Lasantha
09-25 01:58 PM
Juist to prove the original posters point about IV being intolerant about different points of view and the trigger happy attitude of some members about giving a red dots just because someone else speaks his point of view - I got a very personal and abusive remark with a red dot just for my post above. Not that I really care about Red or Green dots. My GC journey is over. This forum helped me a great deal when I was waiting for my GC. Now I am hear to help others with what I know in their GC pursuit and help with any on going action items. Just wish some members here would grow up and learn to live and let live! :)
wallpaper quot;God made rainy days so
bikram_das_in
01-19 09:44 AM
I will contribute to fight this in all possible ways.
pansworld
12-13 02:24 PM
Let it be an open forum. The reason why Rajeev Khanna's Immigration Portal got so many hits before IV was that it is free.....Why we need to have paid membership when our funding drive was successful is still beyond me
I never have and never will like the idea of being asked to pay, I give what I can unasked. What of the people that by circumstance do currently not have these amounts of money to spare. I should not have to feel excluded nor should I have to explain my very personal reasons why to everyone.
Have you guys looked in the forums lately, people are getting "yelled" at and talked to rudely if they do not disclose how much exactly they have contributed. So we are only allowed to an opinion or help if we have money?
I will contribute when I have money to spare, however it seems I will have to leave this organization based on the comments that have been out there before I get to the point where I can afford to contribute. That goes for both time and money, some of us have responsibilities that we do not want to disclose.
*sigh* I might have just opened myself up to the ones that like to attack....go ahead...
I never have and never will like the idea of being asked to pay, I give what I can unasked. What of the people that by circumstance do currently not have these amounts of money to spare. I should not have to feel excluded nor should I have to explain my very personal reasons why to everyone.
Have you guys looked in the forums lately, people are getting "yelled" at and talked to rudely if they do not disclose how much exactly they have contributed. So we are only allowed to an opinion or help if we have money?
I will contribute when I have money to spare, however it seems I will have to leave this organization based on the comments that have been out there before I get to the point where I can afford to contribute. That goes for both time and money, some of us have responsibilities that we do not want to disclose.
*sigh* I might have just opened myself up to the ones that like to attack....go ahead...
2011 quotes on rainy day. quotes on
dallasmbs
07-18 10:07 AM
Date Delivered To USCIS: July 2
Time Delivered To USCIS: 10.30 AM
Service Center: NSC
Rejected: Dont Know
Time Delivered To USCIS: 10.30 AM
Service Center: NSC
Rejected: Dont Know
more...
vxb2004
07-15 12:03 PM
Great job IV. Keep up the great work.
breddy2000
04-04 01:08 PM
Does USCIS send RFE for both primary & dependent applications, if it is related to Employment?
Gurus, any advise.
If I understood your question right, are u asking about EVL RFE for both primary and dependent applicants?
I Don't think so. Logically even when the dependent works,the primary applicant's employer need to prove that they support GC process on that application.
They will not check for dependent EVL as it is not relevant in this case.
At the most they may verify dependent past non-immigrant visa status.
Gurus, any advise.
If I understood your question right, are u asking about EVL RFE for both primary and dependent applicants?
I Don't think so. Logically even when the dependent works,the primary applicant's employer need to prove that they support GC process on that application.
They will not check for dependent EVL as it is not relevant in this case.
At the most they may verify dependent past non-immigrant visa status.
more...
imm_pro
06-02 03:12 PM
Called first three and left VM..will call the rest after lunch..
2010 The Cloud Gate On A Rainy Day
sri1309
01-08 05:03 PM
Immigration-law.com says today"
Sen. Sherrod Brown [OH] Joined Yesterday the List of Co-Sponsors for S.9 Immigration Bill, Changing Co-Sponsors to 13 Senators".
