kumar1
07-10 05:45 PM
my 2 cent
I am applying for Canadian PR this week and will count the days till it gets through. Already getting calls for Vancouver.:D :D :D
No matter what happens here with this insane GC process, we see our future in Canda.
So long USA
:D :D :D
Please go to this site for Canadian immigration info -
www.settlement.org
You can find some bad things about Canada here -
www.notcanada.com
Weigh yourself. Thanks
I am applying for Canadian PR this week and will count the days till it gets through. Already getting calls for Vancouver.:D :D :D
No matter what happens here with this insane GC process, we see our future in Canda.
So long USA
:D :D :D
Please go to this site for Canadian immigration info -
www.settlement.org
You can find some bad things about Canada here -
www.notcanada.com
Weigh yourself. Thanks
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
vdlrao
07-21 05:30 PM
The Family visas spill over is something I couldnt understand. They are retrogressed by > 10 years for many categories. Is that conflicting with spill over? Why would there be spill over with such backlog?
I havent researched FB category , so apologize if its silly question
This is due to the limit of 7% per country of available Family Based Visas and 2% for dependent areas.
I havent researched FB category , so apologize if its silly question
This is due to the limit of 7% per country of available Family Based Visas and 2% for dependent areas.
sledge_hammer
02-16 08:27 AM
Great find!
I guess all the talk about suing USCIS will go down the toilet based on this excerpt from the article -
"Assuming that under the plenary power doctrine noncitizens possess few, if any, constitutional protections with respect to entering the country, the implications of racial and national origin exclusions on citizens must be considered. Because the Constitution unquestionably protects the rights of citizens, citizens claiming injury have a better chance at successfully challenging the immigration laws than noncitizens directly affected by their operation. Courts have recognized that citizens in certain circumstances may challenge the lawfulness of immigration laws because of the impact on their rights."
oguinan,
Paragraph 1 of Article 1 establishes the definition of racial discrimination for the purpose of the document. Paragraphs 2 and 3 limit the operation of the convention. As to why paragraphs 2 & 3 were included, perhaps they were required to get countries to sign on to the convention.
Here's a better link. Read under Modern Racial Exclusion, excerpts of which I have posted below.
http://academic.udayton.edu/race/02rights/immigr09.htm
...similarly situated persons (e.g., siblings and children of U.S. citizens) may face radically different waits for immigration depending on their country of origin, with accompanying racial impacts.
The law created a new immigrant visa program that effectively represents affirmative action for white immigrants, a group that benefitted from preferential treatment under the national origins quota system until 1965. Congress, in an ironic twist of political jargon, established the "diversity" visa program, which though facially neutral prefers immigrants from nations populated primarily by white people.
The link to the CERD report is here. The convention does not address the country limit directly as the convention expressly does not apply in that area, but it does show that there is awareness about the discrimination faced by immigrants. http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(Symbol)/6d8aee7e356e6498c1256d4e00557f3b?Opendocument
You can see that the UN panel is aware of the fact that racial discrimination manifests itself in disproportional representation (note the reference to the composition of the Supreme Court). It can be argued that the 7% country limit provides a pretext to discriminate against India/China/Mexico on the basis of ethnic or racial origin, and as such would run afoul of the convention.
I guess all the talk about suing USCIS will go down the toilet based on this excerpt from the article -
"Assuming that under the plenary power doctrine noncitizens possess few, if any, constitutional protections with respect to entering the country, the implications of racial and national origin exclusions on citizens must be considered. Because the Constitution unquestionably protects the rights of citizens, citizens claiming injury have a better chance at successfully challenging the immigration laws than noncitizens directly affected by their operation. Courts have recognized that citizens in certain circumstances may challenge the lawfulness of immigration laws because of the impact on their rights."
oguinan,
Paragraph 1 of Article 1 establishes the definition of racial discrimination for the purpose of the document. Paragraphs 2 and 3 limit the operation of the convention. As to why paragraphs 2 & 3 were included, perhaps they were required to get countries to sign on to the convention.
Here's a better link. Read under Modern Racial Exclusion, excerpts of which I have posted below.
http://academic.udayton.edu/race/02rights/immigr09.htm
...similarly situated persons (e.g., siblings and children of U.S. citizens) may face radically different waits for immigration depending on their country of origin, with accompanying racial impacts.
The law created a new immigrant visa program that effectively represents affirmative action for white immigrants, a group that benefitted from preferential treatment under the national origins quota system until 1965. Congress, in an ironic twist of political jargon, established the "diversity" visa program, which though facially neutral prefers immigrants from nations populated primarily by white people.
