walking_dude
02-14 01:35 PM
One of the plaintiffs is a Michigan chapter member. Though IV isn't a party in the lawsuit, we have enouraged members to participate on their own. Though 2 of them backed out, 3rd one did decide to participate.
We had formed a group on MI DL issue - Mark and me. We have been working on this issue in different ways, contacting attorneys, state lawmaker offices, other organizations and so on. IV has provided us all necessary support. But, most of the work was done by Mark & me.
Same should happen here. Some leaders need to come forward and take the initiative to organize. Come out in public, contact other members, collect money, find plaintiffs, talk to attorney and own the initative. IV can provide necessary background help.
Will some leaders step forward?
Watch and see how fast the Michigan government will start issuing DL to H1B holders and to those who has pending I-485.
http://www.aclumich.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=567
https://www.aclumich.org/pdf/licensecomplaint.pdf
We had formed a group on MI DL issue - Mark and me. We have been working on this issue in different ways, contacting attorneys, state lawmaker offices, other organizations and so on. IV has provided us all necessary support. But, most of the work was done by Mark & me.
Same should happen here. Some leaders need to come forward and take the initiative to organize. Come out in public, contact other members, collect money, find plaintiffs, talk to attorney and own the initative. IV can provide necessary background help.
Will some leaders step forward?
Watch and see how fast the Michigan government will start issuing DL to H1B holders and to those who has pending I-485.
http://www.aclumich.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=567
https://www.aclumich.org/pdf/licensecomplaint.pdf
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
CADude
04-18 02:49 PM
immigration-law.com
04/18/2007: Further Clarification on Pending I-140 Substitution Petitions and Proposed Substitution Elimination Rule
There are a couple of clarifications we want to make on our previous posting on this issue. The supplemental information part of a regulation is not binding, but when there is a room for interpretation on specific provisions of the rule itself, it gives a guidance to the interpretation. In this regards, for now, the correction to our previous interpretation should stand. Secondly, there is no information available about this issue in the final regulation which is expected to be released sooner or later. Whatever the final version will look, it may be prudent for the employers with the certified labor certification applications to file the substitution I-140 petitions as soon as possible before the final rule is released.
04/18/2007: Clarification and Correction of Scope of Validity of Substitution of Approved Labor Certifications Under the Proposed Substitution Elimination Rule
The final rule to eliminate the substitution is expected to be released in the near future. One question that raises the body heat has been the pending I-140 substitution petitions which have yet to be approved. Under the proposed regulation, there was a provision that the substitution approved at the time of enactment of the final rule will not be affected by the elimination rule. We previously interpreted the language "substitution approved" would include the approved I-140 substitution petitions and would not include the pending I-140 substitution petitions.
We want to correct such interpretation. The substitution approved under the proposed rule appears to mean the substitution approved by the DOL and not necessarily the I-140 substitution approval. Accordingly, if the I-140 has been filed and is pending at the time enactment of the final rule, such case should not be affected by the elimination rule and remain valid. This is made clear by the following supplemental information to the proposed regulaation:
Substitution of alien beneficiaries will be prohibited as of the effective date of a final rule resulting from this NPRM and that prohibition will apply to all pending permanent labor certification applications and to approved certifications not yet filed with DHS, whether the application was filed under the prior or current regulation. This regulatory change would not affect substitutions approved prior to the final rule's effective date.
We stand corrected on this change.
04/18/2007: Further Clarification on Pending I-140 Substitution Petitions and Proposed Substitution Elimination Rule
There are a couple of clarifications we want to make on our previous posting on this issue. The supplemental information part of a regulation is not binding, but when there is a room for interpretation on specific provisions of the rule itself, it gives a guidance to the interpretation. In this regards, for now, the correction to our previous interpretation should stand. Secondly, there is no information available about this issue in the final regulation which is expected to be released sooner or later. Whatever the final version will look, it may be prudent for the employers with the certified labor certification applications to file the substitution I-140 petitions as soon as possible before the final rule is released.
04/18/2007: Clarification and Correction of Scope of Validity of Substitution of Approved Labor Certifications Under the Proposed Substitution Elimination Rule
The final rule to eliminate the substitution is expected to be released in the near future. One question that raises the body heat has been the pending I-140 substitution petitions which have yet to be approved. Under the proposed regulation, there was a provision that the substitution approved at the time of enactment of the final rule will not be affected by the elimination rule. We previously interpreted the language "substitution approved" would include the approved I-140 substitution petitions and would not include the pending I-140 substitution petitions.
