tonyHK12
02-18 02:12 PM
I will not be able to attend the effort, so i just donated $100. Paypal transaction : 5G8297179W5987836
thanks kumar_459. Just one for today so far.
thanks kumar_459. Just one for today so far.
wallpaper Oct and a top speed of ugatti
payur
03-08 04:07 PM
If you look at what you dont have in life, you have NOTHING; If you look at what you have in life, you have EVERYTHING
I hope this helps:)
I hope this helps:)
maag
06-07 01:57 PM
It is easier said than done. When you are entering you are at the discretion of IO and you do not know all the laws. In this particular case, the people tried to convince IO that they were planning to let canada PR go once they receive US GC but the IO was determined to revoke their AOS. So there is nothing really you can do at that point in time.
I agree, I can't put everything on stake to get canadian PR which I am not sure if I will use later or not.
I agree, I can't put everything on stake to get canadian PR which I am not sure if I will use later or not.
2011 Bugatti Veyron 16.4 Super
h1techSlave
03-28 11:16 AM
You have predicted that EB3-India cut of date would become June 2003. But your PD is July 2003. Usually people do not predict that way. They predict their own PD would become current pretty soon.:D
At one end it is bad that USCIS moved back Nebraska Processing date to June 08 2007 (More than one month backword) but it looks like USCIS is preparing itself to kick EB3-India ahead... It is too early to say this confidently.. But my feeling is that USCIS will keep processing dates tied to June 2007 and will kick EB3-India ahead. I am keeping my fingers crossed. Though as per murthy's web site in May bulletin EB3-India dates will remain same, I am feeling that if my guess is correct then at least from June bulletin we will see 2 patterns 1) Nebraka processing date would not move ahead for some months or will
move ahead very slowly from June 08 2007
2) Eb3-India PD dates will move ahead speedily. To me it looks like USCIS is now prepared to kick EB3-I (Till June 2003 PD) lot out.
At one end it is bad that USCIS moved back Nebraska Processing date to June 08 2007 (More than one month backword) but it looks like USCIS is preparing itself to kick EB3-India ahead... It is too early to say this confidently.. But my feeling is that USCIS will keep processing dates tied to June 2007 and will kick EB3-India ahead. I am keeping my fingers crossed. Though as per murthy's web site in May bulletin EB3-India dates will remain same, I am feeling that if my guess is correct then at least from June bulletin we will see 2 patterns 1) Nebraka processing date would not move ahead for some months or will
move ahead very slowly from June 08 2007
2) Eb3-India PD dates will move ahead speedily. To me it looks like USCIS is now prepared to kick EB3-I (Till June 2003 PD) lot out.
more...
WaldenPond
06-28 02:54 PM
Hello arnet,
That is an excellent idea. We are already working closely with USINPAC. Here is some of info about this.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=576
USINPAC has been very helpful and has played a key role in guiding and helping us. We should all be Thankful to USINPAC for significant help that they have provided us.
AAPI is another group that has been instrumental in getting our provisions in the bill.
We have received positive results from many other groups. But no other group has been able to help us as USINPAC and AAPI.
If anybody has any such suggestion or could provide a lead to any other organization or personality, please let us know. This would help us all.
WaldenPond
That is an excellent idea. We are already working closely with USINPAC. Here is some of info about this.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=576
USINPAC has been very helpful and has played a key role in guiding and helping us. We should all be Thankful to USINPAC for significant help that they have provided us.
AAPI is another group that has been instrumental in getting our provisions in the bill.
We have received positive results from many other groups. But no other group has been able to help us as USINPAC and AAPI.
If anybody has any such suggestion or could provide a lead to any other organization or personality, please let us know. This would help us all.
WaldenPond
gsc999
07-07 08:57 PM
Did this rally on 7th July in San Jose happen? Any updates from folks who were there?
---
Just came back, here is my report:
- There were five Chinese and seven Indian people at the march. It was small fun group.
- The group was small but the outcome as you will note from my report below was productive
- Fighnow, who is the Chinese member of mitbbs.com had initiated this 7th July march. Due to short notice we couldn't publicize this event but still it was good to see a bunch of people show up.
