ItIsNotFunny
11-06 03:13 PM
Bump ^^^^
wallpaper love poems your oyfriend
yabayaba
06-11 10:41 AM
Done
goan2005
09-26 09:22 AM
CNN HAS CORRECTED THE ARTICLE NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WOWWW. THANKS IV.
Oh My God, CNN is screwing us in different way now. They are telling american people the Rally last week at SC was for increse in H1B and not for Incresed GCs.
I am getting freakled out by such American politics. I thought USA is different than INDIA atleast in this regard.
http://money.cnn.com/2007/09/25/smbusiness/h1b_cap.fsb/index.htm?postversion=2007092606
WOWWW. THANKS IV.
Oh My God, CNN is screwing us in different way now. They are telling american people the Rally last week at SC was for increse in H1B and not for Incresed GCs.
I am getting freakled out by such American politics. I thought USA is different than INDIA atleast in this regard.
http://money.cnn.com/2007/09/25/smbusiness/h1b_cap.fsb/index.htm?postversion=2007092606
2011 love you poems your oyfriend
dixie
12-28 08:26 AM
Just transited through hong kong on Cathay Pacific. No transit visa required -Whats more they even gave me a 2 weeks visitor visa to take a tour of HK - my layover time was more than 6 hours.
God Bless Asian countries :
Singapore - Never heard of transit visa
Bangkok - Never heard of transit visa
Seoul - Never heard of transit visa
Tokyo - They may introduce it soon as they think they are western country
God Bless Asian countries :
Singapore - Never heard of transit visa
Bangkok - Never heard of transit visa
Seoul - Never heard of transit visa
Tokyo - They may introduce it soon as they think they are western country
more...
paskal
12-26 04:28 PM
the account can be opened in 1 sec
i just have to click the button
yjey have it all set up and ready
but below they have a statement that says" only citizens and permanent residents can use this facility"
Business needs define rules in this country. Western Union was sending money to mexico. Then American Banks started chipping into that business, accepting different documents as valid for money transfer. You get the drift.
As for Citi bank not opening e-accounts for existing account holders, it is a bit surprising. Once they vetted you in the process, they are repeating it just to verify your identity? My bank lets me open different accounts online as I am known to them for a long long time.
i just have to click the button
yjey have it all set up and ready
but below they have a statement that says" only citizens and permanent residents can use this facility"
Business needs define rules in this country. Western Union was sending money to mexico. Then American Banks started chipping into that business, accepting different documents as valid for money transfer. You get the drift.
As for Citi bank not opening e-accounts for existing account holders, it is a bit surprising. Once they vetted you in the process, they are repeating it just to verify your identity? My bank lets me open different accounts online as I am known to them for a long long time.
gccovet
03-09 12:26 PM
No movement for EB2-I just 15 days forward for EB3-I
This sux
GCCOvet
This sux
GCCOvet
more...
pappu
07-01 10:22 PM
Info on the lawsuit by AILA:
==============
USCIS VISA BULLETIN/
VISA AVAILABILTY LAWSUIT
Frequently Asked Questions about Participating in this Lawsuit
AILF is considering filing a lawsuit in federal district court against the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) over its rejection of otherwise properly filed adjustment of status applications for the alleged reason that a visa was not available, even though the Visa Bulletin from the Department of State (DOS) states that a visa was available at the time of filing.
Any foreign national who is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status and whose adjustment of status application has been or will be returned or rejected solely on this basis may be eligible to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit. If you are considering being a participant in this lawsuit, you may find the following frequently asked questions and answers helpful.
Q: What is AILF?
A: The American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF) is a non-profit organization dedicated to protecting the rights of immigrants and refugees and to securing fair and just application and administration of the U.S. immigration laws. In order to achieve these goals, AILF sometimes files lawsuits involving various aspects of immigration law.
Q: What is this lawsuit about?
A: This lawsuit will be filed by plaintiffs who have been harmed because USCIS rejected or returned or is expected to reject or return a properly submitted adjustment of status application for the alleged reason that no visa was immediately available even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that a visa was available at that time.
To be eligible for adjustment to lawful permanent resident status, a foreign national must show that a visa number is “immediately available.” USCIS regulations state that the DOS Visa Bulletin is used to determine whether a visa number is immediately available. This Bulletin is published once a month and lists the visa availability dates for all categories of immigrants for the following month. Thus, for example, the July 2007 bulletin, listing visa availability dates for the entire month of July, was published in June 2007.
