desigc
12-22 05:03 PM
Contributed $100 to IV.
Reciept #87H393384E9981342
Gaz
I am in a similar situation. What did your friend end up doing? I would appreciate any feedback on this.
My 140 is approved, 6th year expires in March 09, 485 has not been filed due to retrogression and there is a potential for a layoff. Can I transfer 140 to a new employer and file 3 yr extension at the same time?
Reciept #87H393384E9981342
Gaz
I am in a similar situation. What did your friend end up doing? I would appreciate any feedback on this.
My 140 is approved, 6th year expires in March 09, 485 has not been filed due to retrogression and there is a potential for a layoff. Can I transfer 140 to a new employer and file 3 yr extension at the same time?
wallpaper (SS2117479) Brad Pitt
msyedy
04-18 01:12 PM
Look how desperate we have become, someone is ready to shell 10k per family member to get GC.
I agree and disagree with you guys.
I disagree because, we all are legal immigrants, we have to be given priority as the American economy needs people like us. H1-B not only means growth in tech but also economy. All the H1-B personnel spend a good amount of money here on (Rent, car, insurance, food, travel) with all this new jobs and much more will be benificial to this country.
We should not be charged such amount to get what we deserve.
On the other hand- I agree to pay 10k per familiy member because, we are stuck at one place with lots of problems without GC.
Most of us are not sure whether they will be staying at one place to do an investments like buying a house. Wife cant work etc.
Keeping all the above in mind even If we loose 10k per member we will make that in less then 6 months when compared to waiting for a GC for years.
I agree and disagree with you guys.
I disagree because, we all are legal immigrants, we have to be given priority as the American economy needs people like us. H1-B not only means growth in tech but also economy. All the H1-B personnel spend a good amount of money here on (Rent, car, insurance, food, travel) with all this new jobs and much more will be benificial to this country.
We should not be charged such amount to get what we deserve.
On the other hand- I agree to pay 10k per familiy member because, we are stuck at one place with lots of problems without GC.
Most of us are not sure whether they will be staying at one place to do an investments like buying a house. Wife cant work etc.
Keeping all the above in mind even If we loose 10k per member we will make that in less then 6 months when compared to waiting for a GC for years.
dhirajgrover
08-10 12:51 AM
What's the current status?
2011 Starred by Brad Pitt, Louis de
adGurkha
06-29 12:47 PM
I asked this before but did not get any answer. Trying my luck again. I lost my OPT card and unfortunately have no records what so ever of it.
Is there a way I can get a copy of this from USCIS?
Is there a way I can get a copy of this from USCIS?
more...
![brad pitt louis. The Vampire, Louis [Brad Pitt]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_tJumILKimc8jLUxwh0HdJEew7TxgsMiceWrHjWrilLI-QooIhO6TYDUXJxVytU6pPk-MjkmbgTKRdl0ePfE215Kxk9sHS_Znmvzi7rXdyp-HOpGJzeCBiCz9IgKuBeSYxojHxRy7bKhy9EvUzJ5oMS2t7SiwLj=s0-d "The Vampire, Louis [Brad Pitt]")
buehler
04-30 11:38 PM
eyeopeners,
Make sure that you work for your new employer only on a h-1. That way your spouse can be on h4. As for using AC21, in your case it is for continuing your I-485 processing and not for working for a different company. Make sure that you file your wife's 485 as soon as your dates become current. Hope that clears your doubts. (Also Don't use your email id as your user id. That is a sure shot way of getting plenty of spam)
sundarpn, you don't need any documents from your previous employer to file your dependent's I-485.
Make sure that you work for your new employer only on a h-1. That way your spouse can be on h4. As for using AC21, in your case it is for continuing your I-485 processing and not for working for a different company. Make sure that you file your wife's 485 as soon as your dates become current. Hope that clears your doubts. (Also Don't use your email id as your user id. That is a sure shot way of getting plenty of spam)
sundarpn, you don't need any documents from your previous employer to file your dependent's I-485.
mirage
07-11 01:29 PM
1 year from now, only EB3-Indians with PDs of 2001-2006 will hang on the IV website. Everybody else(or atleast 99%) will be gone...