- Fightnow and his friends were fully prepared with big banners and all, with appropriate slogans
- In the beginning there was some police presence but they left an hour later, I guess because of a small group
- We carried our placards and banners on the sidewalk and got lot of "honk" support from people driving by.
- Luckily a Chinese TV station happened to be in the area and interviewed many of us. The station is called KCSN 30, if I remember correctly and this news story will air on Monday evening in Bay area. I will post details about this after hearing from fightnow.
- The parking is free on weekends.
----------------------
What we need to do is:
- Organize a bigger march on 14th July
- Organize a similar event in DC if possible to get more mileage
- Prepare some banners and placards etc.
- Bring water, it was warm
- Have fun
-----------------
Let me know if you have any questions or suggestions
---
Just came back, here is my report:
- There were five Chinese and seven Indian people at the march. It was small fun group.
- The group was small but the outcome as you will note from my report below was productive
- Fighnow, who is the Chinese member of mitbbs.com had initiated this 7th July march. Due to short notice we couldn't publicize this event but still it was good to see a bunch of people show up.
- Fightnow and his friends were fully prepared with big banners and all, with appropriate slogans
- In the beginning there was some police presence but they left an hour later, I guess because of a small group
- We carried our placards and banners on the sidewalk and got lot of "honk" support from people driving by.
- Luckily a Chinese TV station happened to be in the area and interviewed many of us. The station is called KCSN 30, if I remember correctly and this news story will air on Monday evening in Bay area. I will post details about this after hearing from fightnow.
- The parking is free on weekends.
----------------------
What we need to do is:
- Organize a bigger march on 14th July
- Organize a similar event in DC if possible to get more mileage
- Prepare some banners and placards etc.
- Bring water, it was warm
- Have fun
-----------------
Let me know if you have any questions or suggestions
more...
felix31
12-07 03:54 PM
why you even pay attention to the guy - we are all directing our efforts toward our common goal.
That said, lets all go back to faxing, calling our representatives and put an end top this retrogression.
To moderators: This thread should be closed, its an old thread and belongs to the past.
That said, lets all go back to faxing, calling our representatives and put an end top this retrogression.
To moderators: This thread should be closed, its an old thread and belongs to the past.
2010 to test its top speed.
eb3_nepa
12-11 12:36 PM
Lets take another view of this "realistic" angle : Its common sense to go after the low hanging fruit first (I-485, filing EAD etc), but what we conveniently forget is in that case we will not have any support whatsoever from the corporates,AILA,health care industry etc. It will have to be a solo effort from IV for which we would need the support and active contributions from at least half of the one million EB applicants affected by this mess. So far, we have piggy-backed on CIR and SKIL both of which were to a large extent driven by corporate interest. If you take these realities into consideration, provisions like 485 etc are not low hanging fruits any more, because we no longer have a stool to stand on. Given the infamous intertia of the lawmakers, introducing our own independent provisions will take a lot more than a membership base of around 6-7K, a contributing base of around 2k and a free-riding/blissfully ignorant base of 900k+.
Unless we become a truly representative organisation of prospective EB immigrants, we cannot take on the combined might of the anti-immigrants and the H1 thristy corporates. Not to be negative, just giving an alternate opinion.
Most of the time we have to search for bills to attach our provisions anyways. The only problem is that right now all our provisions are either being labeled as "quota increase" or are being attached to "Quota Increase" bills. Try and remember S-1932, CIR and SKIL. AILA will always be after H1 Increase and so will Big Corps. Only this time instead of seperating ourselves as "EB only" we try to piggyback on either "Quota increase" bills OR we try and piggyback on just about ANY bill we can piggyback onto. Most of the times weird bills get combined (S1932 for example).
If 2006 has taught us anything it should be "Do NOT try and increase quotas and numbers". For starters it takes TOO long to do and there is MUCH more opposition from even the average American. Remember the IV Core telling us how the Anti-immigrant calls far outnumbered our calls during the Recent SKIL bill? Guys even the biggest Corps have been unsuccessful in getting Visa number increases. Do we honestly believe that with 6,000 members who are NOT a voting base (and may never be) + the lack of funds, we are going to do what these big guns have not been able to accomplish? Am I saying we should give up? HELL NO!! All I am saying is, it is time to review our strategy. Over and above all this, if we think that our current course will bring us victory then let the majority prevail.