We want to correct such interpretation. The substitution approved under the proposed rule appears to mean the substitution approved by the DOL and not necessarily the I-140 substitution approval. Accordingly, if the I-140 has been filed and is pending at the time enactment of the final rule, such case should not be affected by the elimination rule and remain valid. This is made clear by the following supplemental information to the proposed regulaation:
Substitution of alien beneficiaries will be prohibited as of the effective date of a final rule resulting from this NPRM and that prohibition will apply to all pending permanent labor certification applications and to approved certifications not yet filed with DHS, whether the application was filed under the prior or current regulation. This regulatory change would not affect substitutions approved prior to the final rule's effective date.
We stand corrected on this change.
_TrueFacts
09-04 11:53 AM
If not today, every one will get GC tomorrow. Members of IMV or not.
But that shouldn't stop us from visiting this site.
As for deleting my id and this thread. If it it happens then it emphasizes the fact that IMV is no different than corrupt YSR.
If you guys(dealsnet, breddy2000) can't make any sensible contribution to this discussion..keep away from it.
But that shouldn't stop us from visiting this site.
As for deleting my id and this thread. If it it happens then it emphasizes the fact that IMV is no different than corrupt YSR.
If you guys(dealsnet, breddy2000) can't make any sensible contribution to this discussion..keep away from it.
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
BharatPremi
12-14 02:23 PM
O.K. Forget for a moment about IN,China,MX and Philipines. Let me understand the "Quota" witihin "ROW"
Example: Britain, Pakistan.
Let's say next year tons of nationals of Britain Choose to apply under EB.
Let's say total is more than 7% of Total 1,40,000 limit.
Is that allowed?
Same question for Pakistan...
Example: Britain, Pakistan.
Let's say next year tons of nationals of Britain Choose to apply under EB.
Let's say total is more than 7% of Total 1,40,000 limit.
Is that allowed?
Same question for Pakistan...
more...
TeddyKoochu
09-24 12:32 PM
Spill will be around 30k for Eb2 and that will clear till mid 2006. by Sep 2010. In Sep 2011 you should be able to file for 485.
there is no law that says to move date to accept new applications. If DOS makes date current and people have all data visible now will take USCIS to court for not approving cases. What I have learnt that USCIS is considering publishing rule ( Via Rule making process ) in dec 2009 to halt concurrent filling for I 140 and 485 and give chance to pre register for 485. so in Spiring of 2010 we may be able to pre file 485. which may / may not give benefit of AC 21 . EAD is always admin job so they can give out EAD and AP along with pre filling.
I believe that pre-registering for 485 and being able to file for EAD and AP is itself a great step forward for us. How concrete is this news / information.
there is no law that says to move date to accept new applications. If DOS makes date current and people have all data visible now will take USCIS to court for not approving cases. What I have learnt that USCIS is considering publishing rule ( Via Rule making process ) in dec 2009 to halt concurrent filling for I 140 and 485 and give chance to pre register for 485. so in Spiring of 2010 we may be able to pre file 485. which may / may not give benefit of AC 21 . EAD is always admin job so they can give out EAD and AP along with pre filling.
I believe that pre-registering for 485 and being able to file for EAD and AP is itself a great step forward for us. How concrete is this news / information.
voldemar
03-27 10:06 PM
Can you please provide link for the memo.
Sure http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20061800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2006/06-1248.htm
Sure http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20061800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2006/06-1248.htm
more...
samay
07-06 12:08 PM
Hello,
Could you tell at 140 level does a candidate needs to submit all the previous
H1 Approval notices.
I couldnt submit my previous 140 approval notice since it was during 2000-2001. How important is the previous H1 B approval notices for a 140 approval ? . I submitted the current approval notice which is from 2006-2009
Rajesh
Hello
We normally submit all the previous H-1B approvals with the I-140 application. I am a bit confused from your post is there a gap in your H-1 B approvals.
Could you tell at 140 level does a candidate needs to submit all the previous
H1 Approval notices.
I couldnt submit my previous 140 approval notice since it was during 2000-2001. How important is the previous H1 B approval notices for a 140 approval ? . I submitted the current approval notice which is from 2006-2009
Rajesh
Hello
We normally submit all the previous H-1B approvals with the I-140 application. I am a bit confused from your post is there a gap in your H-1 B approvals.
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
sk2006
03-31 09:08 PM
You should if you belongs to Zimabwe.
I don't know who is real " waste of resources" here ? People who are concerned about their mother country's future or people who call them "waster of resources" !!!
MERA BHARAT MAHAN !
You are worried about your mother country's future but want USA's Green card(And probably eventual citizenship) so that you don't have to go back to your home country..
Height of Hypocrisy!
