shahuja
01-31 10:03 AM
congrats prashantc..
Hello All,
In delhi consulate i know they keep the passport and are not giving away any slips (221(g)) or any color slips.
all they say "pending processing". Is this same as Administrative processing ? how do we differentiate if this delay due is due to PIMS or some other reason like security/name check/ or any etc problem. This is such a doubtful situation specially for people who have been waiting for more than 2 weeks ?
If you have knowledge ..do shed some light.
thanks
shahuja
Hello All,
In delhi consulate i know they keep the passport and are not giving away any slips (221(g)) or any color slips.
all they say "pending processing". Is this same as Administrative processing ? how do we differentiate if this delay due is due to PIMS or some other reason like security/name check/ or any etc problem. This is such a doubtful situation specially for people who have been waiting for more than 2 weeks ?
If you have knowledge ..do shed some light.
thanks
shahuja
wallpaper Open Office Draw auch PDFs
americandesi
03-24 05:22 PM
Refer http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/htm/engperliwdiss.htm
deba
01-24 02:53 PM
Anyone in my situation? Thanks again.
Travelling via London Gatwick and Dubai to India and back. No airport change required during transit. Using AP, visa expired. I have a valid Canada PR card.
According to UK embassy US GC and Canada PR card holders do not need transit for direct airside transit. Does anyone have any experience in this situation? Please post.
Travelling via London Gatwick and Dubai to India and back. No airport change required during transit. Using AP, visa expired. I have a valid Canada PR card.
According to UK embassy US GC and Canada PR card holders do not need transit for direct airside transit. Does anyone have any experience in this situation? Please post.
2011 then OpenOffice.org
EB3_SEP04
08-25 08:25 PM
I've been using Lingo for 3+ years, I called them to ask if they are aware(of course they are), rep said within a week they are coming up with a plan that's better than Vonage. unlimited calling to india and 100+ countries for $22.95. Plus i think they are going to include some free minutes every month that you can use to call india from your work or cell phone using a toll free or access # (just like you use Reliance).
Rep said you will receive an email in a week or so about the new offer/plan.
If you are already a Lingo customer I'd wait a week, Lingo has history of beating any competing plan.
Rep said you will receive an email in a week or so about the new offer/plan.
If you are already a Lingo customer I'd wait a week, Lingo has history of beating any competing plan.
more...
newtoearth
05-10 08:59 PM
....
santb1975
11-17 01:02 AM
Does anyone have a count?
more...
optimystic
03-26 02:48 PM
Where does it say (please quote official DHS/USCIS/DOL publication or a bill) that employers must hire "US Citizens" first? I think the regulations are to give preference to US workers (note that its not US citizens) before brining somebody from abroad.
You do make a very good observation and we should clarify with the experts. Can anybody help clarifying this from the lawyers?
I dont know of any link to a particular publication, but I thought it was a common knowledge that the whole point of labor certification process, is for the DOL to monitor that a potential US worker (I thought it meant US Citizen but may be not), is not being displaced by a foreign worker. To be clear here though, the DOL does not prevent an employer from going ahead and sponsoring an H1B and hiring a foreign employee. But DOL is legally directed to reject such labor applications.
Though this is applicable only for H1B hiring and subsequent filing of GC process for such an employee, I am wondering whether there is any loophole in DOL's directives that might provide a cover for employers to enquire whether a propective employee is US Citizens are not.... Especailly in the PERM process don't they have to do active recruiting efforts and gather statiscis that they tried to hire US citizens ..?? How can an employer gather statistics if they didn't ask for work authorization related details....?
May be due to possible loopholes in such laws...they are able to take it a step further and enquiring about the kind of work authorization a candidate possesses!
You do make a very good observation and we should clarify with the experts. Can anybody help clarifying this from the lawyers?
I dont know of any link to a particular publication, but I thought it was a common knowledge that the whole point of labor certification process, is for the DOL to monitor that a potential US worker (I thought it meant US Citizen but may be not), is not being displaced by a foreign worker. To be clear here though, the DOL does not prevent an employer from going ahead and sponsoring an H1B and hiring a foreign employee. But DOL is legally directed to reject such labor applications.
