ItIsNotFunny
03-09 01:31 PM
I am tired of words "Something is Cooking". All I care now is cooked food - whatever is cooking.
wallpaper Funny Fat Cat
webm
03-19 03:52 PM
May be I am not aware, say the dates move to 2005, then whoever has a PD till 2005 and has a pending 485, is bound to get GC approved,
Approval depends on luck again as you know sometimes they follow random process and by that time dates can go back or stand still or fwd..no wonders anything can happen..
Approval depends on luck again as you know sometimes they follow random process and by that time dates can go back or stand still or fwd..no wonders anything can happen..
laborchic
09-19 10:51 AM
We should change our name to Legal Immigration Voice..
2011 Cute and Funny Pictures of Fat
gcnirvana
04-20 06:23 PM
We need at least 6 more volunteers for this task so that the volunteers already making the phone calls are not over-burdened. Please help this very important initiative.
If you would like to volunteer for this effort, please post or send me a private message.
I can make phone calls. Sent a PM
If you would like to volunteer for this effort, please post or send me a private message.
I can make phone calls. Sent a PM
more...
GCard_Dream
03-18 05:57 PM
The line "But those extra numbers would need to be made available to China/India applicants on an equal basis" made me confused. I guess the statement above would still be true if India and China had equal number of pending cases with similar PDs then both countries would have received equal number of unused visas. I missed that fact that visa allocation was by PD. Thanks for the clarification.
Please see the last sentece which says "Thus, the same cut-off date for each country since the extra numbers must be made available in priority date order without regard to country".
When they use this spill over, only PD is imp not the country.
Please see the last sentece which says "Thus, the same cut-off date for each country since the extra numbers must be made available in priority date order without regard to country".
When they use this spill over, only PD is imp not the country.
kuhelica2000
01-09 11:29 AM
Absolutely wrong. Becasue of false 5/6 year experience, the genuine guy with 2/3 years fo experience didn't even get the interview. Misrepresentation in your resume works becuase American system is mostly based on trust. All the places I have worked, no one ever asked to even see my diploma. Becuase, they trusted me. Unfortunately we are taking advantage of this trust and that's why we will be seeing laws to eliminate consulrtng all together because some low ethics like you want credit for doctoring resume.
Guys,
I think you got it all wrong. A fresher/consultant who has the balls to put 5-6 fake yrs of experience in his resume certainly deserves a token of appreciation.
Why dont you ppl understand that there is a common selection process called an Interview and you have to go thru that to get a job and if a fresher beats an experienced guy in that process, to hell with that experienced guy, where has he hidden all his experience when a fresher could make it.
If you were a recruiter and you see a fresher and an experienced guy(4-5) competing/working at the same level for the same job, you have to see the fresher as a guy with a much greater learning graph and skill set.
I have seen guys coming on H1 after slogging 4-5 yrs in India and I think freshers/MS graduates are much better than them, in the way they talk, dress, think, behave....etc....
All you exeperienced guys out there who get scared of competeion in the market, especially from freshers, I strongly recommend u summon all the courage and prepare to be sliced by the sleeker edge.
Amen!!
Guys,
I think you got it all wrong. A fresher/consultant who has the balls to put 5-6 fake yrs of experience in his resume certainly deserves a token of appreciation.
Why dont you ppl understand that there is a common selection process called an Interview and you have to go thru that to get a job and if a fresher beats an experienced guy in that process, to hell with that experienced guy, where has he hidden all his experience when a fresher could make it.
If you were a recruiter and you see a fresher and an experienced guy(4-5) competing/working at the same level for the same job, you have to see the fresher as a guy with a much greater learning graph and skill set.
I have seen guys coming on H1 after slogging 4-5 yrs in India and I think freshers/MS graduates are much better than them, in the way they talk, dress, think, behave....etc....
All you exeperienced guys out there who get scared of competeion in the market, especially from freshers, I strongly recommend u summon all the courage and prepare to be sliced by the sleeker edge.