We will need help renewing our EADs and AP each year forever...and will seek answers on wague rules and regulations USCIS/DHS will keep putting in
We will need help renewing our EADs and AP each year forever...and will seek answers on wague rules and regulations USCIS/DHS will keep putting in
more...
bluez25
07-22 04:57 PM
I have an appointment on August 11th in chennai consulate and I am flying tomorrow to India to submit my documents to VFS.
Can any one tell when will the visa number assigned to the CP case?
The reason I am asking is because I am little worried if the date gets moved back after 1st week of august (From last year July fiasco experience) or some thing and I will be in India already, then I will be in big trouble.
Any insight would be appreciated.
Can any one tell when will the visa number assigned to the CP case?
The reason I am asking is because I am little worried if the date gets moved back after 1st week of august (From last year July fiasco experience) or some thing and I will be in India already, then I will be in big trouble.
Any insight would be appreciated.
2010 Louis finally crosses over
nixstor
06-30 01:00 AM
I am using a labor substitution (dated 2005) that requires BS + 3 years. I had only 2 years experience by 2005. But I have an MS degree in related field. Would this be ok? Would MS+2 years suffice for a labor for BS + 3 years?
Please respond soon. I have prepared all my paperwork for I-140 and I-485 and meeting the lawyer tomorrow. I am planning to file by Monday. My stupid attorney told me only today that the experience mismatch can be a problem.
Thank you all in advance.
Sorry wrong time. Move on!. They gave 2 months time for this, But screwed up the VB big time.Now age old labors are flying and body shoppers are sending emails personally. Damn I received one of them 4 days back. Bas*8** doesn't leave much info. I did not had the time to follow up and get him nailed.
Please respond soon. I have prepared all my paperwork for I-140 and I-485 and meeting the lawyer tomorrow. I am planning to file by Monday. My stupid attorney told me only today that the experience mismatch can be a problem.
Thank you all in advance.
Sorry wrong time. Move on!. They gave 2 months time for this, But screwed up the VB big time.Now age old labors are flying and body shoppers are sending emails personally. Damn I received one of them 4 days back. Bas*8** doesn't leave much info. I did not had the time to follow up and get him nailed.
more...
roseball
03-20 06:33 PM
Well, if you go according to the Lawyer of this forum with which guys had a conference call (you can hear the recording thats on the home page of this site)
Then its advisable to apply in EB3 category and her reasoning was that with her experience she has seen lots of EB2 application in the past few years and very less EB3 apps and hence chances of EB3 being processed earlier than EB2 are quiet high.
Also, consider the job satisfaction/career growth you will get by taking up this new job which you said is better than your current one.....Keeping in view the current trend, it will be atleast 5-6 yrs for Eb-2 to come to Oct 2007....Ask yourself if you want to be doing what you are doing right now for that long......I would move on.....
Then its advisable to apply in EB3 category and her reasoning was that with her experience she has seen lots of EB2 application in the past few years and very less EB3 apps and hence chances of EB3 being processed earlier than EB2 are quiet high.
Also, consider the job satisfaction/career growth you will get by taking up this new job which you said is better than your current one.....Keeping in view the current trend, it will be atleast 5-6 yrs for Eb-2 to come to Oct 2007....Ask yourself if you want to be doing what you are doing right now for that long......I would move on.....
hair O vegetariano Louis de Pointe
whattodo
05-02 01:30 PM
What if 6 months are left before my 6 years of H1B expires? Can I still get 3 years extension based on approved I-140 from another company?
I think you can get the extension with new company too. While applying for the transfer request extension upto Feb 2010. You might have to provide the I140 approval again to prove that you are eligible for 3-year extension.
I think you can join the company immediately. To be in safe side you can apply for transfer in premium.
As you might be aware there is no such thing as H1B transfer - every h1b application is a new one for that company and you as beneficeiry. So when applying for H1B with new company - you have to provide evidence that you are eligible for the H1B. The evidence is to show you are already on H1B (so that you are not subject to annual cap); and that you have enough time on H1B if you already completed 6 years then evidence to prove that you are eligible for further extension of h1b. So in short yes you can get 3 years with new employer. (NOTE: I am not lawyer this is my understanding based on various sources; I am also considering moving after my i140 is approved).