The link to the CERD report is here. The convention does not address the country limit directly as the convention expressly does not apply in that area, but it does show that there is awareness about the discrimination faced by immigrants. http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(Symbol)/6d8aee7e356e6498c1256d4e00557f3b?Opendocument
You can see that the UN panel is aware of the fact that racial discrimination manifests itself in disproportional representation (note the reference to the composition of the Supreme Court). It can be argued that the 7% country limit provides a pretext to discriminate against India/China/Mexico on the basis of ethnic or racial origin, and as such would run afoul of the convention.
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
PlainSpeak
01-13 04:54 PM
i'll not tell anyone that u'r gcperm.... ok?
btw, no one is freaked out knowing that u'r gcperm..... i guess no one cares for u....
Ahh my friend Ron if you are trying to get me to feel bad with your statement i guess no one cares for u.... then all i can say is Better Luck Next Time
I dont care if anyone cares for me or not peronally or w.r.t. what i have stated in this forum.
If people abuse that is their problem not mine. Sure i wil lfeel bad but it would be feeling bad for them not feel bad :P
If people do not agree with me that is also ok since that is their right
If people do not care for what i am saying that is also ok because the whle idea is that people on thsi forum start thinking about all options (Out of te box solutions)
And seriopusly my friend if my intention was to convert or sway a whole bunch of people (Which i have no Intention of doing) within a day that would not be much of a challenge right ? because nothing comes for free (read that as without effort) in this country. I believe that is one of the slogans of IV. And guys i just borrowed it so dont hit on me saying i am now using IV slogans for myself
Peace ...
btw, no one is freaked out knowing that u'r gcperm..... i guess no one cares for u....
Ahh my friend Ron if you are trying to get me to feel bad with your statement i guess no one cares for u.... then all i can say is Better Luck Next Time
I dont care if anyone cares for me or not peronally or w.r.t. what i have stated in this forum.
If people abuse that is their problem not mine. Sure i wil lfeel bad but it would be feeling bad for them not feel bad :P
If people do not agree with me that is also ok since that is their right
If people do not care for what i am saying that is also ok because the whle idea is that people on thsi forum start thinking about all options (Out of te box solutions)
And seriopusly my friend if my intention was to convert or sway a whole bunch of people (Which i have no Intention of doing) within a day that would not be much of a challenge right ? because nothing comes for free (read that as without effort) in this country. I believe that is one of the slogans of IV. And guys i just borrowed it so dont hit on me saying i am now using IV slogans for myself
Peace ...
more...
akred
09-23 12:11 PM
Current homeowners who are waiting for their GC MUST also be exempted from cap. This clause has to be there. Without having any gurantee of getting GC these folks have invested their savings in buying home even when the prices were high, WHY because they had real intent of making US their permanent home. So these people should too be exempted from EB cap.
A better justification would be that doing so will avoid bringing new supply on the market from people moving to their native countries.
FWIW, the home I bought in 2001 is paid off, but I wouldn't mind buying another one if this comes through.
A better justification would be that doing so will avoid bringing new supply on the market from people moving to their native countries.
FWIW, the home I bought in 2001 is paid off, but I wouldn't mind buying another one if this comes through.
villamonte6100
12-14 01:41 PM
I totally agree with you.
Think of lobbying as polite negotiation.
Think of Supreme court case as picking a fist fight, in which we are badly out numbered.
Once you have started a fist fight it is much harder to negotiate, especially from a loosing position.
This is exactly correct. It is not the question of right or wrong here. That is what gets folks so upset on this thread, they feel since their viewpoint s right then.......... Most neutral observers like mbartosik can see this as unjust and there may be many in the US as well, however certainly not the majority. However, there are many ways in which this could backfire. One example is the recently seen debate over illegal immigration and the turn in public sentiment. Truth be told, if someone did something wrong 12 yrs ago(crossed the fence), now is married to a US citizen and has 3 US children, what do you do with them? What about the 3yr old who was brought to the USA by their parents and knows no other system? Perhaps a few years ago joe public would have given them a pass, no more, the debate has become so nasty that positions have been hardened to the point that reason does not prevail. Another reason has something to do with the perceived sense of entitlement Americans sensed in the illegal immigrant community(of course fanned by Lou Dobbs and his ilk). These are complex issues and generally you will get a lot further appealing to someones sense of fairness than explaining how you are entitled to something and will take it from them if it is not given to you.
Think of lobbying as polite negotiation.
Think of Supreme court case as picking a fist fight, in which we are badly out numbered.
Once you have started a fist fight it is much harder to negotiate, especially from a loosing position.