Lets start writing to all the supporters once again. HIghlight housing crisis, also can request premium processing for 485. Make sure we show the immediate and long term benefits. As somene noted, tell that to keep people when they are young enough and not to drive them aaway with their citizen children only to return when they are all 50-55+ of age, with more chances to depend on SSN, than to contribute
Sen. Sherrod Brown [OH] Joined Yesterday the List of Co-Sponsors for S.9 Immigration Bill, Changing Co-Sponsors to 13 Senators".
Lets start writing to all the supporters once again. HIghlight housing crisis, also can request premium processing for 485. Make sure we show the immediate and long term benefits. As somene noted, tell that to keep people when they are young enough and not to drive them aaway with their citizen children only to return when they are all 50-55+ of age, with more chances to depend on SSN, than to contribute
more...
Legal
06-12 04:11 PM
There are so many ifs and buts. our interests are best served with out the big vehicle CIR. If thats the only vehicle, we possibly are going to be held hostage.
Very true. Also members should stay away from promoting one presidential candidate versus other. How does it help our cause? This has nothing to do with free speech. There are so many other websites for such discussions.
Very true. Also members should stay away from promoting one presidential candidate versus other. How does it help our cause? This has nothing to do with free speech. There are so many other websites for such discussions.
hair Rainy Days and Mondays always
amitjoey
09-13 06:32 PM
Regarding the 1st point, we, or at least I, am already trying to recruit as many people as I can, also posted IV posters in a few places.
Does anyone know how the illegals got word out about their rally across the country, or specifically press coverage about it? If so, we can try to use the same source, not for a rally, but to get IV's name out and talk about our major issues reduced to 2-3 points, so it is not confusing for the public.
Regarding, 2nd point, I think we can all contribute small amounts, say $50-100, but unfortunately most of us are stuck in low paying jobs. If we can get employers involved, that could be a better source of funds. Seriously, I dont expect many employers to contribute, but maybe academic employers who are losing funding because their H1-b employees are not authorized to get it, might be more willing to contribute.
Also, is anyone aware of any Indian American politicans, perhaps local Congressmen, that we can contact? I think I read recently of one in Texas.
Here is a story on a senator from Delaware who seems to be suportive of Indian Americans, although the story is on how he made a blunder talking about them:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/07/07/politics/main1785303.shtml
Also, though you are probably aware of these organizations, maybe we can apporach them to help publicize our cause where it matters:
1) Indian American Republican Council:
http://www.iarcnational.org/
2) Indian American Center for Political Awareness
http://www.iacfpa.org/
I agree with rheoretro, the first thing that any member feeling helpless here should do is to get more publicity for IV. Talk to people in the same situation
who are suffering because of backlog or cannot file because of retrogression.
Please urge all your friends, influence them to contribute to IV.
Lets continue doing that on a daily basis and then if you feel you can do more, start writing to your local representatives, senators, house members.
I have written atleast 2-3 times to my senator on numerous occasions.
I feel, your words, combined with your thoughts about how this affects you helps a lot in conveying and putting the message across.
I just got sending a email message to my senator here, I am going to follow it up with a letter.
Email message reads like this:
Dear Senator Boxer
I have been a legal resident in state of " " for close to 5+/X years and I have been a legal resident in the USA for a total of X years.
I am a legal immigrant, whose application for permanent residency has been pending for the last 3 years.
The U.S. government makes only a certain number of immigrant visas (green cards) available each year and these are allocated among the various immigrant visa categories and countries from which applicants seek to emigrate.
Retrogression: For the past few years, the number of immigrants approved for employment-based immigrant visas has been lower than the number of visas available, resulting in no backlog in visa numbers. Recently, the DOS has seen far more immigrants approved for employment-based immigrant visas and has run out of visa numbers in certain categories, causing a temporary backlog or "retrogression" of visa numbers.
EB-3: This visa category includes employment-based immigrant visas for:
1) professionals with a bachelor's degree
2) skilled workers in positions requiring two or more years of experience or training
3) unskilled workers
Chargeability: Immigrant visa numbers are further apportioned among the various countries from which applicants seek to emigrate. Each country has a limit and each approved applicant is "charged" against his or her country's limit.