Amen!!
more...
ashwin_27
02-07 06:09 PM
I will be traveling from the west coast and am trying to find other South Cal folks who are travelling to the event. Maybe we can coordinate travel, if possible.
Also, would appreciate any car pooling options when in DC/VA.
Also, would appreciate any car pooling options when in DC/VA.
2010 Freaky Fat Cat
nomad
07-17 12:58 AM
IVers,
I have created a blog entry here http://utubecitizen.blogspot.com/ regarding numbersusa.com
I have gone through all the posts in this thread, and have taken some of the members comments/points. Am planning to reveal true colors of Lou Dobb, and Tancredo etc in the following days. Please check it out. Please dont consider it as an advt.
thanks
I have created a blog entry here http://utubecitizen.blogspot.com/ regarding numbersusa.com
I have gone through all the posts in this thread, and have taken some of the members comments/points. Am planning to reveal true colors of Lou Dobb, and Tancredo etc in the following days. Please check it out. Please dont consider it as an advt.
thanks
more...
Suva
08-10 02:06 PM
I am in.
hair really fat cats and dogs. fat
jkays94
07-10 02:39 AM
It seems several persons are already discrediting the lawsuit and from the comments I have seen, it is apparent that some have not read the entire complaint.
In order to understand how a civil lawsuit works one needs to understand that in a complaint, one makes no legal arguments, does not cite case or precedent law but only cites the simple facts. The other side can respond to the complaint and deny or accept the allegations in part or in whole. Many cases do not go to trial, they end up in settlements or are decided through summary judgement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_judgment) (for the plaintiff or the defendants) if the case has undisputable matters of facts and one of the parties petitions for it. Several processes also take place ie Discovery long before an actual trial. I recommend reading the following wikipedia entry to familiarize one at a high level with the processes and rules involved:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Rule_of_Civil_Procedure
To get to the core legal arguments behind the case, one needs to read the counts (they are only stated and not argued/expounded on starting pg 13). Namely those are:
COUNT I: VIOLATION OF THE FIFTH AMENDMENT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution) (constitutional rights issue)
COUNT II: VIOLATION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_Procedures_Act)
COUNT III: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ACT (http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title4/civ00036.htm)
COUNT IV: EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT (http://www.hhs.gov/dab/guidelines/eaja.html)
COUNT V: PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promissory_estoppel#Promissory_estoppel)
There are several laws cited above, its thus puzzling to see requests for one to cite the laws USCIS/DOS is accused of violating when its all there in the lawsuit. The plaintiff has the burden of proving the counts they have stated at the appropriate time and not in the complaint. One does not play all their cards in the initial complaint.
Even more puzzling is the persistent fear that there would be retributory action from USCIS. Judges do not take kindly to such behavior and USCIS would have no chance defending itself on charges of retaliatory actions.
In order to understand how a civil lawsuit works one needs to understand that in a complaint, one makes no legal arguments, does not cite case or precedent law but only cites the simple facts. The other side can respond to the complaint and deny or accept the allegations in part or in whole. Many cases do not go to trial, they end up in settlements or are decided through summary judgement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_judgment) (for the plaintiff or the defendants) if the case has undisputable matters of facts and one of the parties petitions for it. Several processes also take place ie Discovery long before an actual trial. I recommend reading the following wikipedia entry to familiarize one at a high level with the processes and rules involved:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Rule_of_Civil_Procedure
To get to the core legal arguments behind the case, one needs to read the counts (they are only stated and not argued/expounded on starting pg 13). Namely those are:
COUNT I: VIOLATION OF THE FIFTH AMENDMENT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution) (constitutional rights issue)
COUNT II: VIOLATION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_Procedures_Act)
COUNT III: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ACT (http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title4/civ00036.htm)
COUNT IV: EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT (http://www.hhs.gov/dab/guidelines/eaja.html)
COUNT V: PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promissory_estoppel#Promissory_estoppel)
There are several laws cited above, its thus puzzling to see requests for one to cite the laws USCIS/DOS is accused of violating when its all there in the lawsuit. The plaintiff has the burden of proving the counts they have stated at the appropriate time and not in the complaint. One does not play all their cards in the initial complaint.
