gjoe
08-07 10:12 AM
I guess everybody should support Rolling and Sunny because this initative will create an opening for all other immigration issues.
Everyone waiting for years to get their GC has a real reason to think why USCIS didn't do their job right.
I would say if Sunny and Rolling stone really file a lawsuit, it is like they turning the spotlight on USCIS and from there the rest us can work to bring more light to the bigger issues with USCIS
Everyone waiting for years to get their GC has a real reason to think why USCIS didn't do their job right.
I would say if Sunny and Rolling stone really file a lawsuit, it is like they turning the spotlight on USCIS and from there the rest us can work to bring more light to the bigger issues with USCIS
wallpaper Lady Gaga#39;s forthcoming single
wellwishergc
07-10 10:29 AM
If revenue from increased fee structure starting July 31 is the reason for making visas unavilable in July, I have a strong feeling that the visas may become current for all categories in the Aug Bulletin.
This is not a NEWS or RUMOR making rounds anywhere. This is a mere speculation on my part. Let's hope for the best but DO NOT get your hopes unrealistically high.
Cheers!
This is not a NEWS or RUMOR making rounds anywhere. This is a mere speculation on my part. Let's hope for the best but DO NOT get your hopes unrealistically high.
Cheers!
vbkris77
09-23 07:54 PM
I think we are assuming that this will continue to be the case through Oct 2010. What if DOL changes policies with PERM approval tomorrow or the economy starts improving by March? EB2 ROW is current and there will be quite a few PERM's from them which will be adjusted immediately. We'll have to wait till the Sep results are in and the data is adjusted with 2005 EB2 numbers. Hopefully all < 2005 should be taken care of for EB2.
Source OH law firm immigration-law.com
09/23/2009: Official PERM Labor Certification Application Processing Times as of 09/30/2009
U.S. Department of Labor, Office of Foreign Labor Certification has just released the current processing time of permanent labor certification applications as of the end of this month. The date represents the date the applications were first filed, which is also called priority date.
Final Reviews (Clean Cut Cases): December 2008
Audit Cases: October 2007
Standard Appeal Cases: August 2007
Gov't Error Appeal Cases: Current
The last four-month processing times confirm that even though its FY 2010 (10/01/2009-09/30/2011) budget proposal estimated that the PERM processing times would be nine (9) months, actually the nine-month processing time started in the second-half of FY 2009. Accordingly, the employers hiring permanent foreign workers must understand that at least for the next one year, processing times of PERM applications will not improve and should learn to live with it and plan accordingly in their recruitment and hiring practices. Foreign workers should also take the delayed processing times of permanent labor certification application in their journeys in nonimmigrant status, on top of the State Department's predicted visa number problems coming year.
Source OH law firm immigration-law.com
09/23/2009: Official PERM Labor Certification Application Processing Times as of 09/30/2009
U.S. Department of Labor, Office of Foreign Labor Certification has just released the current processing time of permanent labor certification applications as of the end of this month. The date represents the date the applications were first filed, which is also called priority date.
Final Reviews (Clean Cut Cases): December 2008
Audit Cases: October 2007
Standard Appeal Cases: August 2007
Gov't Error Appeal Cases: Current
The last four-month processing times confirm that even though its FY 2010 (10/01/2009-09/30/2011) budget proposal estimated that the PERM processing times would be nine (9) months, actually the nine-month processing time started in the second-half of FY 2009. Accordingly, the employers hiring permanent foreign workers must understand that at least for the next one year, processing times of PERM applications will not improve and should learn to live with it and plan accordingly in their recruitment and hiring practices. Foreign workers should also take the delayed processing times of permanent labor certification application in their journeys in nonimmigrant status, on top of the State Department's predicted visa number problems coming year.
2011 lady gaga judas hairstyles.
wc_user
10-13 04:25 PM
yes. I did. I have sent them an e-mail mentioning the delay.
more...
jags_e
07-09 08:11 PM
There is achance that the TV hosts may take us seriously.
Also, If we believe in Gandhian way, we shouldn't care...
No publicity is bad publicity... and I doubt the talk show hosts would poke fun at us for this creative form of protest.
jazz
Also, If we believe in Gandhian way, we shouldn't care...
