Jaime
06-26 10:23 AM
Well, I am a legal immigrant from Mexico, I have an MBA, my race is white (100% European as are more than 10 million Mexicans) and I do not wear a "sombrero".
I thought that this forum was for us all to help each other and not enter these types of useless arguments. I cannot believe that the posters of these racist messages, who are Indian, are falling into the same sterotypes that Americans fall into in regards to India. You are doing that with Mexico. I have been to India, I urge you to go to Mexico and see for yourselves what the country is like before passing judgment.
Mexico has 100 million people vs. India's 1 Billion plus, yet Mexico's GDP is essentially equal to India's (India = 775,410, Mexico=768,437). All the people that you see immigrating here are of course the poor and uneducated who can come here in large numbers because of the simple fact that (hello people!) we share a land border with the U.S.A. (What would happen if India shared a land border with the U.S.A. - One can only imagine! Instead of 7 million illegal Mexicans, we would have 400 million illegal Indians here!) I invite you to visit Mexico, where in some parts you will think you are in Sweden. And again, yes! have been to India!
We are misusing this forum with stereotypes and you guys are turning this into an Indian-only forum. (WHich is a turnoff to me and many more) I know the majority of us in here are Indian, but if I continue to feel unwelcome here I will just take my donations elsewhere.
I thought that this forum was for us all to help each other and not enter these types of useless arguments. I cannot believe that the posters of these racist messages, who are Indian, are falling into the same sterotypes that Americans fall into in regards to India. You are doing that with Mexico. I have been to India, I urge you to go to Mexico and see for yourselves what the country is like before passing judgment.
Mexico has 100 million people vs. India's 1 Billion plus, yet Mexico's GDP is essentially equal to India's (India = 775,410, Mexico=768,437). All the people that you see immigrating here are of course the poor and uneducated who can come here in large numbers because of the simple fact that (hello people!) we share a land border with the U.S.A. (What would happen if India shared a land border with the U.S.A. - One can only imagine! Instead of 7 million illegal Mexicans, we would have 400 million illegal Indians here!) I invite you to visit Mexico, where in some parts you will think you are in Sweden. And again, yes! have been to India!
We are misusing this forum with stereotypes and you guys are turning this into an Indian-only forum. (WHich is a turnoff to me and many more) I know the majority of us in here are Indian, but if I continue to feel unwelcome here I will just take my donations elsewhere.
wallpaper nicole kidman just go with it.
sayonara
08-20 04:18 PM
Thanks for ur response. Whats the number to call?
bskrishna
09-15 12:08 PM
I have sent my contacts ..
2011 Nicole Kidman Pregnant Belly
snthampi
02-03 11:27 AM
[QUOTE=snthampi;2311346]
:D
Good Luck trying to explain reservation system to the USCIS to implement your plan! How many years would we have to wait - for the USCIS to learn the system and execute it :D
Kidding too!
Good one! You are right. It might take them 10 years to understand the system and then 10 years to implement it. By then many of us will be retired.
:D
Good Luck trying to explain reservation system to the USCIS to implement your plan! How many years would we have to wait - for the USCIS to learn the system and execute it :D
Kidding too!
Good one! You are right. It might take them 10 years to understand the system and then 10 years to implement it. By then many of us will be retired.
more...
kate123
11-17 03:51 PM
Done.. Thanks
agadre
07-02 09:34 AM
USICS has hired the hollywood actors in order to clear backlog. Now most of those celebrities have lots of experiences of giving signatures to fans, uscis has assigned them the mail receiving clerk's duties.
Thats a good one.:D
Thats a good one.:D
more...
ub27
07-29 08:53 AM
Recieved an email just now. Status was updated to card production ordered.
Paper filed at TSC on May 22, 2008
Service center: TSC
Last LUD on July 25 (Previous update was on May 25)
Current status: Card production ordered.
Waiting till I get the card .........
Just got an e-mail telling my approval notice for EAD was mailed:
Paper filed at TSC on May 22
On July 28, 2008, we mailed you a notice that we have approved this I765
Paper filed at TSC on May 22, 2008
Service center: TSC
Last LUD on July 25 (Previous update was on May 25)
Current status: Card production ordered.
Waiting till I get the card .........