Unless we become a truly representative organisation of prospective EB immigrants, we cannot take on the combined might of the anti-immigrants and the H1 thristy corporates. Not to be negative, just giving an alternate opinion.
Most of the time we have to search for bills to attach our provisions anyways. The only problem is that right now all our provisions are either being labeled as "quota increase" or are being attached to "Quota Increase" bills. Try and remember S-1932, CIR and SKIL. AILA will always be after H1 Increase and so will Big Corps. Only this time instead of seperating ourselves as "EB only" we try to piggyback on either "Quota increase" bills OR we try and piggyback on just about ANY bill we can piggyback onto. Most of the times weird bills get combined (S1932 for example).
If 2006 has taught us anything it should be "Do NOT try and increase quotas and numbers". For starters it takes TOO long to do and there is MUCH more opposition from even the average American. Remember the IV Core telling us how the Anti-immigrant calls far outnumbered our calls during the Recent SKIL bill? Guys even the biggest Corps have been unsuccessful in getting Visa number increases. Do we honestly believe that with 6,000 members who are NOT a voting base (and may never be) + the lack of funds, we are going to do what these big guns have not been able to accomplish? Am I saying we should give up? HELL NO!! All I am saying is, it is time to review our strategy. Over and above all this, if we think that our current course will bring us victory then let the majority prevail.
more...
apahilaj
08-08 10:04 AM
Congrats!
Usually there will be another message "Notice welcoming permanrent resident sent" . Then, after a few days there will be "Approval notice sent" , the physical approval notice goes to your attorney. You should receive the physical card within 7-10 days.
Thanks.
Actually i am in the same exact position as the OP and was wondering after approximately how many days, do we receive an approval notice sent email?
I got Notice welcoming new PR email on 8/5 and nothing after that.
Thanks and Good luck to all!
Usually there will be another message "Notice welcoming permanrent resident sent" . Then, after a few days there will be "Approval notice sent" , the physical approval notice goes to your attorney. You should receive the physical card within 7-10 days.
Thanks.
Actually i am in the same exact position as the OP and was wondering after approximately how many days, do we receive an approval notice sent email?
I got Notice welcoming new PR email on 8/5 and nothing after that.
Thanks and Good luck to all!
hair The Bugatti Veyron EB 16.4 is
aquarianf
04-25 10:27 AM
[QUOTE=gcbikari;242385]Did you ask Attorney what happens if your employer still choose to Sue you? My friend's attorney told most of cases will be settled, but we might loose money up to 10K. Is it woth it doing? Also if we choose to fight, we might have to attend hearing (may be in different state based on your agreement). I am an employee too, and with you on this. I'd say if attorney guarentees he'll win our case we can go ahead.[/QUOTE
as per the attorney, the case history of employers who won using non competes in the court are very rare unless the law suit is agiainst key personnel and court gets convinced by the legitemate business interest. If the employer still chooses to fight, he has got more to loose than me because of non payments of wages also being involved here. since non compete has been used just to escape the wages, courts wil be more hard on the employer and will consider it as threat rather than genuine.
Did you contacted INS regarding this? Someone in my office told that one of his friend contacted INS regarding back wages. He received a phone call 3-4 months later from INS regarding his complain and was told that INS will investigate into the matter and if complain is valid then the former employer will be punished accordingly. He was told that INS has received many many such complaints and they have huge backlog and it is taking 3-4 months to reach to a complain but they are working on each of them.
as per the attorney, the case history of employers who won using non competes in the court are very rare unless the law suit is agiainst key personnel and court gets convinced by the legitemate business interest. If the employer still chooses to fight, he has got more to loose than me because of non payments of wages also being involved here. since non compete has been used just to escape the wages, courts wil be more hard on the employer and will consider it as threat rather than genuine.