No publicity is bad publicity... and I doubt the talk show hosts would poke fun at us for this creative form of protest.
jazz
karl65
08-11 12:35 PM
I called today to help a friend who has been stuck in namecheck status for almost a year and a half and spoke to an immigration officer who calmly explained to me that the name check isn't done only nationally but also "internationally" meaning, not only do they do a background check on you in the US, they also look you up in your country of origin. In all my time reading about this I have never heard her version before, so I had assumed the namecheck was only done at the national level. No wonder it's taking so long, with the FBI waiting for a response from those countries. :(
Unfortunately it is true. I have read that this check is done especially for people whose country is consider in risk. For example I am from Peru. My country has drug traffic problems, so my name must be checked with the Peruvian police records too.
That�s life!!!!!!
Unfortunately it is true. I have read that this check is done especially for people whose country is consider in risk. For example I am from Peru. My country has drug traffic problems, so my name must be checked with the Peruvian police records too.
That�s life!!!!!!
more...
aadimanav
01-03 12:56 AM
Part 2 continued....
USCIS delays have become so excessive in this arena that many foreign nationals have sought relief in federal court. The Administrative Procedure Act of 1946 (APA), which governs federal agency actions and decisions, requires that an agency resolve a matter presented to it within a "reasonable" time frame. See 8 U.S.C. 555(b). Using the APA, foreign nationals have argued that waiting for two or more years for a decision on an immigration application is "unreasonable" under the statute. The cases are divided, but a majority of courts have agreed that making a foreign national wait years and years just for a decision on his or her application is unreasonable. As a result, many judges have ordered the FBI and USCIS to complete pending name check cases within 60 or 90 days where a foreign national has been waiting for two or more years. Some judges have noted that security concerns are not to be taken lightly, but this only reinforces the fact that such issues should be resolved in a matter of weeks as opposed to years.
The success or failure of litigation in this arena ultimately turns on the court's reading of a jurisdiction-stripping provision embedded in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), as amended by the Real ID Act of 2005. The INA precludes judicial review of any "decision or action" of the USCIS that is "specified [under INA] to be in the discretion" of the USCIS. See 8 U.S.C. 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii). In defending challenges to delayed applications, the U.S. Attorney's office has argued that the adjudication of a green card application, including the pace of adjudication, is committed to the sole discretion of the USCIS, because the INA specifies that a decision to approve or deny a green card application is within the discretion of the USCIS. See 8 U.S.C. 1255(a).
None of the circuit courts have ruled on this issue, but the relationship between USCIS delay and the role of the judiciary has become a "national judicial debate" at the district court level. See Saleem v. Keisler , 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 80044 (W.D. Wis. Oct. 26, 2007). Some courts have bought the government's argument, holding that a discretionary "action" includes every interim action taken along the way leading up to an ultimate decision on an application. See Safadi v. Howard , 466 F.Supp. 2d 696, 699 (E.D. Vir. 2006). Under this theory, a stalled name check is simply action along the way to a final decision. The majority of courts have rejected this reading of the statute, holding that USCIS' discretion only applies to the ultimate decision on an application, not the pace of its adjudication. As one court stated, "it would require Orwellian twisting of the word ["action"] to conclude that it means a failure to adjudicate." Saleem v. Keisler, supra. Similarly, U.S. District Judge Stewart Dalzell recognized that the INA grants discretion to the USCIS to grant or deny a green card application, but "national security does not require that it also have absolute discretion to delay such an application to Dickensian lengths." Cao v. Upchurch , 496 F.Supp. 2d 569, 574 (E.D. Pa 2007). Put simply, "there is a difference between the [USCIS'] discretion over how to resolve an application and the [USCIS'] discretion over whether it resolves an application." Singh v. Still , 470 F. Supp. 2d 1064, 1068 (N.D. Cal. 2007).
The U.S. Attorney's office has also argued that the USCIS is not required to make a decision on green card or naturalization applications since the INA does not specify a time frame for the agency's decision. See Assadzadeh v. Mueller , 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 80915 (E.D. Pa. Oct. 31, 2007). The government's argument is based on Norton v. So. Utah Wilderness Alliance , 542 U.S. 55 (2004), where the U.S. Supreme Court held that a plaintiff can succeed in compelling an agency to act under the APA if and only if the action sought to be compelled is a "discrete action" that the agency is "legally required" to take. Under the government's theory, the USCIS cannot be compelled to act where its organic statute fails to require it to make a decision. But, under Norton , an agency's regulation with the force of law can create a legal duty. Arguably, the USCIS is legally required to act on applications presented to it, as its own regulations provide that it inform applicants of its decisions. See 8 C.F.R. 245.2(a)(5)(i) (green card applications); 8 C.F.R. 316.14(b)(1) (naturalization applications). Most judges in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania appear to accept this argument. For example, in Kaplan v. Chertoff , 481 F. Supp. 2d 370, 399 (E.D. Pa. 2007), Judge Eduardo Robreno held that the USCIS has a duty to adjudicate green card and naturalization applications, based, in part, on the agency's own regulations.