I think you can get the extension with new company too. While applying for the transfer request extension upto Feb 2010. You might have to provide the I140 approval again to prove that you are eligible for 3-year extension.
I think you can join the company immediately. To be in safe side you can apply for transfer in premium.
As you might be aware there is no such thing as H1B transfer - every h1b application is a new one for that company and you as beneficeiry. So when applying for H1B with new company - you have to provide evidence that you are eligible for the H1B. The evidence is to show you are already on H1B (so that you are not subject to annual cap); and that you have enough time on H1B if you already completed 6 years then evidence to prove that you are eligible for further extension of h1b. So in short yes you can get 3 years with new employer. (NOTE: I am not lawyer this is my understanding based on various sources; I am also considering moving after my i140 is approved).
more...
mchundi
12-17 08:42 PM
Most of the states had processed RIR cases till May 2002. N.J (05/2002) and
NY (10/2001) before all the applications were sent to BEC. So most of the
Applicants with these dates must have already got their Green Cards . Some of my friends with these dates have already got their GC some 1 year back.
It is Non-RIR cases which had 04/2001 processing times with NJ , NY being the states which were backlogged. It is these applications which would be
causing these delays. How many percentage of EB1 , EB2 , EB3
(Employement Category) applications might be in this process. ? If there are
less number of applications then Processing Dates may move forward to
2002 / 2003 for India.
Based on the serial numbering in the pre BEC scheme, there are an average of 1k-2k peteions from california alone for the 2002/2003 years. Many Indians amongst them. Thanks the BEC's most of them locked their PD's (hopefully).
If u look at the distribution for the fiscal year 2005, EB-2 did not use much of the surplus AC21 numbers. So why is EB2 retrogressed for India and China now. As somebody indicated in other threads, the USCIS may have suspended the AC21 act. But if they did that it wud not have moved to 2003 at all. So nobody really knows their formula.
Unless the state dept releases the statistics for the fiscal year 2006, we dont know what actually is happening. One thing though, they need to further break down the ROW EB3 and establish cutoff dates for other countries as well.
What about EB-3 (Inda). Hopefully it will move to 2002 very soon. After that i think it has better chances of moving up than EB-2 (India) if the USCIS is following the strict 7% limit.
NY (10/2001) before all the applications were sent to BEC. So most of the
Applicants with these dates must have already got their Green Cards . Some of my friends with these dates have already got their GC some 1 year back.
It is Non-RIR cases which had 04/2001 processing times with NJ , NY being the states which were backlogged. It is these applications which would be
causing these delays. How many percentage of EB1 , EB2 , EB3
(Employement Category) applications might be in this process. ? If there are
less number of applications then Processing Dates may move forward to
2002 / 2003 for India.
Based on the serial numbering in the pre BEC scheme, there are an average of 1k-2k peteions from california alone for the 2002/2003 years. Many Indians amongst them. Thanks the BEC's most of them locked their PD's (hopefully).
If u look at the distribution for the fiscal year 2005, EB-2 did not use much of the surplus AC21 numbers. So why is EB2 retrogressed for India and China now. As somebody indicated in other threads, the USCIS may have suspended the AC21 act. But if they did that it wud not have moved to 2003 at all. So nobody really knows their formula.
Unless the state dept releases the statistics for the fiscal year 2006, we dont know what actually is happening. One thing though, they need to further break down the ROW EB3 and establish cutoff dates for other countries as well.
What about EB-3 (Inda). Hopefully it will move to 2002 very soon. After that i think it has better chances of moving up than EB-2 (India) if the USCIS is following the strict 7% limit.
hot The Vampire, Louis [Brad Pitt]
GCWhru
03-26 02:10 PM
Do you have any source on this....I also had to amend my H1B last month. Its done without any issues..
My lawyer informed this. They instructed me not to travel while extension is pending. In case you have to travel, they suggest to do the extension after return back. I don't have any source for this information.
But it makes sense isn't it. Your extension is the extension of your last I94, however if you travelled after application, your extension have different i94 number and your recent i94 has different number. Just my opinion.
My lawyer informed this. They instructed me not to travel while extension is pending. In case you have to travel, they suggest to do the extension after return back. I don't have any source for this information.