:confused:
I don't know who is real " waste of resources" here ? People who are concerned about their mother country's future or people who call them "waster of resources" !!!
MERA BHARAT MAHAN !
You are worried about your mother country's future but want USA's Green card(And probably eventual citizenship) so that you don't have to go back to your home country..
Height of Hypocrisy!
:confused:
more...
narendra_modi
01-15 01:11 PM
It wont be an issue since you already gor your GC or I-485 filed. I failed to understand still what you are doing here.
If one filed I-485, isn't employee-employer relationship comes under a questionmark? what if that company is closed ? And if this memo is implemented, most of the GC filing IT Inc. will be shut down sooner and hence will be a big mess..they are the ones who are supporting for their GC.
If one filed I-485, isn't employee-employer relationship comes under a questionmark? what if that company is closed ? And if this memo is implemented, most of the GC filing IT Inc. will be shut down sooner and hence will be a big mess..they are the ones who are supporting for their GC.
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
Jungle_Cat
02-14 02:37 PM
$25 for intial consultation....If there is a solid ground to go forward,am there for this movement.
more...
vroapp
07-10 11:27 AM
:-)
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
rayoflight
08-15 02:00 PM
Well it is a big deal for all Indians. I am not talking per se about SRK but as a fellow Indian. Does it take 2 hrs to ascertain his identity when he was here as a guest to the Indian Embassy as a Cultural Ambassador of India to participate in the Indian Independence Day Celebrations!!!
Some of you raised excellent points like would the US Media keep quiet if a Hollywood star is treated out this kinda treatment in India or any country?
Would it keep quiet if:
1) Their ex-president is searched by an airline staff
Our ex-president Shri Abdul Kalaam was searched by Continental
2) Hollywood star is strip searched in a foreign country
Amir Khan was strip searched in Toronto Airport
3) Hollywood star is questioned about their nationality because they dont like American
Neil Nitin Mukesh was questioned in 2008 whether he was Indian since he didn't have features.
and many more incidents...
- Rayoflight
Some of you raised excellent points like would the US Media keep quiet if a Hollywood star is treated out this kinda treatment in India or any country?
Would it keep quiet if:
1) Their ex-president is searched by an airline staff
Our ex-president Shri Abdul Kalaam was searched by Continental
2) Hollywood star is strip searched in a foreign country
Amir Khan was strip searched in Toronto Airport
3) Hollywood star is questioned about their nationality because they dont like American
Neil Nitin Mukesh was questioned in 2008 whether he was Indian since he didn't have features.
and many more incidents...
- Rayoflight
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
sunny1000
01-05 04:55 PM
^^^^^
WTF? why are you bumping this useless thread?
WTF? why are you bumping this useless thread?
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
sanju
02-16 09:37 AM
We have enough grounds for lawsuit without them.
That is one way to look at things. The important thing is, whether the Judge looks at the situation the same way. It will be tough job to convince the Judge. If you seek legal opinion from a lawyer, lawyers mostly tend to say that you have a case expecting that that lawyer will be the one filing the lawsuit (i.e. making the money). So be careful with the idea and advise from a lawyer.
And more importantly, even if 'we have a case', do we have folks who are willing to be plaintiff in this lawsuit. Are you or Googler or chandu (because he replied to my earlier posts suggesting that we will find someone to lead) willing to be the plaintiff, or are you encouraging others (putting the gun on other's shoulder to fire) to be the plaintiff. If you see that there is chance/value in filing lawsuit, why don't you decide to be the plaintiff? Either way, if you are a plaintiff or if you know someone who wants to be one, why don't you take this to IV team.
Say we have a case, then to go to the next step we need -
1.) Someone willing to take the initiative/lead
2.) Plaintiff
3.) Resources
4.) There maybe more that I am not able to think at this time, because I no experience of filing class action lawsuit.
How to find what we need to file lawsuit -
For (1.), I suggest someone willing to give out his/her name as plaintiff should contact IV. I saw that folks are discussing this on too, but that site is not a non-profit. That site is owned by some guy who is earning good money of off the ads on his site. He won't spend resources to file for lawsuit although he has made good money off of the woes of others tracking their green card case status. So the only viable option is to get IV involved.
For (2.), if you want to see this through, then, at least one of around 180 folks who voted for filing lawsuit should be willing to be the plaintiff. If not, then someone needs to make phone calls to find a possible plaintiff.
For (3.), as mentioned above, I don't know of any one organized effort other than IV to lead such an effort of a lawsuit.
