AM
Plus the July 2nd bulletin has been reversed (meaning totally void). So the July 2nd filers should be ok. Infact there is a grim possibility that you may be assigned the remaining yearly visa numbers (as per Greg Siskind's blog entry).
Instead of really worrying, why don't you become a paid member of IV on a monthly recurring basis? This way you are supporting the IV cause (which is your/our cause).
Guys,
I don't like to worry but here is Greg Siskind's comment --(don't know what to make of it)
Just to clarify, some cases received on July 2nd were rejected according to the USCIS' own announcement. I am not sure if people have started to get those applications back or not yet. Perhaps people on the blog can weigh in. The dilemma is what to do if you don't know whether the case is in or not. No clear answer yet. AILA may get some info on this when it presumably meets with USCIS on this very soon.
Posted by: Greg Siskind | July 17, 2007 at 09:17 PM (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2007/07/faqs-part-1.html#comment-76226938)
Instead of really worrying, why don't you become a paid member of IV on a monthly recurring basis? This way you are supporting the IV cause (which is your/our cause).
Guys,
I don't like to worry but here is Greg Siskind's comment --(don't know what to make of it)
Just to clarify, some cases received on July 2nd were rejected according to the USCIS' own announcement. I am not sure if people have started to get those applications back or not yet. Perhaps people on the blog can weigh in. The dilemma is what to do if you don't know whether the case is in or not. No clear answer yet. AILA may get some info on this when it presumably meets with USCIS on this very soon.
Posted by: Greg Siskind | July 17, 2007 at 09:17 PM (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2007/07/faqs-part-1.html#comment-76226938)
more...
glus
09-19 11:02 AM
This must be done. Also, we could include flags of all the member nationalities, to show this website is an international one. So if we have members from 20 different countries, this should be clearly shown. Guys, the problem is not only for indians, it is also for the others like me.
G
G
2010 tattoo polynesian. polynesian
godspeed
06-14 11:41 AM
Senator Saxby Chambliss has voted against the original Senate version of H.R. 4213
more...
ebizash
06-11 10:23 AM
Sent to IL lawmakers.
Forwarded to a few friends.
Forwarded to a few friends.
hair Containing a number of various patterns, the Hawaiian tattoo designs
justAnotherFile
07-24 01:23 PM
The law 245 (c) clearly states that the status of the applicant may be adjusted to that of permanent resident only if the visa number is available.
Nowhere does it state that the application for adjustment of status can be accepted only if visa number is available.
This must lie within the discretion of the USCIS but will need some lobbying because of no precedent of invoking it.
This is similar to the H1-B issue, previously apllication were accepted only on Oct 1, if the current year visas ran out. The USCIS made a policy change to accept applications for the next year starting April 1 in order to alleviate some problems regarding status etc.
Those of who who are inetersted in pursuing this furhter should write a 2-3 line question to USCIS in the below link. If there are enough questions on the same issue we may elicit a response.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/ask
we can plan further action later.
Nowhere does it state that the application for adjustment of status can be accepted only if visa number is available.
This must lie within the discretion of the USCIS but will need some lobbying because of no precedent of invoking it.
This is similar to the H1-B issue, previously apllication were accepted only on Oct 1, if the current year visas ran out. The USCIS made a policy change to accept applications for the next year starting April 1 in order to alleviate some problems regarding status etc.
Those of who who are inetersted in pursuing this furhter should write a 2-3 line question to USCIS in the below link. If there are enough questions on the same issue we may elicit a response.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/ask
we can plan further action later.
more...
zuhail
03-11 08:58 PM
By the way there is a thread where it is mentioned that the spill over to EB2 and EB3 still works the same.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=325657
This would mean that there would be no significant movement in EB2 and EB3 India numbers.
Time is RIGHT NOW to introduce a bill for recapturing Visa Numbers.
Thanks de2002 for The NyTimes Editorial. ( I only wish this had also come from WSJ).
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/03/opinion/03fri2.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=legal%20immigration&st=cse
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=325657
This would mean that there would be no significant movement in EB2 and EB3 India numbers.
Time is RIGHT NOW to introduce a bill for recapturing Visa Numbers.
Thanks de2002 for The NyTimes Editorial. ( I only wish this had also come from WSJ).