Just got an e-mail telling my approval notice for EAD was mailed:
Paper filed at TSC on May 22
On July 28, 2008, we mailed you a notice that we have approved this I765
2010 house nicole kidman eyes wide.
mqualique
05-01 04:01 PM
Thanks
Done, added poll.
Done, added poll.
more...
delax
07-27 07:58 PM
Seems like You are not waiting for GC for more than 8 years. You have not been separated from ur family for more than 3 years. Thats why you don't agree with EB3-I fight. Look at the PD for last 3 years. EB3-I is stuck in 2001 since early 2005. It has not moved in last 3 years and you are saying People should keep quiet about it. How selfish of you.
I never said we should keep quiet about it. I was only responding to an earlier post reagarding 'EB2 - elitist protectionism'. Just like you are within your rights to look after yourself, so is everybody else - welcome to capitalism. I have always maintained that going down the road of EB3 versus EB2 is detrimental to this group. Your post only adds to this.
In anycase I dont know how splitting visas equally between EB2I and EB3I can pass the smell test even if DOS were to implement it - there is a categorization that is already established AFTER the initial handout is made on an equal basis. The split completely negates it - at least to the extent any EB2ROW spill over is directed to EB3 when EB2 I and C are already retrogressed.
Lets not swear by capitalism but selectively resort to socialism.
I never said we should keep quiet about it. I was only responding to an earlier post reagarding 'EB2 - elitist protectionism'. Just like you are within your rights to look after yourself, so is everybody else - welcome to capitalism. I have always maintained that going down the road of EB3 versus EB2 is detrimental to this group. Your post only adds to this.
In anycase I dont know how splitting visas equally between EB2I and EB3I can pass the smell test even if DOS were to implement it - there is a categorization that is already established AFTER the initial handout is made on an equal basis. The split completely negates it - at least to the extent any EB2ROW spill over is directed to EB3 when EB2 I and C are already retrogressed.
Lets not swear by capitalism but selectively resort to socialism.
hair Nicole Kidman Hairstyles
jonty_11
01-21 01:58 PM
Not that anyone would do this purposefully...
What if due to recession you loose your job and cannot find one for 1 year..then once you find one similar in duties and Title as ur LC, you start working (effectively after a long time since you lost ur original job/sponsor)...and were unemployed for 1 yr...or so..but at time of GC approval you have a similar job as your Orig LC...How much of a problem could that be or is it just your luck, that USCIS may or maynot ask for paystubs W2s etc for the last one year????
What if due to recession you loose your job and cannot find one for 1 year..then once you find one similar in duties and Title as ur LC, you start working (effectively after a long time since you lost ur original job/sponsor)...and were unemployed for 1 yr...or so..but at time of GC approval you have a similar job as your Orig LC...How much of a problem could that be or is it just your luck, that USCIS may or maynot ask for paystubs W2s etc for the last one year????
more...
gc28262
07-19 07:56 PM
My thoughts:
I understand and share the despair and hopelessness felt by EB3 guys.
Unfortunately when Visa bulletin comes out and when EB2 progresses, we EB3 guys are suddenly aware of our plight and switch to action mode. After a while this enthusiasm fades away till the next bulletin. These emotional responses won't get us anywhere. If we need to get our issues resolved, we need to work on a consistent basis irrespective of the visa bulletin status. We all need to take more active participation in IVs action items as well as contributing to IV efforts as much as we can. IMO signing up for contributions is the easiest thing to do.
Spillover issues:
Upto 2007 these spillovers were coming to EB3. Some folks analysed INA and figured it out that USCIS/DOS was interpreting spillovers incorrectly and that it should flow across. So they contacted USCIS with their findings and argued for their cause. Since then USCIS/DOS interpretation of spillover interpretation changed. Remember these folks did a thorough analysis of the laws and then approached USCIS/DOS. So to change it the other way you have to have a solid legal basis. Writing to lawmakers just out of frustration will not help. If USCIS/DOS is interpreting spillovers correctly as per law, there isn't much anyone can change it without a legislative change.
If we have to go through legislative path, there are easier fixes that can be achieved by legislative fixes like visa recapture etc. That is the reason, IV has planned a long term strategy to end retrogression for all categories. We all need to participate in these action items, contact lawmakers etc with our issues.