This is exactly correct. It is not the question of right or wrong here. That is what gets folks so upset on this thread, they feel since their viewpoint s right then.......... Most neutral observers like mbartosik can see this as unjust and there may be many in the US as well, however certainly not the majority. However, there are many ways in which this could backfire. One example is the recently seen debate over illegal immigration and the turn in public sentiment. Truth be told, if someone did something wrong 12 yrs ago(crossed the fence), now is married to a US citizen and has 3 US children, what do you do with them? What about the 3yr old who was brought to the USA by their parents and knows no other system? Perhaps a few years ago joe public would have given them a pass, no more, the debate has become so nasty that positions have been hardened to the point that reason does not prevail. Another reason has something to do with the perceived sense of entitlement Americans sensed in the illegal immigrant community(of course fanned by Lou Dobbs and his ilk). These are complex issues and generally you will get a lot further appealing to someones sense of fairness than explaining how you are entitled to something and will take it from them if it is not given to you.
more...
vjkypally
07-24 05:10 PM
Agree with few points in your argument though overall it went little overboard. Whisky Line??? Are you implying there are no lines in US? Ever heard about GC Line???????:))))))I havent waited for 5 to 7 yrs in India for anything and not got it. Maximum I waited would be Tirupati temple for 12-14 hrs:)
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
vbkris77
06-16 03:07 PM
Why do you have to resort to calling names ? Are ad hominem arguments the best you could come up with ? Let me give you an analogous case wherein people say that a recession is a good thing. Recession occurs in order to cleanse the economy of bohemian excesses and inefficiencies. Do you think that such people are sadists and belong to the mental asylum ? Of course there are people who get affected in a recession. Does it mean it is not desired ? In a similar vein, you need to understand that there were and are huge gaping inefficiencies in the current immigration process. There has to be a way to curb these excesses and inefficiencies. Retrogression may not be the best way but it is the only way utilized right now. If you still believe that I have to subscribe to these inefficiencies despite having gone through the immigration process, I am sorry I beg to differ.
This attitude was the reason, it took India a lot of time to get freedom from British. Then lot many nobel indians thought British invasion was good for India..
This attitude was the reason, it took India a lot of time to get freedom from British. Then lot many nobel indians thought British invasion was good for India..
more...
acecupid
07-17 11:21 AM
It is a "permanent" policy. There was no change in the law. USCIS was interpreting the law incorrectly. Now they have corrected themselves with the congressional input. This will not change.
There could of course be a new law and then things might change.
The was no change in law and still there was a change in interpretation based on the current state of EB2, so this interpretation will change once some other category needs spill overs. The is no law which states spill over should be horizonal or vertical or diagonal :) It merely says that DOS can decide how the spill overs should flow.
There could of course be a new law and then things might change.
The was no change in law and still there was a change in interpretation based on the current state of EB2, so this interpretation will change once some other category needs spill overs. The is no law which states spill over should be horizonal or vertical or diagonal :) It merely says that DOS can decide how the spill overs should flow.
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
prem_goel
05-29 03:12 PM
I strongly feel you guys are right regarding EB1 misuse. I also know of some people who are applying in EB1 using these loopholes. we should do something to stop this fraud.
I've read other people's comments in this thread about how Cognizant is misusing EB1 category. I know a couple of folks who did that. This is something that should be brought up to the right people's observation. I plan to submit WH-4 atleast to begin with, against this company. Please PM me if you know anyone else who frauduently represented himself/herself for EB1 category.
I've read other people's comments in this thread about how Cognizant is misusing EB1 category. I know a couple of folks who did that. This is something that should be brought up to the right people's observation. I plan to submit WH-4 atleast to begin with, against this company. Please PM me if you know anyone else who frauduently represented himself/herself for EB1 category.
more...
old_hat
05-02 02:38 PM
The issue started long before LTTE but it has not stayed static. There were many opportunities to set it correct which LTTE shunned. Again a lot of Tamils joined mainstream in Lanka and LTTE went after them too.
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
vinabath
10-24 11:01 AM
If you join Microsoft , you might get less salary but they pay your insurance 100%. Is microsoft selling insurance to you?? its just a benefit/perk being an employee of microsoft.
same thing here too... pre-approved labor is just a perk/benefit offered by employer to hire you with less salary. so if you think you sacrificed your salary to get to cut the line for getting GC then you are thinking right.if not please stop thinking like socialist.
It all about money and business brother.
same thing here too... pre-approved labor is just a perk/benefit offered by employer to hire you with less salary. so if you think you sacrificed your salary to get to cut the line for getting GC then you are thinking right.if not please stop thinking like socialist.