Even more puzzling is the persistent fear that there would be retributory action from USCIS. Judges do not take kindly to such behavior and USCIS would have no chance defending itself on charges of retaliatory actions.
more...
new_horizon
06-10 04:08 PM
Done
hot Funny Fat Cats
srikondoji
07-04 08:58 PM
Rambha:
First hats off to you to source information and then put it on this forum.
However, how will this mistake be rectified?
What happens to us who have spend so much money on preparations?
Among these 700K or so applicants, iam not sure how many have to leave the country because of various reasons before there PDs become current again in near future.
In that case, who should reimburse the costs? If this was a case of poor customer service, then they should also follow this age old saying in business community "Customer is always right" and promptly refund the expenses incurred.
I am for requesting the congress for a special vehicle for july filers. There should be a way out for all the affected applicants no matter what their PD was.
In matter of 2 weeks, the billion dollar mistake have costed us dearly in lot many other ways.
First hats off to you to source information and then put it on this forum.
However, how will this mistake be rectified?
What happens to us who have spend so much money on preparations?
Among these 700K or so applicants, iam not sure how many have to leave the country because of various reasons before there PDs become current again in near future.
In that case, who should reimburse the costs? If this was a case of poor customer service, then they should also follow this age old saying in business community "Customer is always right" and promptly refund the expenses incurred.
I am for requesting the congress for a special vehicle for july filers. There should be a way out for all the affected applicants no matter what their PD was.
In matter of 2 weeks, the billion dollar mistake have costed us dearly in lot many other ways.
more...
house stock photo : Fat Cat lying on
GCard_Dream
12-28 12:26 PM
Both of the flights were on the same itinerary and were booked through Thai. United was asking for money for international part of the travel because he said that Thai would charge United for the extra weight if United checked in the luggage all the way to Bangkok, which isn't really true because Thai did allow 70 LB then. I am not sure what the regulation is now.
I think you are right that the guy was probably ignorant and didn't really care becasue I wasn't flying United after LA anyways.
i have never had that problem
may have been because you booked those flights separately, if they are on the same itinerary and both were booked through Thai, United should not do that, guess they don't care because you are not continuing on United. btw how could they demand money for the international part of the flight- they are not Thai and their rules don't apply...i also think the person you dealt with was ignorant...
the problem i have seen- you fly into the US and have a connecting flight onwards- if you take it withing 24 hrs ie same day- bags just continue- if not you are stuck with domestic rules. now it no longer matters on american carriers at least, intl allowance has also been decreased to 50 lbs.
I think you are right that the guy was probably ignorant and didn't really care becasue I wasn't flying United after LA anyways.
i have never had that problem
may have been because you booked those flights separately, if they are on the same itinerary and both were booked through Thai, United should not do that, guess they don't care because you are not continuing on United. btw how could they demand money for the international part of the flight- they are not Thai and their rules don't apply...i also think the person you dealt with was ignorant...
the problem i have seen- you fly into the US and have a connecting flight onwards- if you take it withing 24 hrs ie same day- bags just continue- if not you are stuck with domestic rules. now it no longer matters on american carriers at least, intl allowance has also been decreased to 50 lbs.
tattoo funny-pictures-fat-cat-ate-
cool_guy_onnet1
02-21 10:29 AM
How does one "change" to EB2?. I have a PD of Oct 2003 EB3. Should i submit a new labor and if it is approved my category will be EB2 PD Oct 2003?. Should i also file another I-140?.
Not that i want to. just out of curiosity. thanks
My co-worker tried that and now has 3 RFE's to respond to.