AILF has learned that USCIS has refused to allow certain adjustment of status applications to be filed even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that visa numbers are available for the immigrant category at that time. USCIS rejected these applications because DOS informed it in an internal communication that no visa numbers remained for that category of immigrants. To date, this has happened only in the employment-based “other worker” category. We anticipate that it may happen in a number of other types of employment-based immigrant categories beginning in July 2007.
We believe USCIS violated the law when it failed to apply the visa availability dates listed in the Visa Bulletin, as required by a federal regulation, and instead rejected properly filed adjustment applications. Through this lawsuit, we will challenge the rejection of adjustment of status applications on this basis. We will ask the court to order USCIS to accept the rejected adjustment applications and treat them as being filed as of the date they originally would have been filed had USCIS not rejected them.
Q: What is a “plaintiff” and how do I know if I am eligible to be a “plaintiff” in this lawsuit?
A: A plaintiff is a person who files a lawsuit against someone else. We are still determining the categories of plaintiffs but an eligible plaintiff for this lawsuit may include:
[other worker category]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in the “other worker” category for receipt by USCIS in June 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
[other employment-based categories]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in any employment-based category other than “other worker” for receipt by USCIS in July 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
Q: Why should I be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
2
A: If the lawsuit is successful, USCIS should accept your adjustment application and treat it as if it had been filed as of the date that you originally tried to file it. Because your adjustment application will then be considered to be pending before the agency, you may be eligible for interim benefits, including an employment authorization document, advance parole, and others.
What the lawsuit will not do is make a visa number immediately available to you if none is available. If the visa numbers have in fact been used for the current fiscal year, the court does not have the authority under the law to make a new number available to you. However, if the court orders that USCIS accept your adjustment application as of the date that you originally tried to file it, you will be at an earlier place in line when visa numbers become available again in the next fiscal year, October 1, 2007. Additionally, as mentioned, you may be eligible for interim benefits while you are waiting.
Q: What is likely to happen because of the suit?
A: Lawsuits are uncertain by nature. We cannot predict the exact outcome. However, other efforts to resolve these problems with USCIS have not succeeded. For this reason, we believe that a lawsuit is the only remaining possible way to resolve these problems.
Q: Will being a plaintiff in this lawsuit hurt my chances for permanent residence?
A: If an individual is otherwise legally entitled to have an application granted, the government cannot lawfully deny that application on the basis that the person is participating or participated in a lawsuit. If we believed the government was taking such action, we would complain to the lawyers representing the government and to the judge handling the case. In our experience, this retaliation has not happened.
Please be aware, though, that USCIS is likely to examine plaintiffs’ adjustment of status applications more closely than it otherwise might. It may ask the plaintiffs questions and ask for additional information about their adjustment applications or immigration status. See below regarding “discovery.”
Q: How much time must plaintiffs spend on this lawsuit?
A: Plaintiffs will have to provide us with the information and documentation we need in order to prepare the lawsuit. AILF will do most of the work in the lawsuit on paper. Depending on how the case proceeds, the government and its attorneys may want to ask the plaintiffs some questions about their case, either through written questions and answers or in person. This is called “discovery.” One type of discovery is a “deposition,” which is an interview where parties are asked questions about their cases.
Depositions are possible but not common in this type of case. In the event that discovery and/or depositions were required, an AILF attorney or an attorney working with us would assist plaintiffs to comply with any discovery requests, and would appear with plaintiffs at any deposition at no charge (see below). At a later stage, a plaintiff may be required to be present at
3
a hearing or a trial and possibly be asked to testify about their particular case, but this is quite rare.
Q: Will it cost me anything to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: AILF and any co-counsel will not charge any attorney’s fees for representing individuals in this lawsuit. AILF and any co-counsel also will pay the costs and expenses associated with the lawsuit, such as filing fees, copying, long distance calls, travel expenses for AILF attorneys and staff, depositions, transcripts, etc. In the unlikely event that an individual should be required to be present at a deposition, hearing or a trial, we may ask that he/she pay their own travel and lodging expenses, if any. Those expenses would be reimbursed if the lawsuit is successful and we recover costs.
Q: Will anyone know that I am a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: Lawsuits are public information, and are available as a public court document. Many courts now have lawsuits and other documents available electronically, accessible via the internet. Also, USCIS will, of course, know the identity of the plaintiffs. We also will discuss plaintiffs’ cases with any other lawyers working with us on the lawsuit. It also is possible that the media – newspapers, radio, or TV reporters – will see the court documents and decide to do a story on the lawsuit.