It all about money and business brother.
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
angelfire76
05-28 10:50 PM
When some of us raised the issue of project managers from Indian IT companies applying under EB1 and using up those visas which would trickle over to EB2 and EB3, we were scoffed at. Some even questioned as to why these people cannot apply under "Multi-national executive" category, as they are "Multi-national" managers.
These guys misrepresent the number of people reporting to them (same managers in the same portfolio uses the same number of people to show in the application as reporting to them. This is true "reuse"), also "reuse" the portfolio value (how can 3-4 managers from the same client account be responsible for x million dollar business) and crooked company attorneys make up a stellar resume and case to file for them. The attorney pay comes from the employee's pocket.
Otherwise how would you explain the sudden rise in EB1 filings and a quota which never used to be over in previous years suddenly has cut-off dates.
If we keep quiet, these same clowns will use up all the visas and smirk at us for filing in the "lower" categories. What a backdoor to a green card! :mad:
These guys misrepresent the number of people reporting to them (same managers in the same portfolio uses the same number of people to show in the application as reporting to them. This is true "reuse"), also "reuse" the portfolio value (how can 3-4 managers from the same client account be responsible for x million dollar business) and crooked company attorneys make up a stellar resume and case to file for them. The attorney pay comes from the employee's pocket.
Otherwise how would you explain the sudden rise in EB1 filings and a quota which never used to be over in previous years suddenly has cut-off dates.
If we keep quiet, these same clowns will use up all the visas and smirk at us for filing in the "lower" categories. What a backdoor to a green card! :mad:
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
chantu
03-30 03:05 PM
Again...I am not supporting congress. Yes, we didnt have anything for the last 60 years. Because of MMS we are going to see something in another 20 years. Is there anything you can give me Mr.Advani's vision about it. Even after fifty years.
Whether we like it or not....nothing is going to change for the common man. Advani, Jaya, Karuna, Maya and mulayam all are same shit but different a$$ h&^e.
I am supporting MMS because he is not a politician. Chose the less evil. nothing else.
Nathan, it is not about MMS, it is about congress. MMS is just a puppet as he was during Narasimha Rao's govt.
Can you tell us with 100% surety that MMS will not get replaced by Rahul Gandhi after 2 years?
Whether we like it or not....nothing is going to change for the common man. Advani, Jaya, Karuna, Maya and mulayam all are same shit but different a$$ h&^e.
I am supporting MMS because he is not a politician. Chose the less evil. nothing else.
Nathan, it is not about MMS, it is about congress. MMS is just a puppet as he was during Narasimha Rao's govt.
Can you tell us with 100% surety that MMS will not get replaced by Rahul Gandhi after 2 years?
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
amitjoey
07-03 05:47 PM
http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2006/08/immigrants-file-lawsuit-against-us.php
JURIST@law.pitt.edu
JURIST@law.pitt.edu
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
_TrueFacts
09-11 10:37 AM
Lessons YSR taught Sonia (http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/masala-noodles/entry/lessons-ysr-taught-sonia)
Snippets.. go through all the user comments on the post in TOI.
YSR moulded democracy in AP in his own feudal mode. Hailing from the drylands of Rayalseema, where barren agriculture and lack of industry made an industry out of violence and extortion
YSR devised his own framework of governance that he started implementinng the moment he came to office in 2004. Simplistically stated this framework was an adaptation of the old zamindari system: under this YSR parcelled demarcated areas of the state to his loyal followers (who were elected as MLAs and MPs from these areas). Within the jurisidisction of these areas, these loyal followers were the kings - they were free to do anything (within limits) using the state's administrative machinery. In return, YSR wanted their loyalty and resources for the party kitty
Well, YSR delivered the state to her not once but twice and also financed a large part of the Congress campaign costs. In this comfort, Sonia forgot that the loyal Congressman had converted the party into his own personal satrapy
Snippets.. go through all the user comments on the post in TOI.
YSR moulded democracy in AP in his own feudal mode. Hailing from the drylands of Rayalseema, where barren agriculture and lack of industry made an industry out of violence and extortion
YSR devised his own framework of governance that he started implementinng the moment he came to office in 2004. Simplistically stated this framework was an adaptation of the old zamindari system: under this YSR parcelled demarcated areas of the state to his loyal followers (who were elected as MLAs and MPs from these areas). Within the jurisidisction of these areas, these loyal followers were the kings - they were free to do anything (within limits) using the state's administrative machinery. In return, YSR wanted their loyalty and resources for the party kitty
Well, YSR delivered the state to her not once but twice and also financed a large part of the Congress campaign costs. In this comfort, Sonia forgot that the loyal Congressman had converted the party into his own personal satrapy
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
Googler
02-15 01:49 PM
Yup Paskal I have a dug a little deeper. Although this case is about DV visa it is very similar to our Visa recatpure situation.