Once a court determines that its jurisdiction is not stripped under the INA, it usually faces little difficulty finding a cause of action under the APA. Of course, determining whether an agency has acted unreasonably is a fact-intensive inquiry, but the government's position does not look promising where the USCIS has failed to perform three distinct background checks for two or more years without any indication of special circumstances. See, e.g., Saleem v. Keisler, supra . The government has argued that flagging agency resources are to blame, but many courts find little sympathy for such posturing. In addressing the issue of agency resources, one court stated that the USCIS should take its complaints up with Congress. See Liang v. Attorney General , 07-cv-2349-CW (N.D. Cal. Oct. 30, 2007). "The executive branch must decide for itself how best to meet its statutory duties; this Court can only decide whether or not those duties have been met." Id . Even factoring in flagging appropriations, the court held that a two-and-a-half-year delay is unreasonable as a matter of law. Id .
With more than 340,000 cases in the name check backlog, it is not clear when some foreign nationals will ever have their cases resolved at the agency level. At least with the advantageous decisions handed down from the federal district courts, foreign nationals have the hope of going into court to request an expeditious resolution to their name checks. In the majority of situations, it appears that litigation is the only option, but at least an option exists.
Please email the author at gforney@wolfblock.com with questions about this article.
USCIS delays have become so excessive in this arena that many foreign nationals have sought relief in federal court. The Administrative Procedure Act of 1946 (APA), which governs federal agency actions and decisions, requires that an agency resolve a matter presented to it within a "reasonable" time frame. See 8 U.S.C. 555(b). Using the APA, foreign nationals have argued that waiting for two or more years for a decision on an immigration application is "unreasonable" under the statute. The cases are divided, but a majority of courts have agreed that making a foreign national wait years and years just for a decision on his or her application is unreasonable. As a result, many judges have ordered the FBI and USCIS to complete pending name check cases within 60 or 90 days where a foreign national has been waiting for two or more years. Some judges have noted that security concerns are not to be taken lightly, but this only reinforces the fact that such issues should be resolved in a matter of weeks as opposed to years.
The success or failure of litigation in this arena ultimately turns on the court's reading of a jurisdiction-stripping provision embedded in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), as amended by the Real ID Act of 2005. The INA precludes judicial review of any "decision or action" of the USCIS that is "specified [under INA] to be in the discretion" of the USCIS. See 8 U.S.C. 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii). In defending challenges to delayed applications, the U.S. Attorney's office has argued that the adjudication of a green card application, including the pace of adjudication, is committed to the sole discretion of the USCIS, because the INA specifies that a decision to approve or deny a green card application is within the discretion of the USCIS. See 8 U.S.C. 1255(a).
None of the circuit courts have ruled on this issue, but the relationship between USCIS delay and the role of the judiciary has become a "national judicial debate" at the district court level. See Saleem v. Keisler , 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 80044 (W.D. Wis. Oct. 26, 2007). Some courts have bought the government's argument, holding that a discretionary "action" includes every interim action taken along the way leading up to an ultimate decision on an application. See Safadi v. Howard , 466 F.Supp. 2d 696, 699 (E.D. Vir. 2006). Under this theory, a stalled name check is simply action along the way to a final decision. The majority of courts have rejected this reading of the statute, holding that USCIS' discretion only applies to the ultimate decision on an application, not the pace of its adjudication. As one court stated, "it would require Orwellian twisting of the word ["action"] to conclude that it means a failure to adjudicate." Saleem v. Keisler, supra. Similarly, U.S. District Judge Stewart Dalzell recognized that the INA grants discretion to the USCIS to grant or deny a green card application, but "national security does not require that it also have absolute discretion to delay such an application to Dickensian lengths." Cao v. Upchurch , 496 F.Supp. 2d 569, 574 (E.D. Pa 2007). Put simply, "there is a difference between the [USCIS'] discretion over how to resolve an application and the [USCIS'] discretion over whether it resolves an application." Singh v. Still , 470 F. Supp. 2d 1064, 1068 (N.D. Cal. 2007).