Also to complicate the matters, there are those folks that came here illegally that were allowed to change status based on 245(i). Every year in Oct (start of new fiscal year for the govt) 140,000 visas are made avaible for EB3s. These 140,000 visas are divided amongst the different nationalities. Some visas are now going to be eaten up by the surge of 245(i)s from 2001. Irrespective of the the nationality of the 245(i) applicants, they are impacting every category witihn EB3. That is the main reason that almost all EB3 categories have retrogressed and will remain so for a while. Its a grim picture but thats the reality.
We need some intervention from Congress, otherwise people like me will have to wait for years - possibly half a decade or more
I support your opinion that there cannot be any amnesty for illegal immigrants, but there should be emergency relief for legal immigrants stuck in the logjam for years. We ought to make it a little fair for legal, honest and law-abiding legal immigrants.
Please support any bill that gives a temporary relief to legal immigrants (especially Employment based applicants). A temporary increase in the number of Visas allocated to the Employment based categories can substantially alievate some hardship.
Thanks for your understanding
Future Citizen, proud resident of state of California
Thanks
Does anyone know how the illegals got word out about their rally across the country, or specifically press coverage about it? If so, we can try to use the same source, not for a rally, but to get IV's name out and talk about our major issues reduced to 2-3 points, so it is not confusing for the public.
Regarding, 2nd point, I think we can all contribute small amounts, say $50-100, but unfortunately most of us are stuck in low paying jobs. If we can get employers involved, that could be a better source of funds. Seriously, I dont expect many employers to contribute, but maybe academic employers who are losing funding because their H1-b employees are not authorized to get it, might be more willing to contribute.
Also, is anyone aware of any Indian American politicans, perhaps local Congressmen, that we can contact? I think I read recently of one in Texas.
Here is a story on a senator from Delaware who seems to be suportive of Indian Americans, although the story is on how he made a blunder talking about them:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/07/07/politics/main1785303.shtml
Also, though you are probably aware of these organizations, maybe we can apporach them to help publicize our cause where it matters:
1) Indian American Republican Council:
http://www.iarcnational.org/
2) Indian American Center for Political Awareness
http://www.iacfpa.org/
I agree with rheoretro, the first thing that any member feeling helpless here should do is to get more publicity for IV. Talk to people in the same situation
who are suffering because of backlog or cannot file because of retrogression.
Please urge all your friends, influence them to contribute to IV.
Lets continue doing that on a daily basis and then if you feel you can do more, start writing to your local representatives, senators, house members.
I have written atleast 2-3 times to my senator on numerous occasions.
I feel, your words, combined with your thoughts about how this affects you helps a lot in conveying and putting the message across.
I just got sending a email message to my senator here, I am going to follow it up with a letter.
Email message reads like this:
Dear Senator Boxer
I have been a legal resident in state of " " for close to 5+/X years and I have been a legal resident in the USA for a total of X years.
I am a legal immigrant, whose application for permanent residency has been pending for the last 3 years.
The U.S. government makes only a certain number of immigrant visas (green cards) available each year and these are allocated among the various immigrant visa categories and countries from which applicants seek to emigrate.
Retrogression: For the past few years, the number of immigrants approved for employment-based immigrant visas has been lower than the number of visas available, resulting in no backlog in visa numbers. Recently, the DOS has seen far more immigrants approved for employment-based immigrant visas and has run out of visa numbers in certain categories, causing a temporary backlog or "retrogression" of visa numbers.
EB-3: This visa category includes employment-based immigrant visas for:
1) professionals with a bachelor's degree
2) skilled workers in positions requiring two or more years of experience or training
3) unskilled workers
Chargeability: Immigrant visa numbers are further apportioned among the various countries from which applicants seek to emigrate. Each country has a limit and each approved applicant is "charged" against his or her country's limit.