Don't know the details but mostly it looks like a scam since why did one file Eb3 in first place and how can he add more exp. while Eb3 is pending as a factor for EB2? He is respondign since OCT. but they just keep asking for more details and they have first question for 140/PERM asking - DID YOU EVER HAD ANOTHER LABOR certification besides this one?
Be very careful-
Not that i want to. just out of curiosity. thanks
My co-worker tried that and now has 3 RFE's to respond to.
Don't know the details but mostly it looks like a scam since why did one file Eb3 in first place and how can he add more exp. while Eb3 is pending as a factor for EB2? He is respondign since OCT. but they just keep asking for more details and they have first question for 140/PERM asking - DID YOU EVER HAD ANOTHER LABOR certification besides this one?
Be very careful-
more...
pictures Fantastic Funny Fat Cats
sankalp
06-11 12:13 PM
rightly said. This is not first time this came up on radar. with success of TARP this comes up everytime we fix the system.
Done
Senator John Cornyn (R-TX)
Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX)
Done
Senator John Cornyn (R-TX)
Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX)
dresses fat cats and dogs. fat cats
pappu
04-06 05:57 PM
right..ok..today at work I heard from my colleague that his friend was sent back from airport
My colleague's friend's story.
Went to india for 3 weeks vacation..at POE, officer called his employer and asked "do you need him(a H1B) to work for this position? Cant you find any US Citizen?".
Apparently, the response from employer ( I think Desi consulting)is, "Yes..we dont need him..can find a USC"..
The poor guy is sent back.
Now, I asked my friend to inform his colleague to come forward and post his story at IV..but I doubt if he cares Rat's as** now that he is kicked out.
hmmm...I have a travel coming up in Nov/Dec...with all adventurous luck going on with me, I have other plans now :confused::confused:
Please send him this link
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=24126&page=8
He needs to post it himself if he wants to come back and if the story is true.
We need real people talking about it first hand.
Until then let us stop talking about friend's cases because it causes unnecessary panic. These stories may not be true and just rumors.
My colleague's friend's story.
Went to india for 3 weeks vacation..at POE, officer called his employer and asked "do you need him(a H1B) to work for this position? Cant you find any US Citizen?".
Apparently, the response from employer ( I think Desi consulting)is, "Yes..we dont need him..can find a USC"..
The poor guy is sent back.
Now, I asked my friend to inform his colleague to come forward and post his story at IV..but I doubt if he cares Rat's as** now that he is kicked out.
hmmm...I have a travel coming up in Nov/Dec...with all adventurous luck going on with me, I have other plans now :confused::confused:
Please send him this link
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=24126&page=8
He needs to post it himself if he wants to come back and if the story is true.
We need real people talking about it first hand.
Until then let us stop talking about friend's cases because it causes unnecessary panic. These stories may not be true and just rumors.
more...
makeup Fat Cat Live Wallpaper
imh1b
11-16 04:25 PM
To the original poster of this thread: Why don't you go to court first.
I am sure after few days of visa bulletin, his anger will fizzle out and all these people talking about action will disappear.
Has the lawsuit been filed yet?
Someone please post updates on the lawsuit.
I am sure after few days of visa bulletin, his anger will fizzle out and all these people talking about action will disappear.
Has the lawsuit been filed yet?
Someone please post updates on the lawsuit.
girlfriend fat cat
coopheal
11-12 11:43 AM
Why should some else follow up on your brilliant ideas. How about you take the lead and contact media in your area with your ideas. If the reporter is interested you can volunteer to be interviewd and also forward the information on the forum so that whoever is interested can also interview.
I see a problem in such postings. We only come up with ideas and expect someone else to work on them. I do not think at your workplace this is all you do-- Just give ideas and ask your managers and VP and CEO to follow up on your ideas.
If lobbying does not work then how come you have a 2 year EAD, You filed AOS in July 2007 due to IV, H1B time is decoupled from H4 time for your wife?
Well said.... A good idea without implementation is just dreaming....
I see a problem in such postings. We only come up with ideas and expect someone else to work on them. I do not think at your workplace this is all you do-- Just give ideas and ask your managers and VP and CEO to follow up on your ideas.