That is one way to look at things. The important thing is, whether the Judge looks at the situation the same way. It will be tough job to convince the Judge. If you seek legal opinion from a lawyer, lawyers mostly tend to say that you have a case expecting that that lawyer will be the one filing the lawsuit (i.e. making the money). So be careful with the idea and advise from a lawyer.
And more importantly, even if 'we have a case', do we have folks who are willing to be plaintiff in this lawsuit. Are you or Googler or chandu (because he replied to my earlier posts suggesting that we will find someone to lead) willing to be the plaintiff, or are you encouraging others (putting the gun on other's shoulder to fire) to be the plaintiff. If you see that there is chance/value in filing lawsuit, why don't you decide to be the plaintiff? Either way, if you are a plaintiff or if you know someone who wants to be one, why don't you take this to IV team.
Say we have a case, then to go to the next step we need -
1.) Someone willing to take the initiative/lead
2.) Plaintiff
3.) Resources
4.) There maybe more that I am not able to think at this time, because I no experience of filing class action lawsuit.
How to find what we need to file lawsuit -
For (1.), I suggest someone willing to give out his/her name as plaintiff should contact IV. I saw that folks are discussing this on too, but that site is not a non-profit. That site is owned by some guy who is earning good money of off the ads on his site. He won't spend resources to file for lawsuit although he has made good money off of the woes of others tracking their green card case status. So the only viable option is to get IV involved.
For (2.), if you want to see this through, then, at least one of around 180 folks who voted for filing lawsuit should be willing to be the plaintiff. If not, then someone needs to make phone calls to find a possible plaintiff.
For (3.), as mentioned above, I don't know of any one organized effort other than IV to lead such an effort of a lawsuit.
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
msp1976
02-18 12:37 PM
I differ with you again, my friend.
The main reason(s) behind less mobilization is this. Pappu described this on a different thread.
1) Ignorance about the true nature of the problem
People like you and I don't know that without a change in the laws, they won't get their greencards for another 10-20 years.
2) Lack of faith and understanding of the system
People like you and I, once they know that they are getting screwed, think that the situation is hopeless. They don't understand that the merits of our case (you alluded to them in your previous posts, the demographic shift due to the baby boomers retiring requires skilled labor in this country), is sufficient to warrant a sympathetic ear to us in the congress. We CAN freaking get out of the mess we are in.
We have to accept these two problems. And then we have to address them. How do we do that? Thats the big question.
I respect your opinion ...but I refuse to believe that people are ignorant...
The main reason(s) behind less mobilization is this. Pappu described this on a different thread.
1) Ignorance about the true nature of the problem
People like you and I don't know that without a change in the laws, they won't get their greencards for another 10-20 years.
2) Lack of faith and understanding of the system
People like you and I, once they know that they are getting screwed, think that the situation is hopeless. They don't understand that the merits of our case (you alluded to them in your previous posts, the demographic shift due to the baby boomers retiring requires skilled labor in this country), is sufficient to warrant a sympathetic ear to us in the congress. We CAN freaking get out of the mess we are in.
We have to accept these two problems. And then we have to address them. How do we do that? Thats the big question.
I respect your opinion ...but I refuse to believe that people are ignorant...
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
msp1976
02-12 08:54 PM
Without reform in the next few months.....dates for EB3 ROW would also start moving backwards....
The BECs would chew on the TR cases and throw out 100 K approvals in the next few months....That it .... Sayonara for the EB3 world current dates too.....
The BECs would chew on the TR cases and throw out 100 K approvals in the next few months....That it .... Sayonara for the EB3 world current dates too.....
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
luncheSpecials
02-15 04:38 PM
I totally blame bodyshoppers for the mess
girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14%
PlainSpeak
01-13 01:40 PM
Let me see if I understand PlainSpeak's language:
1. IV core needs to put a lot of resources to lobby for the DV bill, knowing full well that this bill will go nowhere!
2. Raise a false sense of hope among the EB3 community, again, knowing full well that its going to be dashed - just so that IV gains the trust of EB3 (I am EB3, and they have my trust without your logic!)
3. An exercise to gain trust by misleading!:D
I wonder why IV core did not come up with this brilliant idea ;)
Mr willigetgc to start off with here are a few facts
1. IV core needs to put a lot of resources to lobby for the DV bill
IV Core need not put a lot of resources to lobby for DV bill if they feel it is not worth the time and effort. that is for IV Core to decide and the decision is theirs to make after all they know about advocacy and lobbying
1. knowing full well that this bill will go nowhere!