But it makes sense isn't it. Your extension is the extension of your last I94, however if you travelled after application, your extension have different i94 number and your recent i94 has different number. Just my opinion.
more...
house Brad Pitt Louis
adde72
06-30 10:58 AM
and do it in PM. Someone asked is in a situation due to the attorney. He didn't seek or initiate LS.
Keep it polite. Moderators, watch and close this thread, if it becomes rowdy here.
If he can buy a Labor why cant the advise also ..this is a public forum for a cause - Retrogression - not for encouraging subtitution cases .
Members
Please dont answer any questions relating to that topic .Kick the guys out
Keep it polite. Moderators, watch and close this thread, if it becomes rowdy here.
If he can buy a Labor why cant the advise also ..this is a public forum for a cause - Retrogression - not for encouraging subtitution cases .
Members
Please dont answer any questions relating to that topic .Kick the guys out
tattoo BRAD PITT
gc28262
07-30 07:07 AM
Success Story: Showing a Valid Employer-Employee Relationship (http://shusterman.com/newsletterusimmigrationaugust2010.html#5)
As reported in a previous newsletter, a January 8, 2010 USCIS memo entitled "Determining Employer-Employee Relationship for Adjudication of H-1B Petitions, Including Third-Party Site Placements" has made it more difficult, and sometimes impossible, for IT consulting firms who hire professionals to work at third-party worksites to obtain H-1B status on their behalf.
The stated purpose of the memo by Donald Neufeld, Associate Director of Service Center Operations, is "to provide guidance, in the context of H-1B petitions, on the requirement that the petitioner establish that an employer- employee relationship exists and will continue to exist with the beneficiary throughout the duration of the requested H-1B validity period."
The memo puts particular focus on determining if the employer has demonstrated that it has a "sufficient level of control over the employee." See our H-1B Visa Guide for additional information.
We represent many IT consulting companies, some of which place temporary H-1B workers at client-sites as is common in the industry. In March 2010, we helped one of our corporate clients prepare and file an H-1B extension on behalf of a Senior Systems Administrator who had been working for the same employer since June 2009 in H-1B status authorized by USCIS.
Approximately 3 weeks after the H-1B extension was filed, the USCIS issued a 4-page Request for Evidence (RFE) essentially asking for a laundry list of documents, including Tax Returns of both the petitioner and beneficiary, quarterly wage statements, contracts, photographs of the worksite, etc. to demonstrate that a valid employer-employee relationship existed and would continue to exist for the full duration of the requested H-1B extension of stay. The RFE actually asked for evidence that the employer-employee relationship had existed since the original H-1B approval had been issued (some 9 months before the H-1B extension).
Fortunately, we had forewarned our client of the issues raised by the January 2010 memo and the company was able to provide us with much, if not all, of the requested evidence, including copies of contracts it had in place with the company where the employee was assigned. The contract included language that we brought to the Service's attention stating:
"Contractor shall have sole responsibility to recruit, interview, test, select, hire, manage, train, counsel, discipline, review, evaluate, set pay rates(including the classification of Contractor Personnel as exempt or non-exempt), and terminate the persons who provide the Services hereunder."
and
"On-site Contractor Personnel will be required to acknowledge that they are not employees of CLIENT COMPANY to agree to dispute resolution procedures regarding any dispute they may have concerning their employment by Contractor or concerning their employment status."
We were able to further demonstrate the petitioner's supervision of the employee by showing the hierarchal structure of the organization and evidence that the company had control over the day-to-day activities of the employee through regular service and progress reports.
This case shows the importance of preparing in advance for any possible issues as most RFEs issued by USCIS only allow the petitioner 30 days in which to respond. Because we had anticipated the issues raised in the Neufeld memo, we were able to provide sufficient evidence of the employer-employee relationship to satisfy the USCIS's concerns. This resulted in an H-1B approval notice being issued for our client a short time after our response to the RFE was filed.
