GreenLantern
02-14 05:21 PM
Well I gave this a shot last night, and I have realized that I suck at 3D.
I might try again later, but i'm going to collapse in my own defeat for a while.
I might try again later, but i'm going to collapse in my own defeat for a while.
wallpaper of the F-14D Super Tomcat
caydee
04-23 12:55 PM
Great to hear that the event was a success. I was one of the volunteers who had the oppurtunity to call CA members and I just have one suggestion. Please update your profiles with your latest email and phone numbers. Of the 25 people I called, atleast 5 or 6 had incorrect phone numbers. One even went to a fax number. The intent for IV is to reach you quickly in such case but looks like the intent for such members is 'do-not-disturb'.
I had the same problem with phone numbers. About 8 numbers turned out to be incorrect. Update your profile, please. And if you do not want to be contacted by phone, please leave the phone # box in the profile blank.
I had the same problem with phone numbers. About 8 numbers turned out to be incorrect. Update your profile, please. And if you do not want to be contacted by phone, please leave the phone # box in the profile blank.
gc_maine2
09-01 08:39 AM
I am also interested in online MBA, please share if you get any more information on Aspen.
anyone who has done MBA from USD, please provide your inputs.
Thanks
I just found that Aspen University is offering online MBA at $3600 (end to end) + books.
The univ is accredited by DTE but not sure about its market value.
I am thinking about low cost MBA and the options (apart from newly discovered super low cost Aspen) are --
University of South Dakota (USD) (18 K)
&
University of Massachusetts (UMass) (30 K)
Does any one know if USD has a decent market value ?
anyone who has done MBA from USD, please provide your inputs.
Thanks
I just found that Aspen University is offering online MBA at $3600 (end to end) + books.
The univ is accredited by DTE but not sure about its market value.
I am thinking about low cost MBA and the options (apart from newly discovered super low cost Aspen) are --
University of South Dakota (USD) (18 K)
&
University of Massachusetts (UMass) (30 K)
Does any one know if USD has a decent market value ?
2011 4195 F-14D Super Tomcat
rockstart
03-13 09:44 AM
Has any one working on EAD experienced delays in renewals and how does HR department react to such delay's. Least on H1 it is clear that you can work for 8 months on receipt.
more...
CSPAvictim
07-09 07:17 PM
I'm not sure I totally understand what you said, but
a. The 27% limitation doesn't apply to the last quarter(July,August, Sept)
b. However, June falls in the third quarter for which the limitation DOES apply.
c.
text in bold has a GREY area....'plus remaining balance from previous months.'
They can always say the additional approvals were left over from previous months...
Like jonty_11 pointed out, Clause B states that numbers from previous months can be requested. Since it is a grey area, the USCIS may claim that in June (if they used up X number of visas) then (X-14,000) visas were balance numbers from previous months. And yet, it has to account for the 27% limitation for the third quarter.
It'll be interesting to see how USCIS explains itself in court.
Clause B is not the only thing. In any quarter they are not supposed to issue any more than 27% of 140,000(100%) = 37800. according to Clause A. After June 15th they issued 140,000 - 66000 = 74000. What about the last quarter quota of 37800? Where did it go? It was not supposed to be used before July.
a. The 27% limitation doesn't apply to the last quarter(July,August, Sept)
b. However, June falls in the third quarter for which the limitation DOES apply.
c.
text in bold has a GREY area....'plus remaining balance from previous months.'
They can always say the additional approvals were left over from previous months...
Like jonty_11 pointed out, Clause B states that numbers from previous months can be requested. Since it is a grey area, the USCIS may claim that in June (if they used up X number of visas) then (X-14,000) visas were balance numbers from previous months. And yet, it has to account for the 27% limitation for the third quarter.
It'll be interesting to see how USCIS explains itself in court.
Clause B is not the only thing. In any quarter they are not supposed to issue any more than 27% of 140,000(100%) = 37800. according to Clause A. After June 15th they issued 140,000 - 66000 = 74000. What about the last quarter quota of 37800? Where did it go? It was not supposed to be used before July.
yabadaba
09-26 12:44 PM
As needhelp said earlier, the damage is done. This is really shameful on the part of CNN. Maybe its a coordinated effort by the Lou Dobbs production team to equate our issues with H1B. This philosophy trickles down and freelance writers end up subscribing to that ideology giving betsy ross and her hateful group a nice platform for them to launch their attacks on us or spread even more misinformation.
One thing I started doing was identifying texts in the comments section of any news article post related to high skilled immigration. It looks like ALIPAC or one of those hate groups have a concentrated effort for members to post the same message in the comments section of any media article that is sympathetic to our predicament. We need to identify these posters and the messages - maybe it all comes from one user posting the same set of stock messages with different names.
