rvikul
07-19 03:44 PM
Based on hours and hours of research online, it looks like there are name check victims all over the place. There are several forums, trackers etc.
I believe IV, with its recent gain in popularity would be the ideal place to consolidate and bring together all the name check victims.
I work for a large software company and currently we have at least 140 employees stuck in name check. We even have a representative committee thats actively working with our attorneys to find resolutions to this issue.
I am planning on sending an email to the core team soon, but meanwhile anyone from the core team is reading this it would be great if you could start a thread to track name checks so we can kick of an effort similar to the I-485 filing issues.
Thank you!
I believe IV, with its recent gain in popularity would be the ideal place to consolidate and bring together all the name check victims.
I work for a large software company and currently we have at least 140 employees stuck in name check. We even have a representative committee thats actively working with our attorneys to find resolutions to this issue.
I am planning on sending an email to the core team soon, but meanwhile anyone from the core team is reading this it would be great if you could start a thread to track name checks so we can kick of an effort similar to the I-485 filing issues.
Thank you!
wallpaper Flower Background - Vector Mix
GCard_Dream
09-18 12:23 PM
Did you tell that to John McCain? He still believes that fundamentals of this economy are still very strong. I sometime wonder if he is getting it confused with Chinese economy.
If you have been following the news this week, the economy is really in trouble. Specifically financial and insurance sector. Dow plunged around 900 + points in last 2 days.
If you have been following the news this week, the economy is really in trouble. Specifically financial and insurance sector. Dow plunged around 900 + points in last 2 days.
ajthakur
07-14 06:30 PM
Is it possible they are trying to adjudicate my 485. I am EB2 India PD: JAN 2006.
When did u file your application for EAD renewal and which service center? I am not sure why you think EAD renewal triggered this I-485 RFE?
When did u file your application for EAD renewal and which service center? I am not sure why you think EAD renewal triggered this I-485 RFE?
2011 flowers background wallpapers.
jonty_11
07-09 06:36 PM
I came across this law about the departmental control of numerical limitations, and I'd appreciate it if you all could post your interpretations of the same.
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
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...
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
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...
more...
gimme_GC2006
07-15 11:12 AM
Is your case still @ Local Office
I think so..atleast there were no LUDs
Thats actually a good question..now I am thinking :confused:
I think so..atleast there were no LUDs
Thats actually a good question..now I am thinking :confused:
coopheal
12-10 09:28 AM
EB3-India moved for 15 days. This sucks.
A movement of 15 days in EB3-I is a good movement. Big movement in EB3 without law change is not possible.
FOIA for number of cases per country/category will disclose where we stand but this movement also assures me that we are really past Apr 01 syndrome.
A movement of 15 days in EB3-I is a good movement. Big movement in EB3 without law change is not possible.
FOIA for number of cases per country/category will disclose where we stand but this movement also assures me that we are really past Apr 01 syndrome.
more...
GC_SUCK
08-16 01:07 PM
All my security check are cleared as per information from IO (by calling 4 times in last 4 months).
I am hoping that I will get GC by the end of this year.
You are in GREAT shape. You are current as of September. As long as there is no retrogression you should be good as soon as your security checks are cleared.
A 6 months wait is not unreasonable. I'd be happy with that if I was you!
I am hoping that I will get GC by the end of this year.
You are in GREAT shape. You are current as of September. As long as there is no retrogression you should be good as soon as your security checks are cleared.
A 6 months wait is not unreasonable. I'd be happy with that if I was you!
2010 flowers background. Junky
Rajeev
02-01 03:04 PM
Hi Varsha
I will attend the conference call but unfortunately I would not be able to come to the temple Saturday. The earliest I can reach temple is 3:00 p.m.
I will attend the conference call but unfortunately I would not be able to come to the temple Saturday. The earliest I can reach temple is 3:00 p.m.
more...
msgrewal81
02-19 12:18 AM
There is a big Hispanic lobby to represent illegals in Congress. Who is there to represent us and put our amendments - NOBODY. So, best is to either oppose it or die.
hair Flowers Background
vin13
02-16 11:46 AM
I am volunteering to coordinate the collection and redemption of airline miles.