Though this is applicable only for H1B hiring and subsequent filing of GC process for such an employee, I am wondering whether there is any loophole in DOL's directives that might provide a cover for employers to enquire whether a propective employee is US Citizens are not.... Especailly in the PERM process don't they have to do active recruiting efforts and gather statiscis that they tried to hire US citizens ..?? How can an employer gather statistics if they didn't ask for work authorization related details....?
May be due to possible loopholes in such laws...they are able to take it a step further and enquiring about the kind of work authorization a candidate possesses!
2010 OpenOffice Draw 2.0 (ou 3.0)
QB_man
02-12 02:22 PM
Chennai , Jan 27th, H1B renewal (applied in early 2006) still waiting..
by the way those who got the pp back did you get an apology? or did our friends from the other time zone certify that you have been closely examined and are not a fraud/threat?
Well, I guess what they want us to do is not worry about all this stuff .. just take 50/100 jobs and not come back :) im fine with that just let me know..
by the way those who got the pp back did you get an apology? or did our friends from the other time zone certify that you have been closely examined and are not a fraud/threat?
Well, I guess what they want us to do is not worry about all this stuff .. just take 50/100 jobs and not come back :) im fine with that just let me know..
more...
serg
07-09 09:24 PM
All right, looks like we got (or will get) some attention from media. DOS and USCIS got (or will) it too. That's good. They will forward flowers to hospital, and this is good too (hate to waste flowers)! Bad, if they will not strip messages from buckets, veterans do not need them at all, BUT if they decided to take messages off ... just picture that USCIS will stuck on forwarding flowers instead of doing their job. Who will win?
All right, what next? If BloodDrive will not work, I suggest we have to offer BRAINDRIVE :) Any leaders? :)
All right, what next? If BloodDrive will not work, I suggest we have to offer BRAINDRIVE :) Any leaders? :)
hair FAQ - OpenOffice Draw 3
vinabath
07-10 12:51 PM
Well, Me being a devils advocate I will agree with you. Because I recently saw Gandhi movie. Gandhi took 50+ years being the citizen of the country. Some people think that is very slow. Some think thats the most effective strategy. So from your perspective its waste of money and time as there are no quick returns.
Vinabath i do NOT expect the nation to put Legal Immigration before the IRAQ WAR. Ofcourse I do not expect that. What I am trying to point out is that this is going to be a LONG LONG ongoing issue and if not the war, there will be OTHER issues like the presedential elections etc.
On another note, the US is a capitalistic economy. If you are not selfish, ur a nice guy and nice guys finish LAST.
Vinabath i do NOT expect the nation to put Legal Immigration before the IRAQ WAR. Ofcourse I do not expect that. What I am trying to point out is that this is going to be a LONG LONG ongoing issue and if not the war, there will be OTHER issues like the presedential elections etc.
On another note, the US is a capitalistic economy. If you are not selfish, ur a nice guy and nice guys finish LAST.
more...
hpandey
03-24 03:35 PM
This is the email I just received from CapitalOne:
"Sorry for the delay in responding. I've been out of the office unexpectedly and am now just getting a chance to catch up on past messages. Unfortunately we can't pursue candidates with EAD cards either."
There was a thread related to similar issues which I could not find. Apologies for opening a new one.
Doesn't the above constitute discrimination and illegal ? What recourse do we have when we are disqualified because of EAD ?
My neighbour just got a job at Capital One last week using her EAD . So I am not sure which policy this HR person is talking about. Capital One definately takes people on EAD and my neighbour is proof of it !!!
"Sorry for the delay in responding. I've been out of the office unexpectedly and am now just getting a chance to catch up on past messages. Unfortunately we can't pursue candidates with EAD cards either."
There was a thread related to similar issues which I could not find. Apologies for opening a new one.
Doesn't the above constitute discrimination and illegal ? What recourse do we have when we are disqualified because of EAD ?