Here is an official IV discussion about spillover rules:
ImmigrationVoice.org - USCIS data analysis (http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=97&Itemid=36#_Toc246743452)
Visa spillage rules
There is a supply of 140,000 permanent visas in the EB category for a year. EB1, EB2, EB3 have an equal share of 28.6% or 40,040 visas per year. There is a 7% cap per country on the overall legal immigration including family and skill based. This amounts to 25,620 visas for a single country in EB category. There is a rule to cap 27% of a category in a quarter. So in the first quarter only 10,811 (rounded) visas can be given in any of the categories.
If the supply exceeds demand capped by per country, then per country quota is relaxed to the matching ratio of family based approvals. For practical consideration, it means that the spillover visas beyond 25,620 to a single country can’t be given in the first 3 quarters. The last quarter spillover will need to be first in first out for all the retrogressed countries. This should not limit immigrants from other countries to use up their quota.
Following is the rule from INA Section 201to maintain ratio. There is a different section to override this logic in the last quarter of any calendar year.
(e) Special Rules for Countries at Ceiling. - If it is determined that the total number of immigrant visas made available under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area will exceed the numerical limitation specified in subsection (a)(2) in any fiscal year, in determining the allotment of immigrant visa numbers to natives under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203, visa numbers with respect to natives of that state or area shall be allocated (to the extent practicable and otherwise consistent with this section and section 203) in a manner so that
(1) the ratio of the visa numbers made available under section 203(a) to the visa numbers made available under section 203(b) is equal to the ratio of the worldwide level of immigration under section 201(c) to such level under section 201 (d);
(2) except as provided in subsection (a)(4), the proportion of the visa numbers made available under each of paragraphs (1) through (4) of section 203(a) is equal to the ratio of the total number of visas made available under the respective paragraph to the total number of visas made available under section 203(a), and
(3) 3/ except as provided in subsection (a)(5), the proportion of the visa numbers made available under each of paragraphs (1) through (5) of section 203(b) is equal to the ratio of the total number of visas made available under the respective paragraph to the total number of visas made available under section 203(b).
Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as limiting the number of visas that may be issued to natives of a foreign state or dependent area under section 203(a) or 203(b) if there is insufficient demand for visas for such natives under section 203(b) or 203(a), respectively, or as limiting the number of visas that may be issued under section 203(a)(2)(A) pursuant to subsection (a)(4)(A).
Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as limiting the number of visas that may be issued to natives of a foreign state or dependent area under section 203(a) or 203(b) if there is insufficient demand for visas for such natives under section 203(b) or 203(a) , respectively, or as limiting the number of visas that may be issued under section 203(a)(2)(A) pursuant to subsection (a)(4)(A).
I understand and share the despair and hopelessness felt by EB3 guys.
Unfortunately when Visa bulletin comes out and when EB2 progresses, we EB3 guys are suddenly aware of our plight and switch to action mode. After a while this enthusiasm fades away till the next bulletin. These emotional responses won't get us anywhere. If we need to get our issues resolved, we need to work on a consistent basis irrespective of the visa bulletin status. We all need to take more active participation in IVs action items as well as contributing to IV efforts as much as we can. IMO signing up for contributions is the easiest thing to do.
Spillover issues:
Upto 2007 these spillovers were coming to EB3. Some folks analysed INA and figured it out that USCIS/DOS was interpreting spillovers incorrectly and that it should flow across. So they contacted USCIS with their findings and argued for their cause. Since then USCIS/DOS interpretation of spillover interpretation changed. Remember these folks did a thorough analysis of the laws and then approached USCIS/DOS. So to change it the other way you have to have a solid legal basis. Writing to lawmakers just out of frustration will not help. If USCIS/DOS is interpreting spillovers correctly as per law, there isn't much anyone can change it without a legislative change.
If we have to go through legislative path, there are easier fixes that can be achieved by legislative fixes like visa recapture etc. That is the reason, IV has planned a long term strategy to end retrogression for all categories. We all need to participate in these action items, contact lawmakers etc with our issues.
Here is an official IV discussion about spillover rules:
ImmigrationVoice.org - USCIS data analysis (http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=97&Itemid=36#_Toc246743452)
Visa spillage rules
There is a supply of 140,000 permanent visas in the EB category for a year. EB1, EB2, EB3 have an equal share of 28.6% or 40,040 visas per year. There is a 7% cap per country on the overall legal immigration including family and skill based. This amounts to 25,620 visas for a single country in EB category. There is a rule to cap 27% of a category in a quarter. So in the first quarter only 10,811 (rounded) visas can be given in any of the categories.