Q: What should I do if I am eligible and interested in being a plaintiff in the lawsuit?
A: Please quickly submit the Questionnaire for Potential Plaintiffs and send us the documents requested. If you do not have the Questionnaire, please send an email to visabulletin@ailf.org, and we will send it to you. You may also fax a request to AILF LAC at (202) 742-5619. Please indicate this is a question about the visa bulletin litigation.
If you have any questions that are not answered by this FAQ or the questionnaire, please send them to visabulletin@ailf.org or fax to (202) 742-65619, and we will respond. Thank you!
===============
==============
USCIS VISA BULLETIN/
VISA AVAILABILTY LAWSUIT
Frequently Asked Questions about Participating in this Lawsuit
AILF is considering filing a lawsuit in federal district court against the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) over its rejection of otherwise properly filed adjustment of status applications for the alleged reason that a visa was not available, even though the Visa Bulletin from the Department of State (DOS) states that a visa was available at the time of filing.
Any foreign national who is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status and whose adjustment of status application has been or will be returned or rejected solely on this basis may be eligible to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit. If you are considering being a participant in this lawsuit, you may find the following frequently asked questions and answers helpful.
Q: What is AILF?
A: The American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF) is a non-profit organization dedicated to protecting the rights of immigrants and refugees and to securing fair and just application and administration of the U.S. immigration laws. In order to achieve these goals, AILF sometimes files lawsuits involving various aspects of immigration law.
Q: What is this lawsuit about?
A: This lawsuit will be filed by plaintiffs who have been harmed because USCIS rejected or returned or is expected to reject or return a properly submitted adjustment of status application for the alleged reason that no visa was immediately available even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that a visa was available at that time.
To be eligible for adjustment to lawful permanent resident status, a foreign national must show that a visa number is “immediately available.” USCIS regulations state that the DOS Visa Bulletin is used to determine whether a visa number is immediately available. This Bulletin is published once a month and lists the visa availability dates for all categories of immigrants for the following month. Thus, for example, the July 2007 bulletin, listing visa availability dates for the entire month of July, was published in June 2007.
AILF has learned that USCIS has refused to allow certain adjustment of status applications to be filed even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that visa numbers are available for the immigrant category at that time. USCIS rejected these applications because DOS informed it in an internal communication that no visa numbers remained for that category of immigrants. To date, this has happened only in the employment-based “other worker” category. We anticipate that it may happen in a number of other types of employment-based immigrant categories beginning in July 2007.
We believe USCIS violated the law when it failed to apply the visa availability dates listed in the Visa Bulletin, as required by a federal regulation, and instead rejected properly filed adjustment applications. Through this lawsuit, we will challenge the rejection of adjustment of status applications on this basis. We will ask the court to order USCIS to accept the rejected adjustment applications and treat them as being filed as of the date they originally would have been filed had USCIS not rejected them.
Q: What is a “plaintiff” and how do I know if I am eligible to be a “plaintiff” in this lawsuit?
A: A plaintiff is a person who files a lawsuit against someone else. We are still determining the categories of plaintiffs but an eligible plaintiff for this lawsuit may include:
[other worker category]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in the “other worker” category for receipt by USCIS in June 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
[other employment-based categories]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in any employment-based category other than “other worker” for receipt by USCIS in July 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
Q: Why should I be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
2
A: If the lawsuit is successful, USCIS should accept your adjustment application and treat it as if it had been filed as of the date that you originally tried to file it. Because your adjustment application will then be considered to be pending before the agency, you may be eligible for interim benefits, including an employment authorization document, advance parole, and others.
What the lawsuit will not do is make a visa number immediately available to you if none is available. If the visa numbers have in fact been used for the current fiscal year, the court does not have the authority under the law to make a new number available to you. However, if the court orders that USCIS accept your adjustment application as of the date that you originally tried to file it, you will be at an earlier place in line when visa numbers become available again in the next fiscal year, October 1, 2007. Additionally, as mentioned, you may be eligible for interim benefits while you are waiting.
Q: What is likely to happen because of the suit?
A: Lawsuits are uncertain by nature. We cannot predict the exact outcome. However, other efforts to resolve these problems with USCIS have not succeeded. For this reason, we believe that a lawsuit is the only remaining possible way to resolve these problems.