Those who would like to donate or in need please PM me with your contact information along with a good time to reach.
if you are donating miles, please also provide the airlines and the number of miles you wish to donate.
I had coordinated this effort during the previous advocacy days and we were successful in helping a few individuals in securing air tickets.
Thanks
Those who would like to donate or in need please PM me with your contact information along with a good time to reach.
if you are donating miles, please also provide the airlines and the number of miles you wish to donate.
I had coordinated this effort during the previous advocacy days and we were successful in helping a few individuals in securing air tickets.
Thanks
more...
indianindian2006
07-14 05:52 PM
PD: Jan 2006
Category: EB2
As suggested by many you should talk to a attorney.You are covered by AC21,also on your point of not working with your ex-employer for 180 days again a smart attorney could guide you thru this as sometimes green card can be filed for future employment after the green card is approved.
Best of luck.
Category: EB2
As suggested by many you should talk to a attorney.You are covered by AC21,also on your point of not working with your ex-employer for 180 days again a smart attorney could guide you thru this as sometimes green card can be filed for future employment after the green card is approved.
Best of luck.
hot Flowers and Background
eeezzz
02-15 03:08 PM
Exactly, And how many from South America? 30% of the population is going to be hispanic by 2050.
Perhaps your number is not based on legal immigration. It might reach this number if you add up the illegal ones, and that is why the gov. is building the walls to stop them enter at borders and try to find the illegal ones and send them out.
Perhaps your number is not based on legal immigration. It might reach this number if you add up the illegal ones, and that is why the gov. is building the walls to stop them enter at borders and try to find the illegal ones and send them out.
more...
house Star Burst Flower Background
bfadlia
03-09 12:54 PM
As much as I hated it, being EB3 ROW with Jul05 pd, I feel it is good that they didn't randomly move the pd forward like last year then give gc to some random 2006, 2007 cases while there are plenty of 2004 and 2005 ROW people still waiting
tattoo fun flower background
delhiguy
07-09 04:08 PM
If the class is certified, we may want to join that class rather than have separate lawsuits.
Yes , we are in that class.
Yes , we are in that class.
more...
pictures flowers background designs.
gccovet
03-09 12:26 PM
No movement for EB2-I just 15 days forward for EB3-I
This sux
GCCOvet
This sux
GCCOvet
dresses Spring flower background
cool_desi_gc
03-17 04:15 PM
This clearly shows that EB3 India pipe is clogged becuase of lot of pending cases in 2001/02.Many of them are 245i cases as well.Once the PD crosses 2002, EB3 should go a little smoother.
BTW, mine is Dec 2002
BTW, mine is Dec 2002
more...
makeup Reindeer in flower background.
madhuthomas
01-16 12:29 PM
I Signed up for 20 $ recurring payments.
girlfriend Vector Flower Background
feedfront
11-08 11:39 AM
Nope, not yet.
Congratulations,!! Is your card really green or pollution has some effect on it? ;)
Congratulations,!! Is your card really green or pollution has some effect on it? ;)
hairstyles Ornate green flower background
scorpion00
06-08 06:02 PM
so no spill over from EB2 ROW which is current ,to India and China EB2.
I guess many folks were having high hopes for this in the last quarter.
I guess many folks were having high hopes for this in the last quarter.
feedfront
09-20 12:06 PM
Does anyone know, how much attorney gonna charge to reply RFE?
Administrator2
06-10 09:20 PM
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE SEND THE MESSAGE. WE WILL ALSO START WITH THE PHONE CAMPAIGN IN THE MORNING.
Reason being, the other side is writing letters to other Senators to seek their support. They want to see this amendment pass. Here is the letter.
************************************************** ***************
COMPANIES LAYING-OFF THOUSANDS OF AMERICAN WORKERS DON’T NEED GUEST WORKERS
Please Support the Sanders-Grassley Employ America Amendment to the Tax Extenders bill
Dear Colleague:
Since the recession started in December of 2007, nearly 8 million Americans have lost their jobs and the unemployment rate has nearly doubled. In total, 15 million Americans are officially unemployed, another 8.8 million Americans are working part-time only because they cannot find a full-time job, and more than one million workers have given up looking for work altogether.
