seeker999
08-12 09:36 AM
I like the idea of separate fund for EB3.
Is there no one in IV admins /founders who are interested in EB3?
I believe we need to have a EB3 wing in IV ,Ideally the max donors in EB3 ( atleast 10) can be the decision makers and can ensure EB3 voice is also heard.
We should have the % board members in IV from EB3 wing reflecting the amounts donated by EB3.
Looks like we already have Patton Boggs lobbying for IV. Did any EB3 candidate ever given an chance to interact with them. Exactly how does this work ?
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=43&Itemid=48
I feel that if given a chance to talk to Patton Boggs and present our views. There can be huge amounts of funds that can be raised.
Is there no one in IV admins /founders who are interested in EB3?
I believe we need to have a EB3 wing in IV ,Ideally the max donors in EB3 ( atleast 10) can be the decision makers and can ensure EB3 voice is also heard.
We should have the % board members in IV from EB3 wing reflecting the amounts donated by EB3.
Looks like we already have Patton Boggs lobbying for IV. Did any EB3 candidate ever given an chance to interact with them. Exactly how does this work ?
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=43&Itemid=48
I feel that if given a chance to talk to Patton Boggs and present our views. There can be huge amounts of funds that can be raised.
wallpaper Fabolous Punks Natalie Nunn On
onemorecame
10-18 12:15 PM
any one else.. who got any update after filling RFE?
I got soft LUD on Oct 12.... nothing after that :confused:
I got soft LUD on Oct 12.... nothing after that :confused:
sandiboy
07-18 08:33 AM
Mine reached on Jul 2nd @ 7:55AM. I was also current per June bulletin but it was filed in July. No Receipt yet.
2011 Natalie Nunn Hooking Up,
leoindiano
03-17 10:58 AM
Yes, mine was in Philly BEC too...which was approved in 2007 January.
But, there was quite a few go lucky people whose labor was getting approved in 30 days state, 30 days federal until that time. thats why i took 50-50 probability.
But, there was quite a few go lucky people whose labor was getting approved in 30 days state, 30 days federal until that time. thats why i took 50-50 probability.
more...
conundrum
12-08 04:48 PM
we will have to ask for more pointed info rather than ask for all the info at once.
My suggestion is for a few of us to ask USCIS for just EB - 2 India, China and ROW and another for just EB-3 India, China and ROW. Maybe we might get a faster response that way.
My suggestion is for a few of us to ask USCIS for just EB - 2 India, China and ROW and another for just EB-3 India, China and ROW. Maybe we might get a faster response that way.
chanduv23
09-19 06:29 AM
The reason there were so many placards was - we were expecting atleast 10000 people to show up and with the kind of poor response we got, we were expecting atleast 5000 and thats why there was 700 banners ordered.
If we had the magic figure 10000, the impact could have been marvellous. The banner count would have been appropriate
With 1500 to 2000 - every individual had a banner or a placard or a flag.
Mark's speech was hillarious - but had very strong messages - THESE ARE THINGS THAT NEED SPECIAL SKILLS - AND MARK PULLED IT THROUGH EXTREMELY WELL. Mark is a pround member of the Tri State Chapter and his contributions towards the cause are amazing
Robert Sun (LIA) - was good. Well he was praising Indians and CHinese. Nothing wrong - but yes can be more comprehensive in nature.
We had people from all nationalities - and a lot of people seem to be silent supporters of IV - very passionate about this organization.
Jay was at his best - He took on Lou Dobbs - Which was the best part.
The only lesson I would say that we must learn is - low numbers - YES. The turnout should have been atleast 10000 - though 2000 is good. Just proves how selfish those free riders are who can let down your own community who are helping you.
If we had the magic figure 10000, the impact could have been marvellous. The banner count would have been appropriate
With 1500 to 2000 - every individual had a banner or a placard or a flag.