Q: Will being a plaintiff in this lawsuit hurt my chances for permanent residence?
A: If an individual is otherwise legally entitled to have an application granted, the government cannot lawfully deny that application on the basis that the person is participating or participated in a lawsuit. If we believed the government was taking such action, we would complain to the lawyers representing the government and to the judge handling the case. In our experience, this retaliation has not happened.
Please be aware, though, that USCIS is likely to examine plaintiffs’ adjustment of status applications more closely than it otherwise might. It may ask the plaintiffs questions and ask for additional information about their adjustment applications or immigration status. See below regarding “discovery.”
Q: How much time must plaintiffs spend on this lawsuit?
A: Plaintiffs will have to provide us with the information and documentation we need in order to prepare the lawsuit. AILF will do most of the work in the lawsuit on paper. Depending on how the case proceeds, the government and its attorneys may want to ask the plaintiffs some questions about their case, either through written questions and answers or in person. This is called “discovery.” One type of discovery is a “deposition,” which is an interview where parties are asked questions about their cases.
Depositions are possible but not common in this type of case. In the event that discovery and/or depositions were required, an AILF attorney or an attorney working with us would assist plaintiffs to comply with any discovery requests, and would appear with plaintiffs at any deposition at no charge (see below). At a later stage, a plaintiff may be required to be present at
3
a hearing or a trial and possibly be asked to testify about their particular case, but this is quite rare.
Q: Will it cost me anything to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: AILF and any co-counsel will not charge any attorney’s fees for representing individuals in this lawsuit. AILF and any co-counsel also will pay the costs and expenses associated with the lawsuit, such as filing fees, copying, long distance calls, travel expenses for AILF attorneys and staff, depositions, transcripts, etc. In the unlikely event that an individual should be required to be present at a deposition, hearing or a trial, we may ask that he/she pay their own travel and lodging expenses, if any. Those expenses would be reimbursed if the lawsuit is successful and we recover costs.
Q: Will anyone know that I am a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: Lawsuits are public information, and are available as a public court document. Many courts now have lawsuits and other documents available electronically, accessible via the internet. Also, USCIS will, of course, know the identity of the plaintiffs. We also will discuss plaintiffs’ cases with any other lawyers working with us on the lawsuit. It also is possible that the media – newspapers, radio, or TV reporters – will see the court documents and decide to do a story on the lawsuit.
Q: What should I do if I am eligible and interested in being a plaintiff in the lawsuit?
A: Please quickly submit the Questionnaire for Potential Plaintiffs and send us the documents requested. If you do not have the Questionnaire, please send an email to visabulletin@ailf.org, and we will send it to you. You may also fax a request to AILF LAC at (202) 742-5619. Please indicate this is a question about the visa bulletin litigation.
If you have any questions that are not answered by this FAQ or the questionnaire, please send them to visabulletin@ailf.org or fax to (202) 742-65619, and we will respond. Thank you!
===============
2010 poems for ur oyfriend.
angelfire76
05-26 05:47 PM
Yeah CBP is made up of the most xenophobic people I've met. Even on the Canadian border, as Mexican border it's understandable.
If Mexicans get ill-treated then the Hispanic groups will yell "racism", but if we do, our fellow PRs and US citizens will look down at us from their perch and say "Follow the law/process". No wonder it's open season on us.
If Mexicans get ill-treated then the Hispanic groups will yell "racism", but if we do, our fellow PRs and US citizens will look down at us from their perch and say "Follow the law/process". No wonder it's open season on us.
more...
ashwin_27
07-01 03:47 PM
I think the new reference # for the Sanders Amendment is now
Senate Amendment 4439 to the American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act (H.R. 5297).. Correct??
People will be sending emails to senators with reference to the wrong amendment if this text is not corrected!!
Senate Amendment 4439 to the American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act (H.R. 5297).. Correct??
People will be sending emails to senators with reference to the wrong amendment if this text is not corrected!!
hair Boyfriend, Love Poems,
trueguy
07-03 05:50 PM
Everyone,
Can we stick to the subject please?
Where is the online petition and how soon can we collect all the signature so they can help in getting those three bills approved.
Thanks
Can we stick to the subject please?
Where is the online petition and how soon can we collect all the signature so they can help in getting those three bills approved.
Thanks
more...
lordoftherings
09-26 11:01 AM
There is a blog there in the article. Have you guys seen that how misinformed americans are about H1B.