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:yJNFLn-AtcsJ:vls.law.vill.edu/Locator/3d/Jan2004/031075p.pdf+court+order+immigrant+visa+number&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=7&gl=in
Dvb, did you read the ruling? It denies relief and says that:
"We therefore join the Seventh and Eleventh Circuits in concluding that, in the current circumstances, the language Congress used precludes the INS from issuing a visa pursuant to the DV Program for a given fiscal year upon the expiration of that fiscal year. See Nyaga, 323 F.3d at 914; Iddir v. INS, 301 F.3d 492, 501 (7th Cir. 2002).8
8. Had Coraggioso sought relief prior to the expiration of the 1998 fiscal
year, our analysis may have been different."
So this case is not helpful to us, though it is good for us to be aware of its existence.
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:yJNFLn-AtcsJ:vls.law.vill.edu/Locator/3d/Jan2004/031075p.pdf+court+order+immigrant+visa+number&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=7&gl=in
Dvb, did you read the ruling? It denies relief and says that:
"We therefore join the Seventh and Eleventh Circuits in concluding that, in the current circumstances, the language Congress used precludes the INS from issuing a visa pursuant to the DV Program for a given fiscal year upon the expiration of that fiscal year. See Nyaga, 323 F.3d at 914; Iddir v. INS, 301 F.3d 492, 501 (7th Cir. 2002).8
8. Had Coraggioso sought relief prior to the expiration of the 1998 fiscal
year, our analysis may have been different."
So this case is not helpful to us, though it is good for us to be aware of its existence.
girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14%
greencard_fever
07-23 12:02 PM
USCIS is already did the ground work required to Use up all the left over visas. I am assuming based in the following theory
1) We have seen in the past in USCIS director interview ( i do not have the link for this) that USCIS and DOS is working closely ( This was lacking in the past) to approve as many cases as they can to use maximum VISA number.
2) By looking at the approvals from last 4 months, who ever i know whose PD's were current got their GC's.This indicates that USCIS is working efficiently then it was before to Use up all the VISAS.
3) Lastly i assume that DOS was moving the dates for EB2 consistently for last three visa bulletins and we all know that for August (last Quarter) it has moved by 2yrs+ (DOS and USCIS waited till last quarter to do this which makes more sense),I believe the reason behind this to use all the Visa Numbers and approve as many cases as they can.
This what i am assuming by looking at the recent VB movement and GC approvals.
1) We have seen in the past in USCIS director interview ( i do not have the link for this) that USCIS and DOS is working closely ( This was lacking in the past) to approve as many cases as they can to use maximum VISA number.
2) By looking at the approvals from last 4 months, who ever i know whose PD's were current got their GC's.This indicates that USCIS is working efficiently then it was before to Use up all the VISAS.
3) Lastly i assume that DOS was moving the dates for EB2 consistently for last three visa bulletins and we all know that for August (last Quarter) it has moved by 2yrs+ (DOS and USCIS waited till last quarter to do this which makes more sense),I believe the reason behind this to use all the Visa Numbers and approve as many cases as they can.
This what i am assuming by looking at the recent VB movement and GC approvals.
hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11%
mantric
02-13 02:55 AM
Yes I believe we have a case.
The EB immigration system has become a joke where we are fighting for a pittance of this or that quota.
The current situation is a violation of human dignity of young and skilled american workforce.
It is a violation of liberty of tax paying law abiding residents.
It is very unamerican as it closes off opportunities for some of the brightest people in the world.
Shame on America that this exploitation exists in this day and age in this country.
The EB immigration system has become a joke where we are fighting for a pittance of this or that quota.
The current situation is a violation of human dignity of young and skilled american workforce.
It is a violation of liberty of tax paying law abiding residents.
It is very unamerican as it closes off opportunities for some of the brightest people in the world.
Shame on America that this exploitation exists in this day and age in this country.
willigetgc?
01-14 12:03 PM
.
InTheMoment
09-25 06:22 PM
I think you have summarized pre-adjudication quite well.
Also note that pre-adjudication is not a very recent phenomenon USCIS service centers especially NSC has been doing it since late 2005!
Also note that pre-adjudication is not a very recent phenomenon USCIS service centers especially NSC has been doing it since late 2005!
No comments:
Post a Comment