One thing I started doing was identifying texts in the comments section of any news article post related to high skilled immigration. It looks like ALIPAC or one of those hate groups have a concentrated effort for members to post the same message in the comments section of any media article that is sympathetic to our predicament. We need to identify these posters and the messages - maybe it all comes from one user posting the same set of stock messages with different names.
more...
WeShallOvercome
07-20 02:38 PM
Few employers and few lawyers didn't apply for EAD/AP on July 2nd. My employer said they applied for 485 but not EAD/AP. They will wait for receipt notice and then apply for EAD/AP.
After Aug 17th, can we still apply for EAD/AP knowing dates won't be current.
Thanks.
you don't need PD's to be current to apply for interim benefits like EAD/AP
After Aug 17th, can we still apply for EAD/AP knowing dates won't be current.
Thanks.
you don't need PD's to be current to apply for interim benefits like EAD/AP
2010 The F-14D was also the first
nomi
12-11 02:23 PM
Originally Posted by god_bless_you
SO if USCIS wants to make a new rule of filing I485 for the one whose I 140 is cleared and priority date is not current, It CAN DO That RULE Right?
We do not need any Congress approval for that Right?
If so can we explore this option??
Originally Posted by Nomi
I agree with you. Why we don`t explore this option ???? USCIS make so many rule by itself then why they don`t make this rule to file 485 while PD is not current without going in Senate. Like they start premium processing of I-140. They make this rule without any bill in US Senate. correct me if I am wrong
I think, core team should look this option or ask us to find more information about it. I think, core team can meet with high official from USCIS.
what do you guys think about it ??
thx.
SO if USCIS wants to make a new rule of filing I485 for the one whose I 140 is cleared and priority date is not current, It CAN DO That RULE Right?
We do not need any Congress approval for that Right?
If so can we explore this option??
Originally Posted by Nomi
I agree with you. Why we don`t explore this option ???? USCIS make so many rule by itself then why they don`t make this rule to file 485 while PD is not current without going in Senate. Like they start premium processing of I-140. They make this rule without any bill in US Senate. correct me if I am wrong
I think, core team should look this option or ask us to find more information about it. I think, core team can meet with high official from USCIS.
what do you guys think about it ??
thx.
more...
greyhair
02-09 02:33 PM
Why am I not suprised with this news?
I think it is self evident that even though there is some spill over I think large number of visa's are getting wasted. Else last year we should have seen better movement than just wrapping up 2004. In 2008 there were so many people with 2005 & 2006 PD who were approved. I think it was either inefficiency on part of USCIS or a go slow directive from the administation that has caused visa wastage.
One immigration business shop says that visas are being wasted and that's our proof. We are now ready to list the reasons why visa numbers are being wasted. Not only the visas have been wasted but according to you the reason for wastage are -
1.) Inefficiency
2.) Directive from the administration
But before that, can anybody prove conclusively that visa numbers were wasted. What is the proof? Just because my application is pending doesn't mean that USCIS is wasting green card numbers. Give us all proof that visa numbers are being wasted. Where is the proof. Around 20 days back I wrote an email to the immigration business shop asking for proof of waste of visa numbers. No response.
I think it is self evident that even though there is some spill over I think large number of visa's are getting wasted. Else last year we should have seen better movement than just wrapping up 2004. In 2008 there were so many people with 2005 & 2006 PD who were approved. I think it was either inefficiency on part of USCIS or a go slow directive from the administation that has caused visa wastage.
One immigration business shop says that visas are being wasted and that's our proof. We are now ready to list the reasons why visa numbers are being wasted. Not only the visas have been wasted but according to you the reason for wastage are -
1.) Inefficiency
2.) Directive from the administration
But before that, can anybody prove conclusively that visa numbers were wasted. What is the proof? Just because my application is pending doesn't mean that USCIS is wasting green card numbers. Give us all proof that visa numbers are being wasted. Where is the proof. Around 20 days back I wrote an email to the immigration business shop asking for proof of waste of visa numbers. No response.
hair F-14D Super Tomcat
qasleuth
05-26 05:16 PM
Found this when I googled. Borderpatrol seems to have the authority to do whatever they did within 100 miles off any international border. It falls under 8 CFR 287.1. Entire state of NH is within 100 miles of Canada.
http://www.usborderpatrol.com/Border_Patrol608_2.htm
http://www.usborderpatrol.com/Border_Patrol608_2.htm
more...
GCapplicant
07-02 11:32 AM
Let's try this.
hot F-14D SUPER TOMCAT “VANDY
Googler
02-20 02:54 PM
I'd posted elsewhere about my Feb 13, 2008 conversation with the DOS official who sets cutoff dates:
And then there this piece of info from Ron Gotcher posted on Feb 14, 2008
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4285
"Last night, at a meeting of the American Immigration Lawyer's Assocation Southern California chapter, Charles Oppenheim spoke. Mr. Oppenheim is the officer within the Visa Office tasked with calculating visa bulletin cutoff dates each month. He offered the following thoughts as to cutoff date movement in the upcoming months:
In April, India and China EB2 will be set at 12/01/2003
EB3 for India and China will slow down for the rest of the fiscal year."