If lobbying does not work then how come you have a 2 year EAD, You filed AOS in July 2007 due to IV, H1B time is decoupled from H4 time for your wife?
Well said.... A good idea without implementation is just dreaming....
hairstyles Corporate+fatcat
nixstor
07-04 09:44 PM
Please stop posting this on every thread. In one line you are just spamming. We all visit Attorney Oh's website often. He does not need any publicity
immigration-law.com
07/04/2007: Status and Issues Involving July 2007 485 Fiasco
* The AILF work on the lawsuit appears to be in progress without any hurdles. It has reported that enough candidates have come forward to participate in the lawsuit as the plaintiffs and it does not need any more candidates to move forward for the lawsuit. Some of other people are likely to be covered as members of the class action regardless of their actual participation in the lawsuit. People should send "THANK YOU" to the AILF Legal Action Center leaders and the attorneys who are actually working on this case. Some contribution to the AILF may be more than appropriate. Please visit the AILF site to learn how they can send in contribution.
#
# We have been asked by the readers to report the alleged conspiracy theory. We declined to do it. However, people may want to know potential issues that should be answered and explored. We will discuss these issues on following hypotehtical premises:
* Presumption of Facts: (1) The I-485 applications have been experiencing a tremendous backlog lately. (2) The causes for the backlog have been known to be delays in the security checks. Some of these applicants have sought a relief in federal courts in the form of mandamus actions. (3) Allegedly, the USCIS pull together local and Service Center employees and pull out pending I-485 cases which were older than six months in backlog, working overtime and during the weekend right before July 1, 2007. This is an assumption at this point. (4) As evidenced by the revised Visa Bulletin, apparently these employees contacted "en mass" the DOS to request the visa numbers for these pending I-485 cases, which the DOS reported in the release of the revised VB turned out exceeding 60,000. (5) The rule requires that the USCIS approves I-485 cases "prior to" to contacting and requesting a visa number. (6) The current USCIS policy and procedure also require that I-485 applications be adjudicated and approved "only after" the completion of clearance of the security checks.
* Issue I: Hypothetically, what happens if the USCIS takes out the visa number before they obtain the security clearace?
o Answer I: Obviously it would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: It will constitue a serious security lapse, compromising the homeland security.
* Issue II: Hypothetically, what hppens if the USCIS requests and takes out the visa numbers prior to adjudication and approval of the pending I-485 applications?
o Answer I: It is evident that the USCIS would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: There could be two probable consequences affecting the backlog I-485 applicants and the new July Visa Bulletin eligible I-485 applicants, shoud the hypothetical facts develop. (1) The backlog I-485 applicants who have been issued I-485 approval notices should not be affected by the fiasco, albeit the potential revocation of the I-485 approvals. In most cases, revocation of the approved I-485 requires the time-consuming immigration court proceedings, assuming that the USCIS has a sufficient cause of action which may be questionable in this case. (2) The backlog I-485 applicants who have yet to receive the approval notice and the USCIS has yet to adjudicate and approve the application might be vulnerable in that the USCIS might be required to return the visa numbers for these cases as there was an error. Hypothetically, these numbers could be returned to the State Department and based on these returned number, the State Department might be required to revise the July Visa Bulletin again.
immigration-law.com
07/04/2007: Status and Issues Involving July 2007 485 Fiasco
* The AILF work on the lawsuit appears to be in progress without any hurdles. It has reported that enough candidates have come forward to participate in the lawsuit as the plaintiffs and it does not need any more candidates to move forward for the lawsuit. Some of other people are likely to be covered as members of the class action regardless of their actual participation in the lawsuit. People should send "THANK YOU" to the AILF Legal Action Center leaders and the attorneys who are actually working on this case. Some contribution to the AILF may be more than appropriate. Please visit the AILF site to learn how they can send in contribution.