The U.S. Attorney's office has also argued that the USCIS is not required to make a decision on green card or naturalization applications since the INA does not specify a time frame for the agency's decision. See Assadzadeh v. Mueller , 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 80915 (E.D. Pa. Oct. 31, 2007). The government's argument is based on Norton v. So. Utah Wilderness Alliance , 542 U.S. 55 (2004), where the U.S. Supreme Court held that a plaintiff can succeed in compelling an agency to act under the APA if and only if the action sought to be compelled is a "discrete action" that the agency is "legally required" to take. Under the government's theory, the USCIS cannot be compelled to act where its organic statute fails to require it to make a decision. But, under Norton , an agency's regulation with the force of law can create a legal duty. Arguably, the USCIS is legally required to act on applications presented to it, as its own regulations provide that it inform applicants of its decisions. See 8 C.F.R. 245.2(a)(5)(i) (green card applications); 8 C.F.R. 316.14(b)(1) (naturalization applications). Most judges in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania appear to accept this argument. For example, in Kaplan v. Chertoff , 481 F. Supp. 2d 370, 399 (E.D. Pa. 2007), Judge Eduardo Robreno held that the USCIS has a duty to adjudicate green card and naturalization applications, based, in part, on the agency's own regulations.
Once a court determines that its jurisdiction is not stripped under the INA, it usually faces little difficulty finding a cause of action under the APA. Of course, determining whether an agency has acted unreasonably is a fact-intensive inquiry, but the government's position does not look promising where the USCIS has failed to perform three distinct background checks for two or more years without any indication of special circumstances. See, e.g., Saleem v. Keisler, supra . The government has argued that flagging agency resources are to blame, but many courts find little sympathy for such posturing. In addressing the issue of agency resources, one court stated that the USCIS should take its complaints up with Congress. See Liang v. Attorney General , 07-cv-2349-CW (N.D. Cal. Oct. 30, 2007). "The executive branch must decide for itself how best to meet its statutory duties; this Court can only decide whether or not those duties have been met." Id . Even factoring in flagging appropriations, the court held that a two-and-a-half-year delay is unreasonable as a matter of law. Id .
With more than 340,000 cases in the name check backlog, it is not clear when some foreign nationals will ever have their cases resolved at the agency level. At least with the advantageous decisions handed down from the federal district courts, foreign nationals have the hope of going into court to request an expeditious resolution to their name checks. In the majority of situations, it appears that litigation is the only option, but at least an option exists.
Please email the author at gforney@wolfblock.com with questions about this article.
2010 Judaas Judas! GAGA
Jitamitra
01-10 10:32 AM
Just a thought. I think something is holding back folks to write up these letters directly to president. Do you guys think it's a good idea just to have these letters mailed to IV and then pass it along to white house administration when IV meets them.
more...
gc4me
01-09 10:13 AM
I think we should not mention the bellow point in the letter which we are going send to the president.
Implement the existing interim rule to allow issuance of multi-year Employment Authorization Documents (EAD) and Advance Parole.
According to Mr. Aytes, USCIS is already working on it. Why to mention it in the letter?
That will rather give anti-skill-immigration crying babies one more thing to cry about.
Now what? Under the new filing fee schedule which took effect after July 29, 2007, issuance of EAD and Advance Parole for the post August 27, 2007 is "free, free, free" for the I-485 filers. Allegedly, the cost is incorporated in the I-485 filing fee of $1,020. The new regulation uses the term of "fee waiver" for EAD and Advance Parole for these I-485 filers. Now, you guessed it! Lo and Behold, the business calculation on EAD and Advance Parole has reversed. The DHS will lose a huge money by issuing single-year EAD and a separate Advance Prole document on a yearly basis over and over since they are free and they will have to keep producing it at no charge every year, which creates a huge workloads consuming its huge human resources and other production costs. This is particularly unacceptable to the agency under the predicted State Department Visa Bulletin for FY 2008 and in the future. Now, from the business standpoint, the DHS may make a huge money by issuing a multi-year EAD which will also function as a travel document. Ahah! No wonder why they are finally coming forward revealing their hidden agenda behind the new fee rule-making and EAD/Advance Parole reform business. Reportedly, Mr. Aytes of USCIS disclosed in a New York AILA conference that the USCIS was currently working on a single multi-year EAD card that will also replace the Advance Parole document. What a smart calculation it was in the new fee rule-making action
Implement the existing interim rule to allow issuance of multi-year Employment Authorization Documents (EAD) and Advance Parole.