Also to complicate the matters, there are those folks that came here illegally that were allowed to change status based on 245(i). Every year in Oct (start of new fiscal year for the govt) 140,000 visas are made avaible for EB3s. These 140,000 visas are divided amongst the different nationalities. Some visas are now going to be eaten up by the surge of 245(i)s from 2001. Irrespective of the the nationality of the 245(i) applicants, they are impacting every category witihn EB3. That is the main reason that almost all EB3 categories have retrogressed and will remain so for a while. Its a grim picture but thats the reality.
We need some intervention from Congress, otherwise people like me will have to wait for years - possibly half a decade or more
I support your opinion that there cannot be any amnesty for illegal immigrants, but there should be emergency relief for legal immigrants stuck in the logjam for years. We ought to make it a little fair for legal, honest and law-abiding legal immigrants.
Please support any bill that gives a temporary relief to legal immigrants (especially Employment based applicants). A temporary increase in the number of Visas allocated to the Employment based categories can substantially alievate some hardship.
Thanks for your understanding
Future Citizen, proud resident of state of California
Thanks
more...
kumarpositive@gmail.com
11-16 12:58 AM
For me 24 days passed I've not received any letter from USCIS.
I have received yesterday the reopened notification (11/15/2007), I am very eager to know the status of others who has already met the 30 day period. Please provide some feedback on your case status.
I have received yesterday the reopened notification (11/15/2007), I am very eager to know the status of others who has already met the 30 day period. Please provide some feedback on your case status.
hot Quotes. Today is a rainy day
sandy_anand
04-19 10:20 AM
nice to see that post. believe me most people here lack it and i get flames and red just because of the handle :)
You're welcome. Even while we all suffer due to the retrogression, most of which is out of our control, I believe we can still remain positive in areas over which we do have control, like our sense of humor and ability to get along with everyone by agreeing to disagree in a civil manner. Unfortunately this forum of so called "highly skilled" sorely lacks it. Every disagreement/debate becomes personal and quickly dissolves into a shouting match. It's really sad. We need to learn to be happy for others who are more fortunate and sympathize with others who are less fortunate. We don't have to be highly skilled to be that...just human.
You're welcome. Even while we all suffer due to the retrogression, most of which is out of our control, I believe we can still remain positive in areas over which we do have control, like our sense of humor and ability to get along with everyone by agreeing to disagree in a civil manner. Unfortunately this forum of so called "highly skilled" sorely lacks it. Every disagreement/debate becomes personal and quickly dissolves into a shouting match. It's really sad. We need to learn to be happy for others who are more fortunate and sympathize with others who are less fortunate. We don't have to be highly skilled to be that...just human.
more...
house Rainy Day
coolest_me
08-25 11:44 AM
ICICI Bank has started a 'Express Pay' service in which your monety gets transferred in 1-2 day but they charge 5 $ for that.
I think you might have selected that option while transferring. Thats the first option ...
I think you might have selected that option while transferring. Thats the first option ...
tattoo Rainy Day Drink Recipes,
unitednations
03-31 11:51 AM
I (and I�m sure others too) would like to know how the following works,
Employer X filed labor, 140 for their employee. Both were approved (assumption - no RFEs, etc. until now), 485 was filed for in July 2007, and remains pending.
The employee was employed with Employer X from before the labor was applied and until ~360 days after the 485 was filed, and was always paid more than the LC prevailing wage/offered salary.
In July 2008, the employee leaves employer X and joins employer Y under AC21 provisions. An AC21 letter, G-28N are submitted.
140 never gets revoked by employer X.
In Jan 2009, employer X receives an Ability to Pay RFE for another pending 140 of theirs.
At this point, employer X has 16 140s that are open (pending OR approved with 485 pending to be filed/filed and pending). Out of those 16 140s, one was for the employee that left under AC21.
When they respond to that RFE, I do understand that they could be asked to show ability to pay for all 16 140s, even for the one that doesn�t work for them anymore, because of the fact that it was never revoked.