That is my personal opinion and also the opinion of a whole bunch of people on this forum who do not agree with me but do agrree to teh fact that it has been 4 years since any immigration friendly bill came to be debated in congress. What wil make DV bill any different. This wil also go the same way. I would be surpirsed if it even comes up for debate
2. Raise a false sense of hope among the EB3 community, again, knowing full well that its going to be dashed - just so that IV gains the trust of EB3
My friend willigetgc what do EB3 people have besides hope. If you look at the statistics i will get GC in 19 year sand you with a priority date of May 07 (20 - 25 years). No reason not to hope for something and if IV really believes in what i suggested (I am sure it will go through all possible refinements) that would be a signal of not just hope but also action on part of IV to do something about EB Retrogressed folks. Now i am not saying it will happen and i am also not saying it will. All i am saying is here is a chnace to do something different which is also right because iot is not part of teh IV charter that IV is working to get relief for retrogressed EB
(I am EB3, and they have my trust without your logic!)
And what a great thing it is that you being an EB3 with a priority date of 2007 are working with EB2 hand in hand to get something done. It is great that you have trust with IV. Without trust nothing works. What i say is i have trust in IV i do not have trust that what they advocate is good for EB3. Semantics you may say but please read the lines carefully my friend. I hope you will understand
1. IV core needs to put a lot of resources to lobby for the DV bill, knowing full well that this bill will go nowhere!
2. Raise a false sense of hope among the EB3 community, again, knowing full well that its going to be dashed - just so that IV gains the trust of EB3 (I am EB3, and they have my trust without your logic!)
3. An exercise to gain trust by misleading!:D
I wonder why IV core did not come up with this brilliant idea ;)
Mr willigetgc to start off with here are a few facts
1. IV core needs to put a lot of resources to lobby for the DV bill
IV Core need not put a lot of resources to lobby for DV bill if they feel it is not worth the time and effort. that is for IV Core to decide and the decision is theirs to make after all they know about advocacy and lobbying
1. knowing full well that this bill will go nowhere!
That is my personal opinion and also the opinion of a whole bunch of people on this forum who do not agree with me but do agrree to teh fact that it has been 4 years since any immigration friendly bill came to be debated in congress. What wil make DV bill any different. This wil also go the same way. I would be surpirsed if it even comes up for debate
2. Raise a false sense of hope among the EB3 community, again, knowing full well that its going to be dashed - just so that IV gains the trust of EB3
My friend willigetgc what do EB3 people have besides hope. If you look at the statistics i will get GC in 19 year sand you with a priority date of May 07 (20 - 25 years). No reason not to hope for something and if IV really believes in what i suggested (I am sure it will go through all possible refinements) that would be a signal of not just hope but also action on part of IV to do something about EB Retrogressed folks. Now i am not saying it will happen and i am also not saying it will. All i am saying is here is a chnace to do something different which is also right because iot is not part of teh IV charter that IV is working to get relief for retrogressed EB
(I am EB3, and they have my trust without your logic!)
And what a great thing it is that you being an EB3 with a priority date of 2007 are working with EB2 hand in hand to get something done. It is great that you have trust with IV. Without trust nothing works. What i say is i have trust in IV i do not have trust that what they advocate is good for EB3. Semantics you may say but please read the lines carefully my friend. I hope you will understand
hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11%
vicks_don
07-16 02:20 PM
My current EAD expires on Aug 13th 2008. I currently working on EAD. I applied EAD 110 days before and my EAD was approved and card production ordered on June 25th 2008. I still did not receive my EAD in the mail.
Since I am working on EAD what are my options or what do I need to do if I did not receive my EAD in time.
Thanks
Since I am working on EAD what are my options or what do I need to do if I did not receive my EAD in time.
Thanks
ramus
07-04 09:57 AM
Guys... Please help Mecaca.. Please scan all 100 pages of breaking news thread and summarize issues.. Please be very specfic and up to the point..
Should be short.
I meant a scan of the other 100 page thread Breaking news. I did not follow that thread and it has lot of issues. Please summarize issues mentioned in Breaking News thread here.
I will add issues from this thread! thanks
Should be short.
I meant a scan of the other 100 page thread Breaking news. I did not follow that thread and it has lot of issues. Please summarize issues mentioned in Breaking News thread here.
I will add issues from this thread! thanks
ragz4u
10-24 12:52 PM
I was under the impression that only an 'approved' labor can be substituted. I recently had a conversation with a friend whose company attorney had told him that even unapproved labors stuck in the Backlog center can be substituted.
I am pretty confident that this is another case of an unethical, not-well-versed lawyer wishing to make a quick buck, but can someone please enlighten me if I am wrong?
I am pretty confident that this is another case of an unethical, not-well-versed lawyer wishing to make a quick buck, but can someone please enlighten me if I am wrong?
No comments:
Post a Comment