According to Mr. Aytes, USCIS is already working on it. Why to mention it in the letter?
That will rather give anti-skill-immigration crying babies one more thing to cry about.
Now what? Under the new filing fee schedule which took effect after July 29, 2007, issuance of EAD and Advance Parole for the post August 27, 2007 is "free, free, free" for the I-485 filers. Allegedly, the cost is incorporated in the I-485 filing fee of $1,020. The new regulation uses the term of "fee waiver" for EAD and Advance Parole for these I-485 filers. Now, you guessed it! Lo and Behold, the business calculation on EAD and Advance Parole has reversed. The DHS will lose a huge money by issuing single-year EAD and a separate Advance Prole document on a yearly basis over and over since they are free and they will have to keep producing it at no charge every year, which creates a huge workloads consuming its huge human resources and other production costs. This is particularly unacceptable to the agency under the predicted State Department Visa Bulletin for FY 2008 and in the future. Now, from the business standpoint, the DHS may make a huge money by issuing a multi-year EAD which will also function as a travel document. Ahah! No wonder why they are finally coming forward revealing their hidden agenda behind the new fee rule-making and EAD/Advance Parole reform business. Reportedly, Mr. Aytes of USCIS disclosed in a New York AILA conference that the USCIS was currently working on a single multi-year EAD card that will also replace the Advance Parole document. What a smart calculation it was in the new fee rule-making action
hair YouTube - Lady Gaga - Judas-3
singhv_1980
02-07 01:58 AM
hello casinoroyal, singhv, stuckhere, bepositive..EVERYBODY..need help..
this is the email came from my lawyer today..for the inquiry they did with the consulate regarding my visa.
Hi Shweta,
We understand how frustrating this is for you. We received a response to our inquiry with the consulate. It seems the application is being kept pending for additional administrative processing. The stated reason for the review falls within the law under Section 221(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. Under these circumstances, we typically see that the government issues a notice to the applicant wherein additional information is often requested. Kindly advise if you have received any notification from the consulate on this issue.
Best regards,
IS ADMIN PROC DIFFERENT FROM ADD ADMIN PROC ???
also the same day i called DOS and they told me case was approved already in jan..so that means that now more processing needs to be done ??
ADVICE ??
I am sorry and can understand how frustrating this would be for you. But you keep your spirits high. Can you ask your lawyer to contact DOS himself and inquire about your case? Once he has some information, he can communicate with the consulate here in India directly. I am not sure if you can do much here. I am wondering if there is anyway for you to contact VO instead of VFS ppl.
But importantly dont get discouraged, you will sail through.
this is the email came from my lawyer today..for the inquiry they did with the consulate regarding my visa.
Hi Shweta,
We understand how frustrating this is for you. We received a response to our inquiry with the consulate. It seems the application is being kept pending for additional administrative processing. The stated reason for the review falls within the law under Section 221(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. Under these circumstances, we typically see that the government issues a notice to the applicant wherein additional information is often requested. Kindly advise if you have received any notification from the consulate on this issue.
Best regards,
IS ADMIN PROC DIFFERENT FROM ADD ADMIN PROC ???
also the same day i called DOS and they told me case was approved already in jan..so that means that now more processing needs to be done ??
ADVICE ??
I am sorry and can understand how frustrating this would be for you. But you keep your spirits high. Can you ask your lawyer to contact DOS himself and inquire about your case? Once he has some information, he can communicate with the consulate here in India directly. I am not sure if you can do much here. I am wondering if there is anyway for you to contact VO instead of VFS ppl.
But importantly dont get discouraged, you will sail through.
more...
bayarea07
09-11 08:27 PM
Called Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.)202- 225-5431 and left a VM
hot Lady Gaga Judas
sai
12-31 07:57 AM
What are the bills that are comming up in FEB 2006 ?
Can any one post the details please...