In this case, is the employee (that left) covered or at risk? I ask this question because the employee that left submitted AC21 documentation immediately upon leaving, thus notifying the USCIS that the �ability to pay� responsibility for his case, if any at all, now lies with the new future employer. There probably isn�t any clear definition of such a situation in the law, but can such an argument ever hold up in court, and protect the employee�s AOS application from getting affected due to any ability to pay issues the old employer (X) has had AFTER the employee left them.
The only person on here that I expect to be able to give a non-speculative answer to this is UN, unless someone else has personally gone through something similar.
Long post, I know, and I hope it does get read.
Thank you.
I worked on a very big case back in 2006.
Company had 20 pending 140's which were filed in 2005
Company had 42 approved 140's
in Janaury 2006 they sent RFE on one of the cases and asked for ability to pay. Before response was sent; second rfe is received on another pending casestating ability to pay and that uscis has noted company has filed many 140's; then third rfe is received on another case asking ability to pay on all pending cases (note this was in vermont service center and at this time the whole cybersoftech issue was going on; so there was a heightened alert from vermont service center).
In preparing for the response to the 20 pending cases; we had to analyze the 42 approved cases to ensure that just in case USCIS went after those cases together with the 20 then we should be ready in this particular response to justify the 42 approved cases.
In the response we only showed the 20 pending cases and that we had ability to pay for them.
Within three weeks; USCIS sent notice of intent to revoke the approved 140's. In the notice of intent to revoke; they stated that their records showed 20 pending; 42 approved cases and 205 h-1b's filed. USCIS went through their calculations and stated that if the average salary was xxx on all these petitions then the company would have to have paid close to $15 million in salaries which was (at that time the 2004 tax returns) more then five times the revenue. USCIS also went on to state they thought the company was involved in fraudulently obtaining h-1b's and 140's.
Now; company guy talks to Shusterman and he wants $2k per case and he can only handle the immigration component and that he neeed a CPA (which was me) and the company guy should also get a criminal attorney.
Well anyways; because in the first 20 cases we thought uscis may go after the approved 140's; the financials looked the right way to support all the cases.
The response was very scientific; hire dates; priority dates; amounts people got paid before priority date; amounts paid after; dates people left the company, etc.
In the various calculations; we proved out that even with people leaving who used ac21; we still had ability to pay for them (ie., even though they were no longer there we still had the financials to pay them). Then we gave another scenario that ability to pay clock should stop once person used ac21. We then did recalculation under this scenario.
In every scenario we showed we had ability to pay. Now; we never requested USCIS to revoke the approved 140's for people who had left; in one of the scenarios we adjusted the calculation to stop showing ability to pay once a person left.
USCIS re-approved all the cases. However; they sent notice of intent to deny for pepole who left using ac21. those candidates then gave updated letters and they all eventually got the greencards approved.
Now;this particular case is a little different because even though people left; the company still had ability to pay for them. Therefore, it is difficult to draw conclusion from this for other peoples particular cases. In this case; the fair value of the work I did for them would have cost them about $100K (i actually did audited financial statements for them; they are the only company I did audited financial statements for becuase the stakes were very very high for everyone concerned).
I can tell you that when a company does get this type of RFE; it is very difficult to substantiate everyone together and the calculations and supporting documentation is very complex AND companies have very little desire to help those who have already left. In these types of queries; the company/lawyer doesn't even bother to justify those who have already left; they just ask for revoation and they prove ability to pay for those who are still left with the company. Therefore; USCIS could just make the determination that those revoked cases were approved in error.
The main law for ability to pay is that company has to prove it from priority date until person obtains lawful permanent residency; law was never changed/modified to accomodate ability to pay for a company whose candidates have left using ac21.
Note: This is all pure speculation of what is going on in these cases. I am just writing out loud of why/if there is a shift within uscis.
Employer X filed labor, 140 for their employee. Both were approved (assumption - no RFEs, etc. until now), 485 was filed for in July 2007, and remains pending.
The employee was employed with Employer X from before the labor was applied and until ~360 days after the 485 was filed, and was always paid more than the LC prevailing wage/offered salary.
In July 2008, the employee leaves employer X and joins employer Y under AC21 provisions. An AC21 letter, G-28N are submitted.