Mark's speech was hillarious - but had very strong messages - THESE ARE THINGS THAT NEED SPECIAL SKILLS - AND MARK PULLED IT THROUGH EXTREMELY WELL. Mark is a pround member of the Tri State Chapter and his contributions towards the cause are amazing
Robert Sun (LIA) - was good. Well he was praising Indians and CHinese. Nothing wrong - but yes can be more comprehensive in nature.
We had people from all nationalities - and a lot of people seem to be silent supporters of IV - very passionate about this organization.
Jay was at his best - He took on Lou Dobbs - Which was the best part.
The only lesson I would say that we must learn is - low numbers - YES. The turnout should have been atleast 10000 - though 2000 is good. Just proves how selfish those free riders are who can let down your own community who are helping you.
more...
sandiboy
07-18 08:33 AM
Mine reached on Jul 2nd @ 7:55AM. I was also current per June bulletin but it was filed in July. No Receipt yet.
2010 imgmax512 - KSPR To Go Purely Digital February 17 Natalie Nunn of KSPR
memyselfandus
04-09 09:32 AM
Details below
more...
sbindval
06-13 09:49 AM
Please check this out...might give you guys some hope and laughter :)
immigration_the_human_cost (http://www.theonion.com/content/video/immigration_the_human_cost)
immigration_the_human_cost (http://www.theonion.com/content/video/immigration_the_human_cost)
hair Lil Kim Vs. Natalie Nunn
indianindian2006
07-14 06:06 PM
Can new company file amendmend to existing I-140...
The company who filed my greencard got acquired within 6 months of I485 filing for me, They amend my H1 within 6 months window and now they are in process of amending the I140..
My question to gurus is-Will he be ok if his new company amend the I140.
Your case is a case of Successor in interest, his case is a case of different employer so according to me the answer is no.
The company who filed my greencard got acquired within 6 months of I485 filing for me, They amend my H1 within 6 months window and now they are in process of amending the I140..
My question to gurus is-Will he be ok if his new company amend the I140.
Your case is a case of Successor in interest, his case is a case of different employer so according to me the answer is no.
more...
sprash
01-30 02:35 PM
Wow! Thanks a lot for posting such detailed RFE information. This really helps a lot in understanding what I may be asked.
My GC sponsoring employer revoked my H1 last year itself. I could see the change in status back then itself within a month of having left them. Nothing happenned after that. I got a new H1 from my (then) new employer and things continued as before. This employer has not yet revoked my H1 (from what I can see) and its probably because they are almost going under. There are less than 25 people left in the company so I doubt that they will have spent the money to go and revoke all the H1s of the folks they laid off.
Maybe its like someone suggested - USCIS is pre-processing my 485 based on received date since I mailed my app very early on in July 2007.
Yes, I believe thats what they might be doing - preprocessing. There was no obvious 'trigger' event that caused RFE on my case either. They raised these RFEs even though I had not changed my sponsoring employer or transferred my h1b. I have a feeling they preprocessed mine too.
I don't mean to scare you (just prepare you for the worst) --- you might want to talk to some desi consultants and make an arrangement that in case the RFE is employment verification, they give you pay stubs from the time you were laid off. As you can see from my RFE, you might need to show your recent paystubs and employment verification. Yes, it will be a financial loss for you, but without these I believe your case can get rejected (gurus correct me if I'm wrong!).
Again I am is just hypothesizing your situation, your case might be entirely different. This is 'just in case'.....
My GC sponsoring employer revoked my H1 last year itself. I could see the change in status back then itself within a month of having left them. Nothing happenned after that. I got a new H1 from my (then) new employer and things continued as before. This employer has not yet revoked my H1 (from what I can see) and its probably because they are almost going under. There are less than 25 people left in the company so I doubt that they will have spent the money to go and revoke all the H1s of the folks they laid off.
Maybe its like someone suggested - USCIS is pre-processing my 485 based on received date since I mailed my app very early on in July 2007.
Yes, I believe thats what they might be doing - preprocessing. There was no obvious 'trigger' event that caused RFE on my case either. They raised these RFEs even though I had not changed my sponsoring employer or transferred my h1b. I have a feeling they preprocessed mine too.