If the supply exceeds demand capped by per country, then per country quota is relaxed to the matching ratio of family based approvals. For practical consideration, it means that the spillover visas beyond 25,620 to a single country can’t be given in the first 3 quarters. The last quarter spillover will need to be first in first out for all the retrogressed countries. This should not limit immigrants from other countries to use up their quota.
Following is the rule from INA Section 201to maintain ratio. There is a different section to override this logic in the last quarter of any calendar year.
(e) Special Rules for Countries at Ceiling. - If it is determined that the total number of immigrant visas made available under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area will exceed the numerical limitation specified in subsection (a)(2) in any fiscal year, in determining the allotment of immigrant visa numbers to natives under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203, visa numbers with respect to natives of that state or area shall be allocated (to the extent practicable and otherwise consistent with this section and section 203) in a manner so that
(1) the ratio of the visa numbers made available under section 203(a) to the visa numbers made available under section 203(b) is equal to the ratio of the worldwide level of immigration under section 201(c) to such level under section 201 (d);
(2) except as provided in subsection (a)(4), the proportion of the visa numbers made available under each of paragraphs (1) through (4) of section 203(a) is equal to the ratio of the total number of visas made available under the respective paragraph to the total number of visas made available under section 203(a), and
(3) 3/ except as provided in subsection (a)(5), the proportion of the visa numbers made available under each of paragraphs (1) through (5) of section 203(b) is equal to the ratio of the total number of visas made available under the respective paragraph to the total number of visas made available under section 203(b).
Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as limiting the number of visas that may be issued to natives of a foreign state or dependent area under section 203(a) or 203(b) if there is insufficient demand for visas for such natives under section 203(b) or 203(a), respectively, or as limiting the number of visas that may be issued under section 203(a)(2)(A) pursuant to subsection (a)(4)(A).
Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as limiting the number of visas that may be issued to natives of a foreign state or dependent area under section 203(a) or 203(b) if there is insufficient demand for visas for such natives under section 203(b) or 203(a) , respectively, or as limiting the number of visas that may be issued under section 203(a)(2)(A) pursuant to subsection (a)(4)(A).
hot nicole kidman 1989
summerof98
06-15 12:53 PM
My attorney received all six receipts and sent it to my home address by UPS.
Here are the details:
Mailed to NSC on May 31st.
Received at NSC on June 1st.
Transferred to TSC (I-140 was Approved from TSC)
Receipt Date - June 01
Notice date - June 08
All receipt numbers (me and my wife) start with SRC-07-XXX-XXXXX
Here are the details:
Mailed to NSC on May 31st.
Received at NSC on June 1st.
Transferred to TSC (I-140 was Approved from TSC)
Receipt Date - June 01
Notice date - June 08
All receipt numbers (me and my wife) start with SRC-07-XXX-XXXXX
more...
house nicole kidman
feedfront
11-19 02:55 PM
Done.
tattoo nicole kidman 1989
jaihind
04-24 12:39 PM
Folks
Is there any link to contribute to help his family ??
Let me know please.
Bala
Is there any link to contribute to help his family ??
Let me know please.
Bala
more...
pictures NOVEMBER 10: Nicole Kidman
waitforgc123
09-18 10:39 AM
My 485 was recvd at Jul 3rd - R Williams 9:03 - No information yet on it ...
dresses Nicole Kidman Loves Her Sunday
anandrajesh
07-10 09:57 AM
Article on Pioneer Press in Minneapolis, MN
http://www.twincities.com/ci_6336222?IADID=Search-www.twincities.com-www.twincities.com&nclick_check=1
http://www.twincities.com/ci_6336222?IADID=Search-www.twincities.com-www.twincities.com&nclick_check=1
more...
makeup You might recall Nicole
rc0878
09-17 08:56 AM
Applications were sent to NSC on July 19th' 2007. I got my receipt numbers today and all three numbers (I485, EAD & AP) start with WAC ### ### ####. The online status for the applications say that the 485 application was transfered to Texas Service Center and the EAD & AP applications were sent to Califorina Service Center.