There is a link - To write a note to the editor about this article, click here.
I clicked it and send this message to CNN's editor. All of you can do the same...
Dear Editor,
Last week's Legal Immigration Rally at DC is NOT about H1B increase, It is about the plight of over a million High Tech Skilled Legal Immigrants and their families in a probationary limbo of Green Card Processing. It takes 10 to 12 years to get a green card because of low green card numbers, per country limits and lost Green Card numbers due to inefficient processing of USCIS.
Not sure what is the source of your information. But it is ill-researched and is skewed in nature.
yours truly,
Legal Skilled Immigrants from across the World living in USA
There is a link - To write a note to the editor about this article, click here.
I clicked it and send this message to CNN's editor. All of you can do the same...
Dear Editor,
Last week's Legal Immigration Rally at DC is NOT about H1B increase, It is about the plight of over a million High Tech Skilled Legal Immigrants and their families in a probationary limbo of Green Card Processing. It takes 10 to 12 years to get a green card because of low green card numbers, per country limits and lost Green Card numbers due to inefficient processing of USCIS.
Not sure what is the source of your information. But it is ill-researched and is skewed in nature.
yours truly,
Legal Skilled Immigrants from across the World living in USA
hot poems for your oyfriend
webm
05-08 10:00 PM
I had checked the status earlier this morning (as every other day) and as every other day there was no LUD. When I got home this evening saw the following email (got one for my wife's application too)
I still remember very vividly the day I handed my papers to our HR in Sept 2002. It took our HR nine months to complete recruiting and send it to DoL. I am sure I will remember today and the day we get the physical cards better :)
Receipt Number: SRC07192xxxxx
Application Type: I485 , APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Notice mailed welcoming the new permanent resident.
On May 8, 2008, we mailed you a notice that we had registered this customer's new permanent resident status. Please follow any instructions on the notice. Your new permanent resident card should be mailed within 60 days following this registration or after you complete any ADIT processing referred to in the welcome notice, whichever is later.
Congrats!! pal..
I still remember very vividly the day I handed my papers to our HR in Sept 2002. It took our HR nine months to complete recruiting and send it to DoL. I am sure I will remember today and the day we get the physical cards better :)
Receipt Number: SRC07192xxxxx
Application Type: I485 , APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Notice mailed welcoming the new permanent resident.
On May 8, 2008, we mailed you a notice that we had registered this customer's new permanent resident status. Please follow any instructions on the notice. Your new permanent resident card should be mailed within 60 days following this registration or after you complete any ADIT processing referred to in the welcome notice, whichever is later.
Congrats!! pal..
more...
house emo love poems for a oyfriend
eeezzz
02-15 03:08 PM
Exactly, And how many from South America? 30% of the population is going to be hispanic by 2050.
Perhaps your number is not based on legal immigration. It might reach this number if you add up the illegal ones, and that is why the gov. is building the walls to stop them enter at borders and try to find the illegal ones and send them out.
Perhaps your number is not based on legal immigration. It might reach this number if you add up the illegal ones, and that is why the gov. is building the walls to stop them enter at borders and try to find the illegal ones and send them out.
tattoo love poems to oyfriend love
waitingmygc
04-09 06:00 PM
In this visa bulletin there is reasonable movement in family category. So, its not fair to conclude USCIS is not working.
more...
pictures poems for my oyfriend. best
spicy_guy
07-27 05:18 PM
Everest Consulting Group Inc is really good. I know them personally for more than 10 years now & they do what they say and do NOT torture their employees like many other consulting firms. I just got my GC thru them :)
I hope this helps somebody & please let me know if I can be any further help!
Thanks.
Ramesh.
Are you sure you are no way associated with them (of course, other than being a consultant to them)? ;)
I hope this helps somebody & please let me know if I can be any further help!
Thanks.
Ramesh.
Are you sure you are no way associated with them (of course, other than being a consultant to them)? ;)
dresses i love you oyfriend poems.
sunny1000
04-09 06:31 PM
I completely agree with you . For five years EB3 is stuck in 2001 that means people who came here 10 years back are still waiting. Something needs to be done by someone somewhere but I guess no one has any idea who can ( except the congress ) .
All of my friends about 10-15 of them who came with me in 2000-2001 timeframe got their GC's and their citizenships in EB3 ( none in EB2 ) and I am still hanging .