I don't mean to scare you (just prepare you for the worst) --- you might want to talk to some desi consultants and make an arrangement that in case the RFE is employment verification, they give you pay stubs from the time you were laid off. As you can see from my RFE, you might need to show your recent paystubs and employment verification. Yes, it will be a financial loss for you, but without these I believe your case can get rejected (gurus correct me if I'm wrong!).
Again I am is just hypothesizing your situation, your case might be entirely different. This is 'just in case'.....
hot Pissed That Natalie Nunn
makemygc
07-05 12:29 PM
I just contributed my first $100.00. Go IV!
Thanks map_boiler.
Today, two of my firends who were stuck in BEC joined IV and contributed. At last I was able to convince them that IV is for all who are suffering due to immigration.
Thanks map_boiler.
Today, two of my firends who were stuck in BEC joined IV and contributed. At last I was able to convince them that IV is for all who are suffering due to immigration.
more...
house Please have a wonderfuly blessed weekend Natalie Nunn Oh don t forget
yabayaba
08-11 02:57 PM
Please email to Compete America (info@competeamerica.org) see if they can help us at this point.
Just say number of years waiting for green card under EB3 category.
They know the issue very well..All they need is some momentum....
Search | CompeteAmerica (http://www.competeamerica.org/search/node/india%20EB%E2%80%903)
It would be better to run a campaign thro IV, need input from the IV leadership.
Just say number of years waiting for green card under EB3 category.
They know the issue very well..All they need is some momentum....
Search | CompeteAmerica (http://www.competeamerica.org/search/node/india%20EB%E2%80%903)
It would be better to run a campaign thro IV, need input from the IV leadership.
tattoo Natalie Nunn And Her Chin
jayleno
09-05 02:39 PM
I can understand why an individual fake resonably to get a job, though I do not support it. I dont understand these stupid companies hiring the desperate students and doing all these stuff in the name of business. I dont know how people who have those companies do all this stuff just for extra money and sleep peacefully at night.
I can put 100 arguments in support of MS students graduating and trying to get into a new job. Similarly you can come up with 100 other arguments that they are all non ethical and lies.
It is more costly for companies big and small to hire a new grad, train and eventually have him work on the business and that process is carried only by a minute percentage of all the companies that do business and also they look at elite schools.
Every MS student has to undergo a vigorous financial crisis situation there by the time they graduate they are left with no choice other than accepting what ever comes there way, at the earliest.
They don't have the liberty financially as well as law wise to sit and try for 1 year to get into a full time job. Given those kind of situations it is nothing wrong in projecting themselves to certain years of experience.
At the same, contracting, consulting is all about this. When no party likes, they can always let go.
-the116
I can put 100 arguments in support of MS students graduating and trying to get into a new job. Similarly you can come up with 100 other arguments that they are all non ethical and lies.
It is more costly for companies big and small to hire a new grad, train and eventually have him work on the business and that process is carried only by a minute percentage of all the companies that do business and also they look at elite schools.
Every MS student has to undergo a vigorous financial crisis situation there by the time they graduate they are left with no choice other than accepting what ever comes there way, at the earliest.
They don't have the liberty financially as well as law wise to sit and try for 1 year to get into a full time job. Given those kind of situations it is nothing wrong in projecting themselves to certain years of experience.
At the same, contracting, consulting is all about this. When no party likes, they can always let go.
-the116
more...
pictures Natalie Nunn remained silent
aroranuj
10-16 06:50 PM
Notarized & mailed my FOIA letter today...
dresses Lil Kim and Natalie Nunn At
k94
11-22 02:41 PM
It is my understanding that when applying for a GC, until you have your LC approved (and possibly I-140), you cannot change your title or salary, beyond what was submitted in the LC application. Technically, the DOL is verifying a 'job' (and the salary related to that job), so in theory, that can't change, not because the employer doesn't want to, but because the law doesn't allow it.
Now, an employer may unofficially get around this (by increasing your bonus payout, or giving you stock, or changing the internal level of your job), but these are 'handouts' that you may get if your employer is fair.