Did you contacted INS regarding this? Someone in my office told that one of his friend contacted INS regarding back wages. He received a phone call 3-4 months later from INS regarding his complain and was told that INS will investigate into the matter and if complain is valid then the former employer will be punished accordingly. He was told that INS has received many many such complaints and they have huge backlog and it is taking 3-4 months to reach to a complain but they are working on each of them.
more...
mrajatish
05-04 02:43 PM
I disagree a little bit - this will help people in EB3 indirectly
A lot of people in EB2 and EB3 can qualify for auto adjustment of status now, so it will remove people from EB3 queue making it smaller.
A lot of people in EB2 and EB3 can qualify for auto adjustment of status now, so it will remove people from EB3 queue making it smaller.
hot 2011 Bugatti Veyron 16.4 Super
isantem
11-17 03:49 PM
Done! VA
Thanks IV
Thanks IV
more...
house 2012 Bugatti Veyron Super
xlr8r
05-27 07:22 PM
Done.
tattoo Bugatti Veyron 16.4 Super
rennieallen
10-09 12:29 PM
Try to lift one single crab from a vessel full of crabs, other crabs will try their best to pull that one back. Same mentality is at play here - if I don't get it nobody else should get it. Don't you guys feel shamed to act so self-centered and selfish like crabs?
Hmmm, I don't think this is a very good analogy to support your position.
Do you know what is going to happen to the crab that is being removed from the vessel? (hint: think boiling water)
Do you know why crabs have this instinct? It is a group instinct that through natural selection propagated due to the fact that various predators would slowly pick away at clusters of crabs.
This group instinct (resisting the removal of an individual member) resulted in slightly fewer crabs becoming shark/octopus/otter/etc. meals amongst the groups that exhibited this behavior. These "grab back" groups were slightly more successful than those that "let 'em go" and consequently this particular trait (over many millennia) became well established in the larger gene pool.
This analogy is a nearly perfect counter example to (what I believe is) your intended point.
Hmmm, I don't think this is a very good analogy to support your position.
Do you know what is going to happen to the crab that is being removed from the vessel? (hint: think boiling water)
Do you know why crabs have this instinct? It is a group instinct that through natural selection propagated due to the fact that various predators would slowly pick away at clusters of crabs.
This group instinct (resisting the removal of an individual member) resulted in slightly fewer crabs becoming shark/octopus/otter/etc. meals amongst the groups that exhibited this behavior. These "grab back" groups were slightly more successful than those that "let 'em go" and consequently this particular trait (over many millennia) became well established in the larger gene pool.
This analogy is a nearly perfect counter example to (what I believe is) your intended point.
more...
pictures The Super Sport is a
dontcareanymore
07-28 12:48 AM
1) First of all this is not the response to just the quoted post, but many on the same lines, especially from delax and others.
2)I believe that that whole process is so screwed up that it is never fair and never will be. Irrespective of what Eb3s hope for and try , Eb2 folks are going to get their GCs and Eb3s will have to wait until stars align for them.
3) I don't really care one way or other , because what you wish,hope or try to do will have no bearing on the outcome.
<Those who think 2 year EADs are because of your letters , stay in the dreamland - ignorance is bliss >
4) I am really happy for Eb2 folks (No way jealous) , just pissed by some attitude here.
Now that I have the disclaimers out of the way, Here is what I have to say:
Why the heck you never made the argument that "law is law" and "There is no compassion" before law crap when you were retrogressed ?
What happened to what law says , when attempts were made to grab visas from ROW with the same "It is not fair" argument ?
What is the yardstick for EB2 ? It is just what your employer says it is. I know so many in body shops with Eb2 apps while others languish in Eb3 queue.
You can't extend the logic to all EB1 categories. At least in some of the EB categories one has to have published research work in peer reviewed journals.
Will give you an example :
Know some one who came here as postdoc with PHD in life sciences (zoology) and self filed for GC EB1and now runs an Indian grocery just after being in job for less than a year. How do you justify that GC is in the interest of US than a person who is working in a company for 10 years ?