I wonder what was that which made their application go by light speed and my application go into a blackhole :)
Probably, their labor got approved before the FY2006 when the retrogression started. All the categories were current until then due to the recapture done by AC21. I am stuck in this mess because my labor took 5 years to get approved.
All of my friends about 10-15 of them who came with me in 2000-2001 timeframe got their GC's and their citizenships in EB3 ( none in EB2 ) and I am still hanging .
I wonder what was that which made their application go by light speed and my application go into a blackhole :)
Probably, their labor got approved before the FY2006 when the retrogression started. All the categories were current until then due to the recapture done by AC21. I am stuck in this mess because my labor took 5 years to get approved.
more...
makeup poems for your oyfriend.
vbkris77
06-10 12:47 PM
This if enacted will get all the so called "non-desi" employees/employers. Remember in last one year there was no major employer without layoffs.
girlfriend love poems boyfriend
WillIWin?
07-23 04:00 PM
I sent you a PM. Can you please take a look ?
Thanks!
Thanks!
hairstyles your oyfriend. love poems
GCKaMaara
10-15 01:02 PM
OK. May be my post was little misguiding. I never intended to distinguish EB3 and EB2 situations. We all are in same boat. Just need to counter the issue - one of the proposal was to do a flower campaign. I am not sure you were on forum when we did last time. It was a huge success. I am requesting to do it one more time!
I support the idea of flower campaign. ItIsNotFunny, what is the date you are proposing?
I support the idea of flower campaign. ItIsNotFunny, what is the date you are proposing?
feedfront
09-14 02:03 PM
Well, I have not received RFE mail yet. I have changed my employer because our division was sold to Canadian firm and they moved everything to Montreal.
After changing my employer (in June), I applied for EAD/AP and both got approved within 3-4 weeks w/o any issues/RFE.
I have not filed for AC21 and used EAD to switch job. I think my previous employer might have notified USCIS about H1B case (as I had valid H1B too). Again as per attorney, it takes months if not year for USCIS to work on such notifications.
I had travelled to India last year July and came on AP as I could not get H1B stamp in India. The US consulate took more than few months to approve the my application and by that time I had already come to US on AP as suggested by my employer's attoteny.
After changing my employer (in June), I applied for EAD/AP and both got approved within 3-4 weeks w/o any issues/RFE.
I have not filed for AC21 and used EAD to switch job. I think my previous employer might have notified USCIS about H1B case (as I had valid H1B too). Again as per attorney, it takes months if not year for USCIS to work on such notifications.
I had travelled to India last year July and came on AP as I could not get H1B stamp in India. The US consulate took more than few months to approve the my application and by that time I had already come to US on AP as suggested by my employer's attoteny.
sc09876
08-10 02:42 PM
The INA language says that until EB2 is not current, there will be no spillover to EB3. Agreed. But I would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis. That is, if in the year 2002 (for example) all EB2 has been satisfied, then the spillovers should go to year 2002 EB3.
Is this something IV can point out and fight for? Can EB3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
Let me just say I am not here to start a EB2 vs EB3 fight. I think the beef is that EB3 is still in 2002 while EB2 is now peeking into 2007.
However, IMHO, if you extend that logic, since EB3 has much more filings than EB2, EB2 wait time would be unrealistically high. Just my opinion that it defeats the purpose of classification, since in the end, it will be PD based and not classification based.
Instead the focus should be in "automatic" progression to higher classification if the PD has certain # of years. For example: If the job requirement had 3 years at the time of labor and 3 more years have passes since, 140 should automatically be allowed to re-classify to EB2 (filed or yet to file)
This way, working for the same employer and adding experience will be an advantage and would not need to change jobs just to re-classify or port.
Is this something IV can point out and fight for? Can EB3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
Let me just say I am not here to start a EB2 vs EB3 fight. I think the beef is that EB3 is still in 2002 while EB2 is now peeking into 2007.
However, IMHO, if you extend that logic, since EB3 has much more filings than EB2, EB2 wait time would be unrealistically high. Just my opinion that it defeats the purpose of classification, since in the end, it will be PD based and not classification based.
Instead the focus should be in "automatic" progression to higher classification if the PD has certain # of years. For example: If the job requirement had 3 years at the time of labor and 3 more years have passes since, 140 should automatically be allowed to re-classify to EB2 (filed or yet to file)
This way, working for the same employer and adding experience will be an advantage and would not need to change jobs just to re-classify or port.
No comments:
Post a Comment