I am riveted by this because I spoke to Oppenheim just the day before this meeting (he referred to it). This was the conversation in which he told me that at present EB-2 India would only get numbers leftover from EB-1 India -- the problem is he doesn't know either exactly how many EB-2 India adjudicated applications there are in any specific PD range -- so every month he makes wild guesses, with the intent of using up visas. So I guess at least as of 2/14/08 he thought moving the date to 12/1/03 would more than mop up whatever was leftover from EB-1 India. Given the end of the FBI boondoggle (the effects of which have not been quantified by Oppenheim or USCIS) I'd predict that even a date in early 2002 would be good enough to mop up. Let us see if he changes his mind by mid March.
But his statement at the AILA meeting has been bothering me so I talked to him again today. Here is what he said -- that he is considering not only the EB-1 India excess, but the entire EB-1 worldwide excess being given to oversubscribed EB-2! I asked him about his earlier statement and he said that he had had a chance to look at the numbers and determine that unlike recent years EB-1 worldwide is not using numbers up at a rate that would max out EB-1 usage. BUT. He is waiting for USCIS to give him an estimate of the number of EB-2 India applications that would become eligible if he moves the cutoff dates up to 12/1/03, he will set the date ONLY after he gets that data and determines that there won't be too many within that cutoff date.
I also asked him to confirm that he was relying on his interpretation of Section 202(a)(5) (http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe) of the INA in order to proceed with this spillover. This is his current interpretation of that section -- spillover from EB-1 to EB-2 IF there appears to be a worldwide excess in EB-1, when there is no worldwide excess in EB-1 then country specific spillover for example, from EB-1 India to EB-2 India only etc. In past years like FY06, EB-1 ROW was looking maxed out, so barely any spillover from EB-1 to oversubscribed EB-2.
And then there this piece of info from Ron Gotcher posted on Feb 14, 2008
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4285
"Last night, at a meeting of the American Immigration Lawyer's Assocation Southern California chapter, Charles Oppenheim spoke. Mr. Oppenheim is the officer within the Visa Office tasked with calculating visa bulletin cutoff dates each month. He offered the following thoughts as to cutoff date movement in the upcoming months:
In April, India and China EB2 will be set at 12/01/2003
EB3 for India and China will slow down for the rest of the fiscal year."
I am riveted by this because I spoke to Oppenheim just the day before this meeting (he referred to it). This was the conversation in which he told me that at present EB-2 India would only get numbers leftover from EB-1 India -- the problem is he doesn't know either exactly how many EB-2 India adjudicated applications there are in any specific PD range -- so every month he makes wild guesses, with the intent of using up visas. So I guess at least as of 2/14/08 he thought moving the date to 12/1/03 would more than mop up whatever was leftover from EB-1 India. Given the end of the FBI boondoggle (the effects of which have not been quantified by Oppenheim or USCIS) I'd predict that even a date in early 2002 would be good enough to mop up. Let us see if he changes his mind by mid March.
But his statement at the AILA meeting has been bothering me so I talked to him again today. Here is what he said -- that he is considering not only the EB-1 India excess, but the entire EB-1 worldwide excess being given to oversubscribed EB-2! I asked him about his earlier statement and he said that he had had a chance to look at the numbers and determine that unlike recent years EB-1 worldwide is not using numbers up at a rate that would max out EB-1 usage. BUT. He is waiting for USCIS to give him an estimate of the number of EB-2 India applications that would become eligible if he moves the cutoff dates up to 12/1/03, he will set the date ONLY after he gets that data and determines that there won't be too many within that cutoff date.
I also asked him to confirm that he was relying on his interpretation of Section 202(a)(5) (http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe) of the INA in order to proceed with this spillover. This is his current interpretation of that section -- spillover from EB-1 to EB-2 IF there appears to be a worldwide excess in EB-1, when there is no worldwide excess in EB-1 then country specific spillover for example, from EB-1 India to EB-2 India only etc. In past years like FY06, EB-1 ROW was looking maxed out, so barely any spillover from EB-1 to oversubscribed EB-2.
more...
house grumman f14d super tomcat
pointlesswait
11-11 11:01 PM
great idea...but which moron will give u a loan is the million dollar question...
:D
WE SHOULD try to MARKET HOW the high tech IMMIGRANTS CAN HELP THE HOUSING MESS BY BUYING HOUSES.
Did anyone listen to NPR on this topic recently? Looks like people are open to the idea, but some one has to give more visibility to this topic. Can IV do it.....