With the backlogs that are in effect for pre-PERM LC approvals, employees can go from 1-3 years without a salary or promotion/job title change, and that is the law! Go figure.
Now, an employer may unofficially get around this (by increasing your bonus payout, or giving you stock, or changing the internal level of your job), but these are 'handouts' that you may get if your employer is fair.
With the backlogs that are in effect for pre-PERM LC approvals, employees can go from 1-3 years without a salary or promotion/job title change, and that is the law! Go figure.
more...
makeup Natalie Nunn @ MANSION
amitjoey
01-18 11:21 AM
Okay here we go. Here is a goal of having 1000 members on $20 monthly recurring contributions. 1000-100 = Need 900 members. Come on guys. Lets start deducting from this number. if you sign up for minimum $20 recurring, please post and say you did. Then deduct from 900
girlfriend bad mar Natalie+nunn
pappu
08-03 01:01 PM
if there is diff emails with diff content it will be better. it will show diversity. even though we all will say the same thing.
on second thoughts i feel lou dobbs is unlikely to change his opinion even if 1K people send him mails. send it anyways to all other cnn anchors so that IV can get some coverage on cnn.
on second thoughts i feel lou dobbs is unlikely to change his opinion even if 1K people send him mails. send it anyways to all other cnn anchors so that IV can get some coverage on cnn.
hairstyles NATALIE NUNN HAS A SEX TAPE …
kutra
03-03 06:51 PM
Some of the data can be obtained from here
http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/pdf/PERM_Data_FY07_Announcement.pdf
of course it is not complete but gives a good glimpse.
Now, you show me your 10 billion dollars :)
My 10 billion dollars can be found here: http://www.prankplace.com/funnymoney.htm :D
BTW, your PDF is data for people who filed under PERM in 2007, and not for the audience you are including in your letter.
Anyway, I am going to stop playing devil's advocate and let you manage this. Just make sure you don't invite unnecessary attention by asking outlets to come peeking here.
http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/pdf/PERM_Data_FY07_Announcement.pdf
of course it is not complete but gives a good glimpse.
Now, you show me your 10 billion dollars :)
My 10 billion dollars can be found here: http://www.prankplace.com/funnymoney.htm :D
BTW, your PDF is data for people who filed under PERM in 2007, and not for the audience you are including in your letter.
Anyway, I am going to stop playing devil's advocate and let you manage this. Just make sure you don't invite unnecessary attention by asking outlets to come peeking here.
andycool
03-16 02:04 PM
141,020 visa numbers used in FY2009
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV.pdf
Look at the last page.
The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is 140,000. So the usage was actually more.
__________________
Not a legal advice.
Hello Desi,
"Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by documentarily qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation, that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may require the establishment of an earlier cut-off date than that which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
Furthermore, Section 202(a)(2) reads, �2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. Subject to paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed seven percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or two percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.� The seven percent per-country limit specified in INA 202(a)(2) is considered to be for both Family-sponsored and Employment-based numbers combined.
Allocation of visa numbers under Section 202(e) is accomplished as follows:
1. If based on historical patterns or current demand it appears that during a fiscal year number use by aliens chargeable to a particular country will exceed the per-country numerical limit for both the Family and Employment preferences combined, that country would be considered oversubscribed. Both the Family and Employment preferences would be subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1).
2. Sometimes during a fiscal year it may become apparent that because of a lack of demand in the Family preferences, number use by aliens chargeable to an oversubscribed country will be well within the per-country numerical limit. In such case the excess Family numbers would be made available to the Employment preferences subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1). Each of the first three Employment categories would receive 28.6% of the excess numbers, and each of the Fourth and Fifth preference categories 7.1%. (Fall-across would likewise apply if an oversubscribed country lacked sufficient demand in the Employment preferences but had excess demand in the Family preferences.)