Also just fyi, my I-140 app. is pending at NSC since Dec' 2006. So now I am all over the country :-) Don't know its good or bad. Any idea anyone?
Is anyone else in a similar situation?
Best of luck to all....
Also just fyi, my I-140 app. is pending at NSC since Dec' 2006. So now I am all over the country :-) Don't know its good or bad. Any idea anyone?
Is anyone else in a similar situation?
Best of luck to all....
girlfriend nicole kidman golden globes
rustum
08-28 01:13 AM
Count me in this boat.
140 filed 05/25/2007 pending at NSC
485,765 and 131 filed on 07/27/2007 at NSC.
Dont know about checks as it was filed by company lawyers.
Thanks.
140 filed 05/25/2007 pending at NSC
485,765 and 131 filed on 07/27/2007 at NSC.
Dont know about checks as it was filed by company lawyers.
Thanks.
hairstyles Nicole Kidman; Nicole Kidman
GreenCardLegion
03-09 09:18 PM
And worst is the lottery...
And I know a guy (a restaurant waiter from Nepal) got his GC in frikkin 14 months. And this was 5 years ago when I had just applied and now even today mine is still pending and that Nepali waiter who could not speak 4 words in English is now a Citizen and whenever I go to this restaurant for a buffet he keeps laughing at me and he is still a waiter in the same restaurant. I know him for 6 years. I get enraged at this countrys immigration policy. And I have met about 5 cabbies (Somalia, Pakistan, Sudan) etc etc who came here by winning visa lottery. And they are all citizens or GC holders. This is a mockery. This country has finally started to SUCK big time.
And I know a guy (a restaurant waiter from Nepal) got his GC in frikkin 14 months. And this was 5 years ago when I had just applied and now even today mine is still pending and that Nepali waiter who could not speak 4 words in English is now a Citizen and whenever I go to this restaurant for a buffet he keeps laughing at me and he is still a waiter in the same restaurant. I know him for 6 years. I get enraged at this countrys immigration policy. And I have met about 5 cabbies (Somalia, Pakistan, Sudan) etc etc who came here by winning visa lottery. And they are all citizens or GC holders. This is a mockery. This country has finally started to SUCK big time.
franklin
06-13 09:14 PM
Is there any specific center we should be sending our 485 application. I have applied for I140 from Nebraska, can I apply for 485 in Texas...
Per my previous post:-
all I485 apps go to Nebraska http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=3faf2c1a6855d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1RCR D
Employment-Based Applications
If you are filing for lawful permanent resident status based on an offer of permanent employment in the United States, you should
submit your I-485 to:
USCIS Nebraska Service Center
P.O. Box 87485
Lincoln, NE 68501-7485
This includes an employment-based I-485 if you are filing a Form I-140, Petition for Alien Worker, concurrently with
your I-485, or an I-485 filing based on a pending or an approved Form I-140.
They then get forwarded to the correct place
Per my previous post:-
all I485 apps go to Nebraska http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=3faf2c1a6855d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1RCR D
Employment-Based Applications
If you are filing for lawful permanent resident status based on an offer of permanent employment in the United States, you should
submit your I-485 to:
USCIS Nebraska Service Center
P.O. Box 87485
Lincoln, NE 68501-7485
This includes an employment-based I-485 if you are filing a Form I-140, Petition for Alien Worker, concurrently with
your I-485, or an I-485 filing based on a pending or an approved Form I-140.
They then get forwarded to the correct place
alisa
09-14 10:43 AM
What do you guys think about ROW EB3? Any chance for them folks or are they SOL as well?
I am not sure what SOL stands for.
But I can assure you that EB-3 ROW has very little hope. My estimate was that EB3-ROW's wait times were around 5-6 years.
But now, I have a feeling, that its going to be more like 10+ years. And 10+ years is a long time. Some sort of reform will happen in the next five or six years, and even that reform is not likely to get us greencards, since it may emphasize the family-based applicants.
I am not sure what SOL stands for.
But I can assure you that EB-3 ROW has very little hope. My estimate was that EB3-ROW's wait times were around 5-6 years.
But now, I have a feeling, that its going to be more like 10+ years. And 10+ years is a long time. Some sort of reform will happen in the next five or six years, and even that reform is not likely to get us greencards, since it may emphasize the family-based applicants.
No comments:
Post a Comment