With the unemployment rate still unacceptably high and millions of people looking for a job, we have a responsibility to ensure that companies do not use temporary visa programs to replace American workers with cheaper labor from overseas.
Therefore, during the consideration of the American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act, we will be offering an amendment that would prohibit companies which have announced mass lay-offs over the past year from hiring guest workers, unless they can prove that their overall employment will not be reduced as a result of these lay-offs.
At a time when millions of Americans are out of work, the notion that we need to import labor from abroad because there are not enough qualified, willing or able American workers in this country rings hollow.
Recently, some of the very companies that have hired tens of thousands of guest-workers from overseas have announced large scale lay-offs of American workers. The high-tech industry, a major employer of H-1B guest workers, has announced over 330,000 job cuts since 2008. The construction industry, a major employer of H-2B guest-workers, has laid-off 1.9 million workers since December of 2007.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan, signed into law last February, included a provision to prevent companies receiving assistance through the Troubled Asset Relief Program from replacing laid-off American workers with guest-workers from overseas.
The Employ America Act expands upon this provision to prevent any company engaged in a mass lay-off of American workers from importing cheaper labor from abroad through temporary guest-worker programs. Those companies that are truly facing labor shortages would not be impacted by this legislation and could continue to obtain employer-sponsored visas. Only companies that are laying-off a large number of Americans would be barred from importing foreign workers through guest worker programs.
If you would like to co-sponsor this amendment, please have your staff contact Warren Gunnels in Sen. Sanders’ office at 8-6358 or Kathy Nuebel Kovarik in Sen. Grassley's office at 4-3744.
Sincerely,
____________________ ____________________
BERNARD SANDERS CHARLES E. GRASSLEY
UNITED STATES SENATOR UNITED STATES SENATOR
************************************************** ***************
Reason being, the other side is writing letters to other Senators to seek their support. They want to see this amendment pass. Here is the letter.
************************************************** ***************
COMPANIES LAYING-OFF THOUSANDS OF AMERICAN WORKERS DON’T NEED GUEST WORKERS
Please Support the Sanders-Grassley Employ America Amendment to the Tax Extenders bill
Dear Colleague:
Since the recession started in December of 2007, nearly 8 million Americans have lost their jobs and the unemployment rate has nearly doubled. In total, 15 million Americans are officially unemployed, another 8.8 million Americans are working part-time only because they cannot find a full-time job, and more than one million workers have given up looking for work altogether.
With the unemployment rate still unacceptably high and millions of people looking for a job, we have a responsibility to ensure that companies do not use temporary visa programs to replace American workers with cheaper labor from overseas.
Therefore, during the consideration of the American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act, we will be offering an amendment that would prohibit companies which have announced mass lay-offs over the past year from hiring guest workers, unless they can prove that their overall employment will not be reduced as a result of these lay-offs.
At a time when millions of Americans are out of work, the notion that we need to import labor from abroad because there are not enough qualified, willing or able American workers in this country rings hollow.
Recently, some of the very companies that have hired tens of thousands of guest-workers from overseas have announced large scale lay-offs of American workers. The high-tech industry, a major employer of H-1B guest workers, has announced over 330,000 job cuts since 2008. The construction industry, a major employer of H-2B guest-workers, has laid-off 1.9 million workers since December of 2007.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan, signed into law last February, included a provision to prevent companies receiving assistance through the Troubled Asset Relief Program from replacing laid-off American workers with guest-workers from overseas.
The Employ America Act expands upon this provision to prevent any company engaged in a mass lay-off of American workers from importing cheaper labor from abroad through temporary guest-worker programs. Those companies that are truly facing labor shortages would not be impacted by this legislation and could continue to obtain employer-sponsored visas. Only companies that are laying-off a large number of Americans would be barred from importing foreign workers through guest worker programs.
If you would like to co-sponsor this amendment, please have your staff contact Warren Gunnels in Sen. Sanders’ office at 8-6358 or Kathy Nuebel Kovarik in Sen. Grassley's office at 4-3744.
Sincerely,
____________________ ____________________
BERNARD SANDERS CHARLES E. GRASSLEY
UNITED STATES SENATOR UNITED STATES SENATOR
************************************************** ***************
No comments:
Post a Comment