My neighbour just got a job at Capital One last week using her EAD . So I am not sure which policy this HR person is talking about. Capital One definately takes people on EAD and my neighbour is proof of it !!!
hot Abbildung 3: Das
drirshad
01-06 11:11 AM
Guys got a reply from Mattew Oh as follows on enquring about section 8001.
--- Matthew Oh <ohlaw@immigration-law.com> wrote:
> Irshad: I am glad that you have started a new
> portal. I was going to
> contact you to address problem of setting up a link
> to the immigrationportal
> as it has to go through another attorney's website.
> Some attorneys may have
> a problem with that. Since you have a new web site,
> I will take a look at
> it and may consider setting up a link on our web
> site.
>
> With reference to 8001, the community should focus
> on the Comprehensive
> Immigration Reform legislation rather than S. 1932
> issue. That legislation
> is gone. Thank you for keeping in touch with me.
>
--- Matthew Oh <ohlaw@immigration-law.com> wrote:
> Irshad: I am glad that you have started a new
> portal. I was going to
> contact you to address problem of setting up a link
> to the immigrationportal
> as it has to go through another attorney's website.
> Some attorneys may have
> a problem with that. Since you have a new web site,
> I will take a look at
> it and may consider setting up a link on our web
> site.
>
> With reference to 8001, the community should focus
> on the Comprehensive
> Immigration Reform legislation rather than S. 1932
> issue. That legislation
> is gone. Thank you for keeping in touch with me.
>
more...
house OpenOffice.org Draw
gc_buddy
11-12 02:55 PM
Guys,
Please don't be afraid to share your denial info. At this time, OMB is asking to remove all personally identifiable information from reciept notices. So, we don't have to worry. We will get much attention only with specific evidances. Please do not hesitate..
I have recieved Omb response since I partificipated in the campaign. But, I have not used AC21 yet. Will be contacting PD_Recap for further direction.
Please don't be afraid to share your denial info. At this time, OMB is asking to remove all personally identifiable information from reciept notices. So, we don't have to worry. We will get much attention only with specific evidances. Please do not hesitate..
I have recieved Omb response since I partificipated in the campaign. But, I have not used AC21 yet. Will be contacting PD_Recap for further direction.
tattoo OpenOffice.org Draw 2.0 screen
pappu
11-06 03:28 PM
Check this:
http://www.bibdaily.com/pdfs/Liang%2010-30-07.pdf
Defendants assert that the background check is a complex
process that must accommodate an extremely large volume of requests
from the USCIS. Given the backlog of name-check requests and the
FBI�s limited resources, they maintain that the delay of two and a
half years in processing Mr. Liang�s background check is not
unreasonable. There is some validity to these points, and the
Court appreciates that the name-check process is indeed complex and
resource-intensive. But limited resources or not, a common-sense
rule of reason dictates that if the FBI was performing background
checks with due diligence, it would not take two and a half years
to process Mr. Liang�s name. While the Court is sympathetic to the
demands placed on the FBI and the limited ability of the USCIS to
control how the FBI allocates its resources, a lack of sufficient
resources devoted to name-check operations is a matter for the
agencies to take up between themselves or with Congress. The
executive branch must decide for itself how best to meet its
statutory duties; this Court can only decide whether or not those
duties have been met.
See Dong, 2007 WL 2601107 at *11 (�[I]t is
not the place of the judicial branch to weigh a plaintiff�s clear
right to administrative action against the agency�s burdens in
complying.�).
Moreover, although there is no Congressionally mandated
timetable for the processing of I-485 applications, Congress has by
statute expressed its view of what a reasonable amount of time is:
�It is the sense of Congress that the processing of an immigration benefit application should be completed not later than 180 days
after the initial filing of the application.� 8 U.S.C. � 1571.
The Court recognizes that this statute was enacted prior to the
events of September 11, 2001, and that the burdens on agencies with
responsibility for immigration matters have since increased.
Nonetheless, Plaintiffs� applications have been pending for five
times the length of the period identified by Congress.
Defendants argue that expediting Mr. Liang�s name check will
prejudice other applicants who have been waiting longer than he -in some cases, since as long as December, 2002.