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/03/opinion/03fri2.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=legal%20immigration&st=cse
hot polynesian tattoos meaning
SunnySurya
07-03 09:28 PM
May I suggest the following reservations:
20% Other Backward Countries (OBC)
15% Scheduled Countries (SC)
15% Scheduled Territories (ST)
5% Kins of the armed forces
Remaining 55% for Highly Skilled people
20% Other Backward Countries (OBC)
15% Scheduled Countries (SC)
15% Scheduled Territories (ST)
5% Kins of the armed forces
Remaining 55% for Highly Skilled people
more...
house hawaiian tattoos. hawaiian
varshadas
02-09 08:26 PM
Yes, I will send in the details for the telcon shortly
tattoo comes to Polynesian tattoo
h1techSlave
07-28 03:04 PM
Would you be offended if the image of Ganesh is used on a sack of rice or sugar or a bottle of cooking oil? If not, then what's the problem in using it on an alcoholic beverage bottle?
I always thought in the same angle. Why people are so jittery about alcohol? Alcohol is harmless in reasonable quantities. It is bad when consumed excessively; so are oil, rice etc. What's the big deal about alcohol alone?
I always thought in the same angle. Why people are so jittery about alcohol? Alcohol is harmless in reasonable quantities. It is bad when consumed excessively; so are oil, rice etc. What's the big deal about alcohol alone?
more...
pictures hawaiian tattoo. in Hawaiian
gimme_GC2006
04-06 11:31 PM
No no. This is very true. This happened to my friend's friend.
My friend's friend was visiting my friend and was traveling with his dog. The VO asked my friend's friend what his plan was with the dog. My friend's friend said he was just planning to stay with my friend and take the dog to walk in nearby park where he can poop in the grass and pee on a tire. The VO immediately called my friend and asked if he can take a US dog and have it poop in the park and pee on tire. My friend said yes! And the VO immediately deported my friend's friend along with dog!! :eek: My friend's friend very upset, not in shape to talk about it for 3 months.
IV should do something about this before too late! ;)
hahahah...too funny
My friend's friend was visiting my friend and was traveling with his dog. The VO asked my friend's friend what his plan was with the dog. My friend's friend said he was just planning to stay with my friend and take the dog to walk in nearby park where he can poop in the grass and pee on a tire. The VO immediately called my friend and asked if he can take a US dog and have it poop in the park and pee on tire. My friend said yes! And the VO immediately deported my friend's friend along with dog!! :eek: My friend's friend very upset, not in shape to talk about it for 3 months.
IV should do something about this before too late! ;)
hahahah...too funny
dresses polynesian tattoo designs.
Ramba
07-14 06:18 PM
You are correct but his case could be that his employer cancelled his 140 which could damage his case more than the use of AC21 to change employers.
The fundamental rule (for getting GC) is the longterm intent of having permanent employment relationship between employer and employee at the time of filing 140 and 485 (see the Q&A). The intet has to be "at the time of filing" only. The employee has worked 3 years in H1B for thr sponser. It clearly establishes the both party's intent at the time of filing. So, even if the employer revokes his approved 140, he is 100% safe.
The fundamental rule (for getting GC) is the longterm intent of having permanent employment relationship between employer and employee at the time of filing 140 and 485 (see the Q&A). The intet has to be "at the time of filing" only. The employee has worked 3 years in H1B for thr sponser. It clearly establishes the both party's intent at the time of filing. So, even if the employer revokes his approved 140, he is 100% safe.
more...
makeup tattoo polynesian. tattoo
swede
09-19 02:33 AM
Thank you IV and all volunteers that made this rally happen. It was very well organized and I really enjoyed being part of it!!
I really liked Murthy's speech. Short and to the point. "Legal" is the key.
I also liked Mark's little comedy act.
(Wish more would have shown up to show their support, but I guess some people are content waiting 10 or more years for their GC.)
Suggestions for improvement to next time:
1. I liked that the Chinese group joined the rally, but I didn't like their speaker. He was only talking about Chinese and Indian joining forces, and then making some kind of joke about IC chips are only made by Indians and Chinese. It's ok if you want to be an Indian/Chinese-only group, it is your choice. But if you want to change something about your green cards, you will fail with that attitude. You need to attract and change things for EVERYONE, or no one will listen to you. (If you want IV to be for everyone, IV needs to be more clear on that. There are so many Indians on the forums that ppl might think it is only for Indians.)
2. Minor things... Good job on the signs(!), but there were too many of them. Half would be enough. People had trouble focus on them.
Also, keep the message short. Max a few words. No one can, in a few seconds, read a moving sign containing 4 lines of text with 5 words on each, on an unknown subject. The poor people who tried to read them looked like near-sighted old men. Short and big letters is better. "Shorter wait for legals"
rather than
"Reduce the backlog for highly-skilled legal immigrants so we can live the American dream and not wait for 10 years"
But all in all, I was amazed how well everything was planned. The state flags was a nice touch. Flowers too. Water for the participants. Great! Even the nice DC cops blocking the roads for us seemed very happy with us. Following the law is what legals do...