#
# We have been asked by the readers to report the alleged conspiracy theory. We declined to do it. However, people may want to know potential issues that should be answered and explored. We will discuss these issues on following hypotehtical premises:
* Presumption of Facts: (1) The I-485 applications have been experiencing a tremendous backlog lately. (2) The causes for the backlog have been known to be delays in the security checks. Some of these applicants have sought a relief in federal courts in the form of mandamus actions. (3) Allegedly, the USCIS pull together local and Service Center employees and pull out pending I-485 cases which were older than six months in backlog, working overtime and during the weekend right before July 1, 2007. This is an assumption at this point. (4) As evidenced by the revised Visa Bulletin, apparently these employees contacted "en mass" the DOS to request the visa numbers for these pending I-485 cases, which the DOS reported in the release of the revised VB turned out exceeding 60,000. (5) The rule requires that the USCIS approves I-485 cases "prior to" to contacting and requesting a visa number. (6) The current USCIS policy and procedure also require that I-485 applications be adjudicated and approved "only after" the completion of clearance of the security checks.
* Issue I: Hypothetically, what happens if the USCIS takes out the visa number before they obtain the security clearace?
o Answer I: Obviously it would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: It will constitue a serious security lapse, compromising the homeland security.
* Issue II: Hypothetically, what hppens if the USCIS requests and takes out the visa numbers prior to adjudication and approval of the pending I-485 applications?
o Answer I: It is evident that the USCIS would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: There could be two probable consequences affecting the backlog I-485 applicants and the new July Visa Bulletin eligible I-485 applicants, shoud the hypothetical facts develop. (1) The backlog I-485 applicants who have been issued I-485 approval notices should not be affected by the fiasco, albeit the potential revocation of the I-485 approvals. In most cases, revocation of the approved I-485 requires the time-consuming immigration court proceedings, assuming that the USCIS has a sufficient cause of action which may be questionable in this case. (2) The backlog I-485 applicants who have yet to receive the approval notice and the USCIS has yet to adjudicate and approve the application might be vulnerable in that the USCIS might be required to return the visa numbers for these cases as there was an error. Hypothetically, these numbers could be returned to the State Department and based on these returned number, the State Department might be required to revise the July Visa Bulletin again.
nk2006
02-19 03:07 PM
I dont think this bill will survive in house - any bill with a set number of years residence as the only condition will raise the cries of amnesty and can get killed. In the current economic conditions, not sure if Obama administration will take any agressive steps to fix immigration issue - unfortunately they have far more urgent issues at hand. A bipartisan support could have made it possible but any bill which can be interpreted as 'amnesty' will sure raise emotions.
Having said that - it seems useful (irrespective of if illegals will also get benefited or only legals get benefits) for us - any bill that can potentially take thousands of people from the waiting list can also benefit people with <5 years anyways - so it should benefit everyone. Hell....even if there is a bill that grants greencards after 10 years of legal residence - I am sure it will ease the retrogession a lot (from all the stories in IV, I am sure there are quite a few still waiting after 10 years of legal residence). Whether such bill can be passed in the near future (in 2009) is another matter and I highly doubt it.
Having said that - it seems useful (irrespective of if illegals will also get benefited or only legals get benefits) for us - any bill that can potentially take thousands of people from the waiting list can also benefit people with <5 years anyways - so it should benefit everyone. Hell....even if there is a bill that grants greencards after 10 years of legal residence - I am sure it will ease the retrogession a lot (from all the stories in IV, I am sure there are quite a few still waiting after 10 years of legal residence). Whether such bill can be passed in the near future (in 2009) is another matter and I highly doubt it.
.soulty
02-15 09:21 PM
nice wip screens there guys, looking good :thumb:
thirdworldman thats looking amazing, you going to have that perspective view as your final frame or you going to check for another shot when you finished rendering?
great stuff.. ;)
thirdworldman thats looking amazing, you going to have that perspective view as your final frame or you going to check for another shot when you finished rendering?
great stuff.. ;)
No comments:
Post a Comment