In this era of increased scrutiny by the USCIS of most types of petitions, we would not suggest any consulting or staffing agency even consider filing an H- 1B petition if it does not have sufficient evidence of the existence of the employer-employee relationship, including signed contracts between the petitioner and the end-client. It is important to note that in many cases similar to this, the USCIS will only approve the H-1B petition for the duration of the contract between the employer and the end-client. Read more of our Immigration Success Stories.
As reported in a previous newsletter, a January 8, 2010 USCIS memo entitled "Determining Employer-Employee Relationship for Adjudication of H-1B Petitions, Including Third-Party Site Placements" has made it more difficult, and sometimes impossible, for IT consulting firms who hire professionals to work at third-party worksites to obtain H-1B status on their behalf.
The stated purpose of the memo by Donald Neufeld, Associate Director of Service Center Operations, is "to provide guidance, in the context of H-1B petitions, on the requirement that the petitioner establish that an employer- employee relationship exists and will continue to exist with the beneficiary throughout the duration of the requested H-1B validity period."
The memo puts particular focus on determining if the employer has demonstrated that it has a "sufficient level of control over the employee." See our H-1B Visa Guide for additional information.
We represent many IT consulting companies, some of which place temporary H-1B workers at client-sites as is common in the industry. In March 2010, we helped one of our corporate clients prepare and file an H-1B extension on behalf of a Senior Systems Administrator who had been working for the same employer since June 2009 in H-1B status authorized by USCIS.
Approximately 3 weeks after the H-1B extension was filed, the USCIS issued a 4-page Request for Evidence (RFE) essentially asking for a laundry list of documents, including Tax Returns of both the petitioner and beneficiary, quarterly wage statements, contracts, photographs of the worksite, etc. to demonstrate that a valid employer-employee relationship existed and would continue to exist for the full duration of the requested H-1B extension of stay. The RFE actually asked for evidence that the employer-employee relationship had existed since the original H-1B approval had been issued (some 9 months before the H-1B extension).
Fortunately, we had forewarned our client of the issues raised by the January 2010 memo and the company was able to provide us with much, if not all, of the requested evidence, including copies of contracts it had in place with the company where the employee was assigned. The contract included language that we brought to the Service's attention stating:
"Contractor shall have sole responsibility to recruit, interview, test, select, hire, manage, train, counsel, discipline, review, evaluate, set pay rates(including the classification of Contractor Personnel as exempt or non-exempt), and terminate the persons who provide the Services hereunder."
and
"On-site Contractor Personnel will be required to acknowledge that they are not employees of CLIENT COMPANY to agree to dispute resolution procedures regarding any dispute they may have concerning their employment by Contractor or concerning their employment status."
We were able to further demonstrate the petitioner's supervision of the employee by showing the hierarchal structure of the organization and evidence that the company had control over the day-to-day activities of the employee through regular service and progress reports.
This case shows the importance of preparing in advance for any possible issues as most RFEs issued by USCIS only allow the petitioner 30 days in which to respond. Because we had anticipated the issues raised in the Neufeld memo, we were able to provide sufficient evidence of the employer-employee relationship to satisfy the USCIS's concerns. This resulted in an H-1B approval notice being issued for our client a short time after our response to the RFE was filed.
In this era of increased scrutiny by the USCIS of most types of petitions, we would not suggest any consulting or staffing agency even consider filing an H- 1B petition if it does not have sufficient evidence of the existence of the employer-employee relationship, including signed contracts between the petitioner and the end-client. It is important to note that in many cases similar to this, the USCIS will only approve the H-1B petition for the duration of the contract between the employer and the end-client. Read more of our Immigration Success Stories.
more...
pictures with Brad Pitt as Louis de
onemorecame
04-13 01:59 PM
Congratulations..
dresses Brad Pitt pic!
thomachan72
03-28 03:05 PM
Durbin (father of Dream Act) hates us. He loves to grand stand for "children of undocumented" "the down torn, the poor, the under privileged" and thinks we are like spoilt rich kid. This is a good thought, but who will bell the cat? Durbin is totally irrational when it comes to children of legal and undocumented. Not sure that you know this, but just thought of laying the facts as they are..