I really liked Murthy's speech. Short and to the point. "Legal" is the key.
I also liked Mark's little comedy act.
(Wish more would have shown up to show their support, but I guess some people are content waiting 10 or more years for their GC.)
Suggestions for improvement to next time:
1. I liked that the Chinese group joined the rally, but I didn't like their speaker. He was only talking about Chinese and Indian joining forces, and then making some kind of joke about IC chips are only made by Indians and Chinese. It's ok if you want to be an Indian/Chinese-only group, it is your choice. But if you want to change something about your green cards, you will fail with that attitude. You need to attract and change things for EVERYONE, or no one will listen to you. (If you want IV to be for everyone, IV needs to be more clear on that. There are so many Indians on the forums that ppl might think it is only for Indians.)
2. Minor things... Good job on the signs(!), but there were too many of them. Half would be enough. People had trouble focus on them.
Also, keep the message short. Max a few words. No one can, in a few seconds, read a moving sign containing 4 lines of text with 5 words on each, on an unknown subject. The poor people who tried to read them looked like near-sighted old men. Short and big letters is better. "Shorter wait for legals"
rather than
"Reduce the backlog for highly-skilled legal immigrants so we can live the American dream and not wait for 10 years"
But all in all, I was amazed how well everything was planned. The state flags was a nice touch. Flowers too. Water for the participants. Great! Even the nice DC cops blocking the roads for us seemed very happy with us. Following the law is what legals do...
girlfriend Hawaiian tribal tattoos differ
pray
08-17 01:11 PM
you write some ridiculous stuff in your first post and you want us to chill out. Get a sense of this board and its professional members, before you post any nonsense like that.
As I said previously, just chill out.Let me give all you guys some advice whether you want it or not.You guys are just busy speculating about something which you guys have no idea about.As a result all you guys are doing is getting worked up and trust me this nonsense is not helping you one bit.
If you are giving some factual help with how to file,procedures etc it is one thing, baseless speculation will get you nowhere.If you think I am not in the same boat as the majority of you-- you are mistaken.It is just that I try to stay positive while you guys keep whining.We all know the system is not working fairly for Indians even though we are bright,intelligent and law abiding folks.
You have no idea how dates will progress,so to reiterate once again just chill!
As I said previously, just chill out.Let me give all you guys some advice whether you want it or not.You guys are just busy speculating about something which you guys have no idea about.As a result all you guys are doing is getting worked up and trust me this nonsense is not helping you one bit.
If you are giving some factual help with how to file,procedures etc it is one thing, baseless speculation will get you nowhere.If you think I am not in the same boat as the majority of you-- you are mistaken.It is just that I try to stay positive while you guys keep whining.We all know the system is not working fairly for Indians even though we are bright,intelligent and law abiding folks.
You have no idea how dates will progress,so to reiterate once again just chill!
hairstyles Hawaiian Tattoo Design
vbkris77
04-10 12:28 PM
What you said is absolutely true. EB1 Last year and the year before saw lot more approvals than usual. My reasoning is that even though EB1 was current for all along, they never really approved I140s to give them GC. So In the overall clearing of I140s, CIS cleared lot more EB1 cases and became approved during last 2 years. If you look at the I140 completion in the dash board, it will be very much clear that the completions came down to 4 digits for each month from 5 digits. Receipts continued to be less than 5K per month.
This year, we may see a big dip in EB1 cases and larger EB2 spillover. EB4 spillover is ruled out after this bulletin.
Here are the details for last year and years before:
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
This year, we may see a big dip in EB1 cases and larger EB2 spillover. EB4 spillover is ruled out after this bulletin.
Here are the details for last year and years before:
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
GC_ASP
03-18 05:45 PM
Please see the last sentece which says "Thus, the same cut-off date for each country since the extra numbers must be made available in priority date order without regard to country".
When they use this spill over, only PD is imp not the country.
If that is the case, I am not sure why China didn't even move a single day. From the example, China should have gotten half of the unused visas. :confused:
When they use this spill over, only PD is imp not the country.
If that is the case, I am not sure why China didn't even move a single day. From the example, China should have gotten half of the unused visas. :confused:
Sachin_Stock
09-09 02:05 PM
The only hope, on a personal front, is to port to Eb2 or Eb1. It all depends on your company though. However, those who don't have any issues with their employer, and is contributing a lot, then go for porting. Thats the only hope.