140 never gets revoked by employer X.
In Jan 2009, employer X receives an Ability to Pay RFE for another pending 140 of theirs.
At this point, employer X has 16 140s that are open (pending OR approved with 485 pending to be filed/filed and pending). Out of those 16 140s, one was for the employee that left under AC21.
When they respond to that RFE, I do understand that they could be asked to show ability to pay for all 16 140s, even for the one that doesn�t work for them anymore, because of the fact that it was never revoked.
In this case, is the employee (that left) covered or at risk? I ask this question because the employee that left submitted AC21 documentation immediately upon leaving, thus notifying the USCIS that the �ability to pay� responsibility for his case, if any at all, now lies with the new future employer. There probably isn�t any clear definition of such a situation in the law, but can such an argument ever hold up in court, and protect the employee�s AOS application from getting affected due to any ability to pay issues the old employer (X) has had AFTER the employee left them.
The only person on here that I expect to be able to give a non-speculative answer to this is UN, unless someone else has personally gone through something similar.
Long post, I know, and I hope it does get read.
Thank you.
I worked on a very big case back in 2006.
Company had 20 pending 140's which were filed in 2005
Company had 42 approved 140's
in Janaury 2006 they sent RFE on one of the cases and asked for ability to pay. Before response was sent; second rfe is received on another pending casestating ability to pay and that uscis has noted company has filed many 140's; then third rfe is received on another case asking ability to pay on all pending cases (note this was in vermont service center and at this time the whole cybersoftech issue was going on; so there was a heightened alert from vermont service center).
In preparing for the response to the 20 pending cases; we had to analyze the 42 approved cases to ensure that just in case USCIS went after those cases together with the 20 then we should be ready in this particular response to justify the 42 approved cases.
In the response we only showed the 20 pending cases and that we had ability to pay for them.
Within three weeks; USCIS sent notice of intent to revoke the approved 140's. In the notice of intent to revoke; they stated that their records showed 20 pending; 42 approved cases and 205 h-1b's filed. USCIS went through their calculations and stated that if the average salary was xxx on all these petitions then the company would have to have paid close to $15 million in salaries which was (at that time the 2004 tax returns) more then five times the revenue. USCIS also went on to state they thought the company was involved in fraudulently obtaining h-1b's and 140's.
Now; company guy talks to Shusterman and he wants $2k per case and he can only handle the immigration component and that he neeed a CPA (which was me) and the company guy should also get a criminal attorney.
Well anyways; because in the first 20 cases we thought uscis may go after the approved 140's; the financials looked the right way to support all the cases.
The response was very scientific; hire dates; priority dates; amounts people got paid before priority date; amounts paid after; dates people left the company, etc.
In the various calculations; we proved out that even with people leaving who used ac21; we still had ability to pay for them (ie., even though they were no longer there we still had the financials to pay them). Then we gave another scenario that ability to pay clock should stop once person used ac21. We then did recalculation under this scenario.
In every scenario we showed we had ability to pay. Now; we never requested USCIS to revoke the approved 140's for people who had left; in one of the scenarios we adjusted the calculation to stop showing ability to pay once a person left.
USCIS re-approved all the cases. However; they sent notice of intent to deny for pepole who left using ac21. those candidates then gave updated letters and they all eventually got the greencards approved.
Now;this particular case is a little different because even though people left; the company still had ability to pay for them. Therefore, it is difficult to draw conclusion from this for other peoples particular cases. In this case; the fair value of the work I did for them would have cost them about $100K (i actually did audited financial statements for them; they are the only company I did audited financial statements for becuase the stakes were very very high for everyone concerned).
I can tell you that when a company does get this type of RFE; it is very difficult to substantiate everyone together and the calculations and supporting documentation is very complex AND companies have very little desire to help those who have already left. In these types of queries; the company/lawyer doesn't even bother to justify those who have already left; they just ask for revoation and they prove ability to pay for those who are still left with the company. Therefore; USCIS could just make the determination that those revoked cases were approved in error.