I understand what you want to convey. However, let us imagine a situation;
1) a senator / representative introduces an amendment saying "children of legal immigrants who are stuck in the backlogg of visa applicants and have abided by the rules that apply to those mentioned for children of ilegal immigrants, should be given precedence when allotting the required green cards". This is because these kids also "have been in this land for long, know of no other land other than this, have abided by rules and also in most cases are the best performing in the schools/colleges. they will serve particularly to raise the standard of education in the US on the long run".
I cant imagine how they can deny this amendment if at all tha majority wishes to pass the Dream act. This way atleast we can help the kids of our friends who have kids and are waiting for ever in line.
I would like to hear what IV seniors have to say about this. if they consider that we will esentially be linking us to the ilegals by doing this, I would say; There is no way that there is going to be any help comming (legally) for us regarding reduction of backlogg, so why not atleast get the future generation a slight push and we can still continue to wait for our turn.
I understand what you want to convey. However, let us imagine a situation;
1) a senator / representative introduces an amendment saying "children of legal immigrants who are stuck in the backlogg of visa applicants and have abided by the rules that apply to those mentioned for children of ilegal immigrants, should be given precedence when allotting the required green cards". This is because these kids also "have been in this land for long, know of no other land other than this, have abided by rules and also in most cases are the best performing in the schools/colleges. they will serve particularly to raise the standard of education in the US on the long run".
I cant imagine how they can deny this amendment if at all tha majority wishes to pass the Dream act. This way atleast we can help the kids of our friends who have kids and are waiting for ever in line.
I would like to hear what IV seniors have to say about this. if they consider that we will esentially be linking us to the ilegals by doing this, I would say; There is no way that there is going to be any help comming (legally) for us regarding reduction of backlogg, so why not atleast get the future generation a slight push and we can still continue to wait for our turn.
more...
makeup rad pitt louis. Brad Pitt in the bed,; Brad Pitt in the bed,. withnail
immm
07-07 01:45 PM
(Admins, please delete this thread if already covered)
http://www.mercedsunstar.com/opinion/story/13765761p-14347307c.html
Our View: Feds play games with immigrants
They said they had an abundance of green cards and then rescinded the offer in a matter of weeks.
Last Updated: July 7, 2007, 03:16:02 AM PDT
If you want to know what's really wrong with our immigration system, consider the July debacle at the Citizen and Immigration Service.
Individuals and businesses typically have to wait years to apply for "green cards" for permanent residency based on job skills. The backlogs have been so severe that an engineer from India or China has had to wait six years to apply for a green card. In other employment categories, the wait can be nine to 11 years. For people from the Philippines, the wait in some work categories is 22 years.
But then in the monthly Visa Bulletin issued June 13, the State Department said that employment-based visas would be available.
This set off a rush among sponsoring businesses and individuals who have waited in line for years to apply for green cards. Thousands prepared applications and mailed them in time for the immigration service to receive them by July 2, the first day of the application window.
Then on that very day, the State Department issued a "never mind" update, announcing that the 60,000 green cards it had expected to offer would no longer be available. The thousands who submitted applications will have their applications sent back to them. As Los Angeles immigration attorney Carl Shusterman said Tuesday, "We're right back to square one, with scientists, engineers, teachers and health care workers having to wait in endless lines for employment-based visas." Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, chairwoman of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security and International Law sent irate letters to the Secretary of State and Secretary of Homeland Security. She said that changing course midmonth is contrary to years of practice, would result in the loss of thousands of dollars already expended by sponsoring businesses and individuals to prepare applications and, more important, would "threaten the integrity and predictability of our immigration system." This is no way to treat people who try to play by the rules.
The Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman notes in his 2007 annual report to Congress that the nation has a "perpetual backlog" of employment-based green card applications. This backlog means that even green cards that should be available aren't used. This contributes to the backlog; if green cards are not issued in the year they are authorized, they are lost. In 2006, more than 10,000 employment-based green cards were lost, even though the immigration service had 100,000 to 150,000 applications waiting to be processed. Since 1994, nearly 219,000 employment-based green cards have been lost because the immigration service isn't processing enough applications in a timely manner.
It gets worse. The funds appropriated by Congress to jumpstart a backlog elimination project expired Sept. 30. The backlog will continue.