While this would
be unfortunate, Defendants� failure to fulfill their statutory duty
to other applicants has no bearing on whether they have fulfilled
their statutory duty to Plaintiffs, and thus cannot serve as a
basis for denying Plaintiffs� motion.
While Defendants worry that
granting Plaintiffs relief may reward �the more litigious
applicants� or encourage other applicants to file lawsuits,
�perhaps recognizing this possibility will provide the defendants
with adequate incentive to begin processing [I-485] applications in
a lawful and timely fashion in order to obviate the applicants�
need to resort to the courts for redress.� Dong, 2007 WL 2601107
at *12.
http://www.bibdaily.com/pdfs/Liang%2010-30-07.pdf
Defendants assert that the background check is a complex
process that must accommodate an extremely large volume of requests
from the USCIS. Given the backlog of name-check requests and the
FBI�s limited resources, they maintain that the delay of two and a
half years in processing Mr. Liang�s background check is not
unreasonable. There is some validity to these points, and the
Court appreciates that the name-check process is indeed complex and
resource-intensive. But limited resources or not, a common-sense
rule of reason dictates that if the FBI was performing background
checks with due diligence, it would not take two and a half years
to process Mr. Liang�s name. While the Court is sympathetic to the
demands placed on the FBI and the limited ability of the USCIS to
control how the FBI allocates its resources, a lack of sufficient
resources devoted to name-check operations is a matter for the
agencies to take up between themselves or with Congress. The
executive branch must decide for itself how best to meet its
statutory duties; this Court can only decide whether or not those
duties have been met.
See Dong, 2007 WL 2601107 at *11 (�[I]t is
not the place of the judicial branch to weigh a plaintiff�s clear
right to administrative action against the agency�s burdens in
complying.�).
Moreover, although there is no Congressionally mandated
timetable for the processing of I-485 applications, Congress has by
statute expressed its view of what a reasonable amount of time is:
�It is the sense of Congress that the processing of an immigration benefit application should be completed not later than 180 days
after the initial filing of the application.� 8 U.S.C. � 1571.
The Court recognizes that this statute was enacted prior to the
events of September 11, 2001, and that the burdens on agencies with
responsibility for immigration matters have since increased.
Nonetheless, Plaintiffs� applications have been pending for five
times the length of the period identified by Congress.
Defendants argue that expediting Mr. Liang�s name check will
prejudice other applicants who have been waiting longer than he -in some cases, since as long as December, 2002.
While this would
be unfortunate, Defendants� failure to fulfill their statutory duty
to other applicants has no bearing on whether they have fulfilled
their statutory duty to Plaintiffs, and thus cannot serve as a
basis for denying Plaintiffs� motion.
While Defendants worry that
granting Plaintiffs relief may reward �the more litigious
applicants� or encourage other applicants to file lawsuits,
�perhaps recognizing this possibility will provide the defendants
with adequate incentive to begin processing [I-485] applications in
a lawful and timely fashion in order to obviate the applicants�
need to resort to the courts for redress.� Dong, 2007 WL 2601107
at *12.
more...
pictures OpenOffice.org Draw 3.2 Ubuntu
grupak
03-24 09:04 AM
This is the email I just received from CapitalOne:
"Sorry for the delay in responding. I've been out of the office unexpectedly and am now just getting a chance to catch up on past messages. Unfortunately we can't pursue candidates with EAD cards either."
There was a thread related to similar issues which I could not find. Apologies for opening a new one.
Doesn't the above constitute discrimination and illegal ? What recourse do we have when we are disqualified because of EAD ?
Is this for a job?
According to I-9 form, employers can't discriminate based on EAD. There are some exception where they require security clearance for the jobs.
You might want to remind CapitalOne of this anti-discrimination notice on I-9 or bring it to the notice of USCIS.
"Sorry for the delay in responding. I've been out of the office unexpectedly and am now just getting a chance to catch up on past messages. Unfortunately we can't pursue candidates with EAD cards either."
There was a thread related to similar issues which I could not find. Apologies for opening a new one.
Doesn't the above constitute discrimination and illegal ? What recourse do we have when we are disqualified because of EAD ?
Is this for a job?