The main law for ability to pay is that company has to prove it from priority date until person obtains lawful permanent residency; law was never changed/modified to accomodate ability to pay for a company whose candidates have left using ac21.
Note: This is all pure speculation of what is going on in these cases. I am just writing out loud of why/if there is a shift within uscis.
more...
pictures Congrats rainy day
whatamidoinghere
02-11 03:47 PM
Read the term "Not to exceed 28.6 percent plus"That plus means EB3 total can exceed 28.6%..
No.... USCIS is not dumb...They have interpreted the law in the way they think is appropriate....They are applying the over all 7% country cap to China/India EB2 and sending the overflow to EB3 ROW..... It is not fair but it is not exactly illegal...The law is open to interpretation and USCIS has chose to select this interpretation......You can take a crack at suing the USCIS.....I doubt that you would get anywhere......The EB2 India/China might benefit from the lawsuit....But as you know not all members would agree on IV spending resources on this lawsuit because this serves only a small section of member population.... At a personal level you can gather a few EB2 China India guys and have a crack at suing USCIS....
It says "not required by other classes". In this case it is required but could not be applied to EB2 due to per country numerical limits. Therefore it should go to unused pool of visas followed by AC21. Also why will USCIS prefer EB3 instead of EB2 people? It does not make sense.
As far as suing the govt is concerned we all know what happened to doctors in the UK.. so this is will be a futile exercise.
No.... USCIS is not dumb...They have interpreted the law in the way they think is appropriate....They are applying the over all 7% country cap to China/India EB2 and sending the overflow to EB3 ROW..... It is not fair but it is not exactly illegal...The law is open to interpretation and USCIS has chose to select this interpretation......You can take a crack at suing the USCIS.....I doubt that you would get anywhere......The EB2 India/China might benefit from the lawsuit....But as you know not all members would agree on IV spending resources on this lawsuit because this serves only a small section of member population.... At a personal level you can gather a few EB2 China India guys and have a crack at suing USCIS....
It says "not required by other classes". In this case it is required but could not be applied to EB2 due to per country numerical limits. Therefore it should go to unused pool of visas followed by AC21. Also why will USCIS prefer EB3 instead of EB2 people? It does not make sense.
As far as suing the govt is concerned we all know what happened to doctors in the UK.. so this is will be a futile exercise.
dresses work done on a rainy day,
EndlessWait
05-24 01:20 PM
it would make our plans to go back even more certian.. A MASS EXODUS of HIGH TECH WORKERS.. is exactly what this country needs..way to go!
more...
makeup the beauty of a rainy day.
Mayday
03-30 08:47 PM
There are others who advised you about what to do so I am not adding to it. If you want to prevent this happening to others you can expose the company here and in other forums...
the worst idea ever.
first - probability that potential employee of that employer will read it is zero.
second - employer continues to act same way to other people.
third - employer can actually sue him for doing so.
the worst idea ever.
first - probability that potential employee of that employer will read it is zero.
second - employer continues to act same way to other people.
third - employer can actually sue him for doing so.
girlfriend by “The Rainy Day”
pou-pou
06-12 09:17 AM
yeah, i basically inverted the screen and I though some kind of overall layout can be done. eg the scan lines in this situation. :)
hairstyles Photo Of The Day
dagabaaj
01-30 05:08 PM
Bump
fasterthanlight�
06-21 11:09 PM
So whats going on here..... Ben?
wantgc23
07-30 06:27 PM
I am not a chartist or day trader if that is what you want to know. I have worked in high frequency Stat-Arb trading which also does micro caps sometimes.
smisachu,
Where can one learn about high frequency trading ? Can you suggest books that mathematically model various instruments price movements such as stocks, options and futures ?
Thanks in Advance!
smisachu,
Where can one learn about high frequency trading ? Can you suggest books that mathematically model various instruments price movements such as stocks, options and futures ?
Thanks in Advance!
No comments:
Post a Comment