It is true that the original number is broken up equally among all categories but the INA clearly states that if the demand within a category is not sufficient to use up all the visas in that category then the excess should be made available without any regard to country limit in that category. Here's a fact from the July bulletin - not an opinion:
There have been questions raised regarding the way numbers have been provided to the China and India in the Employment Second preference categories beginning in April. Section 202(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act states that if total demand for visas in an Employment preference category is insufficient to use all available visa numbers in that category in a calendar quarter, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limit. (For example: If the second preference annual limit were 40,000, number use by “All Other Countries” were estimated to be only 25,000, and the China/India combined number use based on their per-country limits were 6,000, then there would be 9,000 numbers unused. Those 9,000 numbers could then be made available to China and India applicants without regard to their per-country limits.)
I dont buy the argument that length of wait (as implied in the letter) should determine eligibility for approval disregarding the clear categorization established by law AFTER the initial handout is made on an equal basis. I have always maintained that any logic used to justify shifting visas between EB2 and EB3 purely based on the length of wait can also easily be used between EB2 and EB1. The fact that EB1 has never retrogressed does not matter. Unfortunately LAW is an absolute entity - there is no compassionate interpretation in civil and common law.
If a EB3-2002 is approved before EB2-2004 purely based on length of wait and ignoring the categorization after the initial handout then the same logic or rationale can be used to approve EB2-2004 before EB1-2007 by 'holding back' the visa from the EB1 candidate and giving it to EB2.
I dont think either of us is interested in going down the path of EB2 versus EB3 but to the extent this letter implies/attempts to do that, it is detrimental to the functioning of this group. Cheers
2)I believe that that whole process is so screwed up that it is never fair and never will be. Irrespective of what Eb3s hope for and try , Eb2 folks are going to get their GCs and Eb3s will have to wait until stars align for them.
3) I don't really care one way or other , because what you wish,hope or try to do will have no bearing on the outcome.
<Those who think 2 year EADs are because of your letters , stay in the dreamland - ignorance is bliss >
4) I am really happy for Eb2 folks (No way jealous) , just pissed by some attitude here.
Now that I have the disclaimers out of the way, Here is what I have to say:
Why the heck you never made the argument that "law is law" and "There is no compassion" before law crap when you were retrogressed ?
What happened to what law says , when attempts were made to grab visas from ROW with the same "It is not fair" argument ?
What is the yardstick for EB2 ? It is just what your employer says it is. I know so many in body shops with Eb2 apps while others languish in Eb3 queue.
You can't extend the logic to all EB1 categories. At least in some of the EB categories one has to have published research work in peer reviewed journals.
Will give you an example :
Know some one who came here as postdoc with PHD in life sciences (zoology) and self filed for GC EB1and now runs an Indian grocery just after being in job for less than a year. How do you justify that GC is in the interest of US than a person who is working in a company for 10 years ?
It is true that the original number is broken up equally among all categories but the INA clearly states that if the demand within a category is not sufficient to use up all the visas in that category then the excess should be made available without any regard to country limit in that category. Here's a fact from the July bulletin - not an opinion:
There have been questions raised regarding the way numbers have been provided to the China and India in the Employment Second preference categories beginning in April. Section 202(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act states that if total demand for visas in an Employment preference category is insufficient to use all available visa numbers in that category in a calendar quarter, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limit. (For example: If the second preference annual limit were 40,000, number use by “All Other Countries” were estimated to be only 25,000, and the China/India combined number use based on their per-country limits were 6,000, then there would be 9,000 numbers unused. Those 9,000 numbers could then be made available to China and India applicants without regard to their per-country limits.)
I dont buy the argument that length of wait (as implied in the letter) should determine eligibility for approval disregarding the clear categorization established by law AFTER the initial handout is made on an equal basis. I have always maintained that any logic used to justify shifting visas between EB2 and EB3 purely based on the length of wait can also easily be used between EB2 and EB1. The fact that EB1 has never retrogressed does not matter. Unfortunately LAW is an absolute entity - there is no compassionate interpretation in civil and common law.