:D
WE SHOULD try to MARKET HOW the high tech IMMIGRANTS CAN HELP THE HOUSING MESS BY BUYING HOUSES.
Did anyone listen to NPR on this topic recently? Looks like people are open to the idea, but some one has to give more visibility to this topic. Can IV do it.....
tattoo to the US Navy F-14 Tomcat
logiclife
02-13 12:49 PM
It is an item on the organization's agenda.
Both for USCIS and BECs to show some transparency. More posts mean more attention, but the posts are made by 800 members and majority of them are stuck in Dallas and Philly BECs or waiting for 485 to be filed so that they can get portability benefit beyond 6th year.
That is much more important than speed of 485 processing. It is on the agenda of the org but the reason you dont see those posts is because its not a problem yet for the majority on this forum. That's just how it works. First things first. You dont find people on student visas worried about Labor backlogs coz they need to find H1 first. You dont find people stuck in labor worried about retrogression coz they need to get their labor approved first without which retrogression or no-retrogression makes no difference to them.
I agree with your idea and understand that USCIS handling of 485 is a serious issue, just trying to explain why you dont see too many posts here for that issue.
Both for USCIS and BECs to show some transparency. More posts mean more attention, but the posts are made by 800 members and majority of them are stuck in Dallas and Philly BECs or waiting for 485 to be filed so that they can get portability benefit beyond 6th year.
That is much more important than speed of 485 processing. It is on the agenda of the org but the reason you dont see those posts is because its not a problem yet for the majority on this forum. That's just how it works. First things first. You dont find people on student visas worried about Labor backlogs coz they need to find H1 first. You dont find people stuck in labor worried about retrogression coz they need to get their labor approved first without which retrogression or no-retrogression makes no difference to them.
I agree with your idea and understand that USCIS handling of 485 is a serious issue, just trying to explain why you dont see too many posts here for that issue.
more...
pictures The F-14 is being replaced by
priya34
10-12 02:30 PM
PD Feb 2004
Category: EB3
LC cleared: Sep 27th 2007
Category: EB3
LC cleared: Sep 27th 2007
dresses F-14D USN Super Tomcat
indio0617
11-20 09:20 AM
Probably, at this moment it might still be true but the reality is that it is soon going to be demoted from this position......so there is nothing like missing the opportunity....!!!!
VERY TRUE...
VERY TRUE...
more...
makeup F-14D Super Tomcat (Aurelia)
damialok
05-28 03:17 PM
Finally after 6 years, its my turn to report. Online is NOT updated but when I called NSC they informed that it was approved on 05/23/2008. They also informed me that it will take 6 business days to get the card(card ordered on 05/23/2008).
girlfriend F-14D Super Tomcat
krishmunn
05-23 02:25 PM
MBA is not for everyone and in addition, an Online MBA doesn't have any value. .
Agree with your first part ---- MBA (or any Masters) is not for everyone -- you are a living example :)
For second part of your post (online MBA does not have any value) ---- you are probably still living in stone age -- BTW, did you hear of something called google :)
Agree with your first part ---- MBA (or any Masters) is not for everyone -- you are a living example :)
For second part of your post (online MBA does not have any value) ---- you are probably still living in stone age -- BTW, did you hear of something called google :)
hairstyles david burnham
newbee7
07-09 04:32 PM
You chose to ignore this from your post
when we were certain the process will be completed very shortly
certain = 100%
You are reading what you want to read.
__________________
Not a legal advice.
Certainty is releated to belief not reality. It still means the name check was not completed. The law does not say they "when you are certain that the FBI name check can be cleared..please allot a visa."
when we were certain the process will be completed very shortly
certain = 100%
You are reading what you want to read.
__________________
Not a legal advice.
Certainty is releated to belief not reality. It still means the name check was not completed. The law does not say they "when you are certain that the FBI name check can be cleared..please allot a visa."
Jaime
09-10 04:23 PM
Let's not waste this opportunity!!! Let's go guys!!!! Getting to DC requires a sacrifice, but you will be SO glad you went once you see how great we can make it!!!! We can only make it great is you come though!!!
Hermione
09-26 10:55 AM
FSB debate is on H1-B raise and NOT on PR visas. So, I dont see reason to participation in debate. Thanks for the info though.
Actually, I think participating in the debate to present the other point of view (as in 'foreign workers are good for the US economy') is a good thing to do. Giving the forum out to the antis is a good way to make sure Durbin gets his message reaffirmed. Well, that's all true, unless you are one of those people who likes to yell 'Close the door!' right after they get in.
Actually, I think participating in the debate to present the other point of view (as in 'foreign workers are good for the US economy') is a good thing to do. Giving the forum out to the antis is a good way to make sure Durbin gets his message reaffirmed. Well, that's all true, unless you are one of those people who likes to yell 'Close the door!' right after they get in.
No comments:
Post a Comment