If a foreign state other than an oversubscribed country has little Family preference demand but considerable Employment preference demand, the otherwise unused Family numbers fall across to Employment (and vice versa) for purposes of that foreign state�s annual numerical limit. For example, in FY-2009 South Korea used a grand total of 15,899 Family and Employment preference numbers, of which 1,688 were Family numbers and 14,211 were Employment numbers. This grand total was well within the FY-2009 per-country numerical limit of 25,620 Family and Employment numbers combined, so South Korea was not oversubscribed. The unused Family numbers were distributed within the Employment categories, allowing South Korea to be considerably over the 9,800 Employment limit which would have been in effect had it been an oversubscribed country.
This is from April Visa Bulletin , according to this S korea got 14,211 visas from FB ( spill over from FB - EB) then dont you think the total EB visas issued in 2009 should be around 150000 instead of 141000....
I am little confused...
your comment will be greatly appreciated ;)
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV.pdf
Look at the last page.
The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is 140,000. So the usage was actually more.
__________________
Not a legal advice.
Hello Desi,
"Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by documentarily qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation, that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may require the establishment of an earlier cut-off date than that which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
Furthermore, Section 202(a)(2) reads, �2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. Subject to paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed seven percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or two percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.� The seven percent per-country limit specified in INA 202(a)(2) is considered to be for both Family-sponsored and Employment-based numbers combined.
Allocation of visa numbers under Section 202(e) is accomplished as follows:
1. If based on historical patterns or current demand it appears that during a fiscal year number use by aliens chargeable to a particular country will exceed the per-country numerical limit for both the Family and Employment preferences combined, that country would be considered oversubscribed. Both the Family and Employment preferences would be subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1).
2. Sometimes during a fiscal year it may become apparent that because of a lack of demand in the Family preferences, number use by aliens chargeable to an oversubscribed country will be well within the per-country numerical limit. In such case the excess Family numbers would be made available to the Employment preferences subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1). Each of the first three Employment categories would receive 28.6% of the excess numbers, and each of the Fourth and Fifth preference categories 7.1%. (Fall-across would likewise apply if an oversubscribed country lacked sufficient demand in the Employment preferences but had excess demand in the Family preferences.)
If a foreign state other than an oversubscribed country has little Family preference demand but considerable Employment preference demand, the otherwise unused Family numbers fall across to Employment (and vice versa) for purposes of that foreign state�s annual numerical limit. For example, in FY-2009 South Korea used a grand total of 15,899 Family and Employment preference numbers, of which 1,688 were Family numbers and 14,211 were Employment numbers. This grand total was well within the FY-2009 per-country numerical limit of 25,620 Family and Employment numbers combined, so South Korea was not oversubscribed. The unused Family numbers were distributed within the Employment categories, allowing South Korea to be considerably over the 9,800 Employment limit which would have been in effect had it been an oversubscribed country.
This is from April Visa Bulletin , according to this S korea got 14,211 visas from FB ( spill over from FB - EB) then dont you think the total EB visas issued in 2009 should be around 150000 instead of 141000....
I am little confused...
your comment will be greatly appreciated ;)
alterego
08-15 10:08 PM
Doubt that it will go back from here. There will be new visa numbers available in Oct 07. So it should only move forward IMO.
That is because the quota system does not apply as well in the 4th quarter of each year. Thats the explanation previously given. EB India has to hope for the end of each fiscal year for some magic to happen.
EB ROW, please be patient it will be all yours after Oct. 2007 for the next 9 months.:)
Those EB India stuck in 485.................it is either now or next year summer. If you don't see yours by Sep't, unless you have a PD pre go into hibernation and wake up in June or July 2008, you might find better luck at that time.
That is because the quota system does not apply as well in the 4th quarter of each year. Thats the explanation previously given. EB India has to hope for the end of each fiscal year for some magic to happen.
EB ROW, please be patient it will be all yours after Oct. 2007 for the next 9 months.:)
Those EB India stuck in 485.................it is either now or next year summer. If you don't see yours by Sep't, unless you have a PD pre go into hibernation and wake up in June or July 2008, you might find better luck at that time.