If a EB3-2002 is approved before EB2-2004 purely based on length of wait and ignoring the categorization after the initial handout then the same logic or rationale can be used to approve EB2-2004 before EB1-2007 by 'holding back' the visa from the EB1 candidate and giving it to EB2.
I dont think either of us is interested in going down the path of EB2 versus EB3 but to the extent this letter implies/attempts to do that, it is detrimental to the functioning of this group. Cheers
dresses Bugatti Veyron Super Sport top
InTheMoment
06-14 03:46 PM
Can you all tell which state you applied from?
As per the bispecialization phase III of USCIS, I-485 applicants from eastern and southern states are processed at SRC (TX) while western and northern at LIN (NE).
Let's verify whether this stands true...those who got their receipts can verify.
As per the bispecialization phase III of USCIS, I-485 applicants from eastern and southern states are processed at SRC (TX) while western and northern at LIN (NE).
Let's verify whether this stands true...those who got their receipts can verify.
more...
makeup ugatti veyron 16.4 super
485Mbe4001
04-21 03:27 PM
http://download.srv.cs.cmu.edu/~pausch/
Please click on the 'Last Lecture'. it is a 76 min lecture by a professor Randy Pausch from Carnegie Mellon University who is suffering from pancreatic cancer. it is about life, goals and dealing with the issue.
more information about him at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randy_Pausch
"The "Last Lecture"
Pausch delivered his "Last Lecture," titled "Really Achieving Your Childhood Dreams," at CMU on September 18, 2007.[7] This talk was modeled after an ongoing series of lectures where top academics are asked to think deeply about what matters to them, and then give a hypothetical "final talk," i.e., "what wisdom would you try to impart to the world if you knew it was your last chance?"
Before speaking, Pausch received a long standing ovation from a large crowd of over 400 colleagues and students. When he motioned them to sit down, saying, "Make me earn it," some in the audience shouted back, "You did!"
During the lecture, Pausch was upbeat and humorous, alternating between wisecracks, insights on computer science and engineering education, advice on building multi-disciplinary collaborations, working in groups and interacting with other people, offering inspirational life lessons, and performing push-ups on stage.
"
Please click on the 'Last Lecture'. it is a 76 min lecture by a professor Randy Pausch from Carnegie Mellon University who is suffering from pancreatic cancer. it is about life, goals and dealing with the issue.
more information about him at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randy_Pausch
"The "Last Lecture"
Pausch delivered his "Last Lecture," titled "Really Achieving Your Childhood Dreams," at CMU on September 18, 2007.[7] This talk was modeled after an ongoing series of lectures where top academics are asked to think deeply about what matters to them, and then give a hypothetical "final talk," i.e., "what wisdom would you try to impart to the world if you knew it was your last chance?"
Before speaking, Pausch received a long standing ovation from a large crowd of over 400 colleagues and students. When he motioned them to sit down, saying, "Make me earn it," some in the audience shouted back, "You did!"
During the lecture, Pausch was upbeat and humorous, alternating between wisecracks, insights on computer science and engineering education, advice on building multi-disciplinary collaborations, working in groups and interacting with other people, offering inspirational life lessons, and performing push-ups on stage.
"
girlfriend new ugatti veyron 16.4 super
Macaca
07-09 12:21 PM
We need to define immediately available.
Now lets see how the above LAW (including immediately available) was followed in the following cases (which may not be a complete list).
Oct 1 2005 & Oct 1 2006 when .27 = 140K = 37,800 GCs were available but ALL AOSs were not acceptable.
May 14 (??) when 60K GCs were available but many more AOSs were acceptable and were accepted from June 1-30.
June 12 when < 40K GCs were available but ALL AOSs were acceptable.
July 2 when 0 GCs were available and ANY AOS was not acceptable.
Months in 2005, 2006 and 2007 when ALL AOSs were not acceptable.
Months in 2005 and 2006 when ANY AOS was not acceptable.
10K+ GCs were returned in 2006 but soma (??) categories were not available.
Now lets see how the above LAW (including immediately available) was followed in the following cases (which may not be a complete list).
Oct 1 2005 & Oct 1 2006 when .27 = 140K = 37,800 GCs were available but ALL AOSs were not acceptable.