According to I-9 form, employers can't discriminate based on EAD. There are some exception where they require security clearance for the jobs.
You might want to remind CapitalOne of this anti-discrimination notice on I-9 or bring it to the notice of USCIS.
dresses garde d#39;Open Office Draw 3
vbkris77
04-01 11:38 AM
Don't drag me into this.. It is totally cool if you want get information from multiple sources.. IV intention is not to provide news updates..
IV is a platform for fixing legal immigration.. That takes money to do that.. So there various innovative ways an organization can try get money to reach its goals.. This is one way..
I support and understand this initiate and hence I am writing in Donor forum..
I am not sure if u were born as an idiot or became an idiot after being turning a so called "donor".
To be frank I stopped contributing as and when IV started having donor forums.
There are thousands of websites and forums througout the internet to get info and what VKBris posted may not even come close to what Q and Teddy and so many others used to share as a group.
Now coming on to freebies,What benefit does IV provide to past contributors.I have contributed in the past, have been active at the initial stages,have spent my own money and booked airtickets to meet senators.Been a leader in a state chapter.But later realised that it was not worth for this forum which has partitions among so called donors.
Why the heck does any one want to see in a home page about posts on a donor forum.Just hide it and keep it among yourself and discuss .
Now red may follow,and a possible ban.
IV is a platform for fixing legal immigration.. That takes money to do that.. So there various innovative ways an organization can try get money to reach its goals.. This is one way..
I support and understand this initiate and hence I am writing in Donor forum..
I am not sure if u were born as an idiot or became an idiot after being turning a so called "donor".
To be frank I stopped contributing as and when IV started having donor forums.
There are thousands of websites and forums througout the internet to get info and what VKBris posted may not even come close to what Q and Teddy and so many others used to share as a group.
Now coming on to freebies,What benefit does IV provide to past contributors.I have contributed in the past, have been active at the initial stages,have spent my own money and booked airtickets to meet senators.Been a leader in a state chapter.But later realised that it was not worth for this forum which has partitions among so called donors.
Why the heck does any one want to see in a home page about posts on a donor forum.Just hide it and keep it among yourself and discuss .
Now red may follow,and a possible ban.
more...
makeup Figure.2
gc_chahiye
06-25 12:00 PM
............Expanding on my previous posts.
One more thing.
If you decide to apply multiple 485s with each other as dependents, then file just one first. Wait. Gets its A number and put that number in the other application. This way you will cover one pitfall of multiple filing. It will not cause confusion at USCIS end.
one thing to consider though: with the number of 485 filings that are expected in July, receipts are probably going to take 8 weeks or longer to come through (just ask teh H1B filers this year). By then the PD for the other spouse would have probably retrogressed. Another thing to keep in mind...
One more thing.
If you decide to apply multiple 485s with each other as dependents, then file just one first. Wait. Gets its A number and put that number in the other application. This way you will cover one pitfall of multiple filing. It will not cause confusion at USCIS end.
one thing to consider though: with the number of 485 filings that are expected in July, receipts are probably going to take 8 weeks or longer to come through (just ask teh H1B filers this year). By then the PD for the other spouse would have probably retrogressed. Another thing to keep in mind...
girlfriend OxygenOffice Professional
drona
07-09 07:29 PM
Please also mention the EB retrogression, backlogs and revised July visa bulletin issue here. We must mention WHY we sent the flowers
hairstyles Draw Recovery Download
vkrishn
08-13 01:20 PM
did they contact you after this email? or any LUD on your case?
Nope. Nothing Yet. Its atleast better than the script response that i get from NSC.
Nope. Nothing Yet. Its atleast better than the script response that i get from NSC.
raidohri
06-15 12:27 PM
Normally how long the medicals are valid, I have applied my 485 in the past with medicals that are 7 month old
nixstor
08-04 07:59 PM
HV000,
I agree with you. How ever you have not still updated your profile with DC rally attendance info. Please follow the thread (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=11846) here to update your profile.
Thanks
I agree with you. How ever you have not still updated your profile with DC rally attendance info. Please follow the thread (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=11846) here to update your profile.
Thanks