Can any one post the details please...
more...
house wallpaper Lady Gaga Judas
chanduv23
07-09 08:48 PM
Hello all
I am a silent visitor of this website.
Just my 2 cents... Don't think USA is like India where you can do something forcefully. Why don't you guys understand the real problem of USCIS.
Do you think that by sending flower to USCIS will force them to make EB2/EB3 current for 2005/2006/2007 guys??
Please try to understand their problem.
Also India is the great. Why don't you guys just think that India is your home country where you are born and brought up. Why you people can't just wait and watch?? If nothing happens to the so called GC, then why don't you think to pack up and go back to India???????
My sincere request, please don't do rally, you might be arrested......you never know what they can do..... Don't you think that, it is better to go back to India rather than being embarrassed here in US???
Isn't it a shame on us to go for Rally to get GC?????:D
Just think that you will get it when time comes, otherwise pack up.
Please don't take much tension as life is very short. I am assuring you all, nothing will happen with law suit and flower campaign.Don't irritate USCIS by doing all this please.
EB2 India
PD-2005-May
I140 approved-Sept 2006
Nice joke - comedy
I am a silent visitor of this website.
Just my 2 cents... Don't think USA is like India where you can do something forcefully. Why don't you guys understand the real problem of USCIS.
Do you think that by sending flower to USCIS will force them to make EB2/EB3 current for 2005/2006/2007 guys??
Please try to understand their problem.
Also India is the great. Why don't you guys just think that India is your home country where you are born and brought up. Why you people can't just wait and watch?? If nothing happens to the so called GC, then why don't you think to pack up and go back to India???????
My sincere request, please don't do rally, you might be arrested......you never know what they can do..... Don't you think that, it is better to go back to India rather than being embarrassed here in US???
Isn't it a shame on us to go for Rally to get GC?????:D
Just think that you will get it when time comes, otherwise pack up.
Please don't take much tension as life is very short. I am assuring you all, nothing will happen with law suit and flower campaign.Don't irritate USCIS by doing all this please.
EB2 India
PD-2005-May
I140 approved-Sept 2006
Nice joke - comedy
tattoo “Judas,” Latest from Lady Gaga
leo2606
07-31 07:19 PM
What happens if we type incorrect A# on spouse application, are they going to send RFE or case will be denied?
more...
pictures LADY GAGA – JUDAS!
kshitijnt
05-09 10:29 PM
Let us talk about the "skills" introduced by H1/L1/offshore companies
a) One guy takes the phone interview for 15 other guys with "skills" they preted to have
b) Lying on the resume with "skills" that you don't have, so that you can learn the "skill" at the expense of the client
c) "Skill" in Violating B1 visa laws and sending people on B1 to do actual work to client
d) "Skill" in violating L1 law which is used to drive down the wages by 20-30%
e) "Skill" demonstrated by indian offshorers to enter into a contract with a large corporation where they will provide warm bodies in exchange for a very low billing rate. Client wouldn't have any ability to interview the incoming cosultant, which means the offshorer employee is learning at the expense of the foolish client. Then that will be touted as "savings".
f) "Skill" of fly-by-night operators to shave off 70% of the billing rate through a 6-level pyramid of contracting companies
Should I add to this list of "skills" further?
Hey Hunter, were you born in this world with C++ knowledge baby? I have said to some of my managers and also clients that I was interested in the job because I wanted to ramp up skills in that area and they were more than willing to give me that job.
And let me guess, you are someone who hates Indians, isnt it, so why dont you spend some time upgrading your skills , will help you in your own personal skills and career? Rather than waste time on this board.
a) One guy takes the phone interview for 15 other guys with "skills" they preted to have
b) Lying on the resume with "skills" that you don't have, so that you can learn the "skill" at the expense of the client
c) "Skill" in Violating B1 visa laws and sending people on B1 to do actual work to client
d) "Skill" in violating L1 law which is used to drive down the wages by 20-30%
e) "Skill" demonstrated by indian offshorers to enter into a contract with a large corporation where they will provide warm bodies in exchange for a very low billing rate. Client wouldn't have any ability to interview the incoming cosultant, which means the offshorer employee is learning at the expense of the foolish client. Then that will be touted as "savings".
f) "Skill" of fly-by-night operators to shave off 70% of the billing rate through a 6-level pyramid of contracting companies
Should I add to this list of "skills" further?