May 14 (??) when 60K GCs were available but many more AOSs were acceptable and were accepted from June 1-30.
June 12 when < 40K GCs were available but ALL AOSs were acceptable.
July 2 when 0 GCs were available and ANY AOS was not acceptable.
Months in 2005, 2006 and 2007 when ALL AOSs were not acceptable.
Months in 2005 and 2006 when ANY AOS was not acceptable.
10K+ GCs were returned in 2006 but soma (??) categories were not available.
hairstyles The Bugatti Veyron 16.4 Super
mgmanoj
11-19 12:55 PM
Done
somegchuh
10-08 05:37 PM
I see three groups emerging in this disucssion:
1. We applied labor in 2002/3/4. Therefore, GC should be PD based.
2. We applied labor in 2001/2/3 but had to reapply in 2005/6, therefore GC should be based on number of years in US.
3. Govt should "end retrogression" and give green cards to everyone.
I can understand the rationale of all three groups: they want things to work the way it will benefit them. In some way the rationale of first two groups can be justified also.
What I am having trouble with third "end retrogression". What does it exactly mean? There are only limited number of GC's per country. Are you talking about merging all the countries into one queue? I am not sure if ROW applicants will like that because that might set them back. Are we talking about raising the per country caps? How do you accomplish this "end retrogression".
gjoe/and others,
No one's trying to cut the line here. If there's any, it's purely procedural and has nothing to do with 'Ending Retrogression'. With or without retrogression someone might get an RFE, get stuck in namecheck etc. Ending retrogression provides earlier PDs better chances of getting GC faster (if dates are 'C' you get it the month you clear RFE, Name check etc.)
Just posting here isn't helping you cause. Instead you guys can get together and start sending flowers to USCIS director requesting him to publish the complete list of GC applications approved every year. It's the first step in enforcing FIFO. Right now there is no such list and no way of knowing who got their GC out of turn. And while you guys are at it also send some flowers to FBI to clear Namechecks FIFO, to DOL to approve PERM petitions FIFO etc.
Go spend those $50 at Flowers.com folks. Start writing to Senators, collect money, do the lobbying etc. Who's stopping you?
Or do you want logiclife, pappu and rest of the IV core to do it PRO BONO for you?
1. We applied labor in 2002/3/4. Therefore, GC should be PD based.
2. We applied labor in 2001/2/3 but had to reapply in 2005/6, therefore GC should be based on number of years in US.
3. Govt should "end retrogression" and give green cards to everyone.
I can understand the rationale of all three groups: they want things to work the way it will benefit them. In some way the rationale of first two groups can be justified also.
What I am having trouble with third "end retrogression". What does it exactly mean? There are only limited number of GC's per country. Are you talking about merging all the countries into one queue? I am not sure if ROW applicants will like that because that might set them back. Are we talking about raising the per country caps? How do you accomplish this "end retrogression".
gjoe/and others,
No one's trying to cut the line here. If there's any, it's purely procedural and has nothing to do with 'Ending Retrogression'. With or without retrogression someone might get an RFE, get stuck in namecheck etc. Ending retrogression provides earlier PDs better chances of getting GC faster (if dates are 'C' you get it the month you clear RFE, Name check etc.)
Just posting here isn't helping you cause. Instead you guys can get together and start sending flowers to USCIS director requesting him to publish the complete list of GC applications approved every year. It's the first step in enforcing FIFO. Right now there is no such list and no way of knowing who got their GC out of turn. And while you guys are at it also send some flowers to FBI to clear Namechecks FIFO, to DOL to approve PERM petitions FIFO etc.
Go spend those $50 at Flowers.com folks. Start writing to Senators, collect money, do the lobbying etc. Who's stopping you?
Or do you want logiclife, pappu and rest of the IV core to do it PRO BONO for you?
ramus
07-07 09:33 PM
Yes, if we work on our state chapter and get some idea how many members can join in DC then we can talk about it to core members and see what they think.
IF something is planned, we can come to DC from Raleigh,NC.
IF something is planned, we can come to DC from Raleigh,NC.
No comments:
Post a Comment