Hey Hunter, were you born in this world with C++ knowledge baby? I have said to some of my managers and also clients that I was interested in the job because I wanted to ramp up skills in that area and they were more than willing to give me that job.
And let me guess, you are someone who hates Indians, isnt it, so why dont you spend some time upgrading your skills , will help you in your own personal skills and career? Rather than waste time on this board.
dresses Lady Gaga - Judas
eager_immi
07-18 01:58 PM
Can we all take a month from his list of trancscripts and read through his transcripts and see which one has the H1B mistatement. I think he said this sometime in 2005 or 2006 we only need 24 participants.
'http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/ldt.html
'http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/ldt.html
more...
makeup hot Lady GaGa JUDAS Official
apb
10-06 01:14 PM
Great to hear your wife's approval and hope she is doing fine now, after the emergency.
Appreciate your helpful attitude towards others who are struggling with USCIS process.
After the infopass for me and my wife, we had multiple soft/hard luds and status changed to case moved to local office.
Received mail that we would be called for interview.
Wish they get this fast when the dates are current.
Appreciate your helpful attitude towards others who are struggling with USCIS process.
After the infopass for me and my wife, we had multiple soft/hard luds and status changed to case moved to local office.
Received mail that we would be called for interview.
Wish they get this fast when the dates are current.
girlfriend india, Lady
patiently_waiting
09-25 07:01 PM
Click-2-Call allows you to call only "the vonage number" from PC.It makes the vonage number to ring and connect to the destination.
any settings need to be updated in vonage account for making the remote number to ring and connect to the destination ?
Thanks
any settings need to be updated in vonage account for making the remote number to ring and connect to the destination ?
Thanks
hairstyles lady-gaga-judas-1
nk2006
09-16 09:22 AM
House Judiciary Committee Schedules Continued Mark-Up of H.R. 5882 and Others
Its good that its rescheduled. We again have a chance.
I called everyone in the list once - will do it again with my wife today/tomorrow. Please everyone do it and encourage others (your family members / friends/ etc) to call - it wont take much of our time can impact our future in a big way.
Its good that its rescheduled. We again have a chance.
I called everyone in the list once - will do it again with my wife today/tomorrow. Please everyone do it and encourage others (your family members / friends/ etc) to call - it wont take much of our time can impact our future in a big way.
saileshdude
09-12 02:36 PM
I felt the same too since I am also in the middle of H-1B transfer and my PD is current. But I spoke to my new employer's attorney and he mentioned that they are two seperate processes and should not delay things. In most cases they are considered seperate. There is always a chance. But that is rare. Even I felt that using EAD would have been better but my EAD expired and the new company decided to do H1. So things started moving with H1 and my PD became current.
I saw LUD on my previous H1. So don't know what's going on.
Its just that i think if IO see's that there is an H1 transfer application pending, he may delay the AOS with the current sponsor. I am just mentally preparing myself, havent seen any change in online status.
Looking back, it might have been better to just go with EAD, that way USCIS wouldnt even know I am changing jobs then :D
Hindsight is alwas 20/20
I saw LUD on my previous H1. So don't know what's going on.
Its just that i think if IO see's that there is an H1 transfer application pending, he may delay the AOS with the current sponsor. I am just mentally preparing myself, havent seen any change in online status.
Looking back, it might have been better to just go with EAD, that way USCIS wouldnt even know I am changing jobs then :D
Hindsight is alwas 20/20
guyfromsg
07-13 12:17 PM
On the other day Congressman Tom Tancredo was in Lou Dobbs program and they as usual ranted about H1-B visas. I almost fell from the chair when Tom T said H1B visa is valid for 5 years and there are around 700,000 people overstaying their visas. He clearly implied the thousands of people from all over the world staying here legally as illegals.
Here is the youtube link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fi_c9ep9uKI
Since Lou Dobbs didn't challenge Tom I'm sure he agrees with him. I wish somone create a video explaining how H1 can be extended beyond six years, interview some USCIS ( even ex employee), immigration lawyers and put a fitting response to this video in Youtube itself.
Here is the youtube link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fi_c9ep9uKI
Since Lou Dobbs didn't challenge Tom I'm sure he agrees with him. I wish somone create a video explaining how H1 can be extended beyond six years, interview some USCIS ( even ex employee), immigration lawyers and put a fitting response to this video in Youtube itself.