In the long term, this country needs to increase the number of employment-based green cards to meet demand. But if the immigration service cannot even process applications in a timely fashion for the current numbers of employment-based green cards that are supposed to be available, what's the point? In the short term, if Congress and the president do nothing else regarding immigration reform, they should at least make sure that the immigration service processes green card applications in timely fashion. The backlog is inexcusable and contributes to the nation's illegal immigration problem. If we want people to play by the rules, we have to make it possible for them to do so.
http://www.mercedsunstar.com/opinion/story/13765761p-14347307c.html
Our View: Feds play games with immigrants
They said they had an abundance of green cards and then rescinded the offer in a matter of weeks.
Last Updated: July 7, 2007, 03:16:02 AM PDT
If you want to know what's really wrong with our immigration system, consider the July debacle at the Citizen and Immigration Service.
Individuals and businesses typically have to wait years to apply for "green cards" for permanent residency based on job skills. The backlogs have been so severe that an engineer from India or China has had to wait six years to apply for a green card. In other employment categories, the wait can be nine to 11 years. For people from the Philippines, the wait in some work categories is 22 years.
But then in the monthly Visa Bulletin issued June 13, the State Department said that employment-based visas would be available.
This set off a rush among sponsoring businesses and individuals who have waited in line for years to apply for green cards. Thousands prepared applications and mailed them in time for the immigration service to receive them by July 2, the first day of the application window.
Then on that very day, the State Department issued a "never mind" update, announcing that the 60,000 green cards it had expected to offer would no longer be available. The thousands who submitted applications will have their applications sent back to them. As Los Angeles immigration attorney Carl Shusterman said Tuesday, "We're right back to square one, with scientists, engineers, teachers and health care workers having to wait in endless lines for employment-based visas." Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, chairwoman of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security and International Law sent irate letters to the Secretary of State and Secretary of Homeland Security. She said that changing course midmonth is contrary to years of practice, would result in the loss of thousands of dollars already expended by sponsoring businesses and individuals to prepare applications and, more important, would "threaten the integrity and predictability of our immigration system." This is no way to treat people who try to play by the rules.
The Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman notes in his 2007 annual report to Congress that the nation has a "perpetual backlog" of employment-based green card applications. This backlog means that even green cards that should be available aren't used. This contributes to the backlog; if green cards are not issued in the year they are authorized, they are lost. In 2006, more than 10,000 employment-based green cards were lost, even though the immigration service had 100,000 to 150,000 applications waiting to be processed. Since 1994, nearly 219,000 employment-based green cards have been lost because the immigration service isn't processing enough applications in a timely manner.
It gets worse. The funds appropriated by Congress to jumpstart a backlog elimination project expired Sept. 30. The backlog will continue.
In the long term, this country needs to increase the number of employment-based green cards to meet demand. But if the immigration service cannot even process applications in a timely fashion for the current numbers of employment-based green cards that are supposed to be available, what's the point? In the short term, if Congress and the president do nothing else regarding immigration reform, they should at least make sure that the immigration service processes green card applications in timely fashion. The backlog is inexcusable and contributes to the nation's illegal immigration problem. If we want people to play by the rules, we have to make it possible for them to do so.
girlfriend rad pitt louis
akred
04-10 12:44 AM
Try Wells Fargo or Chase. They have been quite good about lending me money for a couple of rental properties.
Also ask them for rebates as they are eager to get business.
Another one I came across was Penfed.org. They may work for you since you seem to be borrowing for a primary residence.
Also ask them for rebates as they are eager to get business.
Another one I came across was Penfed.org. They may work for you since you seem to be borrowing for a primary residence.
hairstyles rad pitt louis. Pitt next starred
yabadaba
02-28 01:48 PM
nozerd,
The IB system is offered by many charter schools. These schools are public schools but have been set up through a charter agreed to by the parents. They are public schools managed by parents. You do not have to pay anything for your child to attend one of these (At least in the great state of GA, u dont).
The IB website indicated schools like Jamnabai Narsee in Bombay also offer the IB program.
The IB system is offered by many charter schools. These schools are public schools but have been set up through a charter agreed to by the parents. They are public schools managed by parents. You do not have to pay anything for your child to attend one of these (At least in the great state of GA, u dont).
The IB website indicated schools like Jamnabai Narsee in Bombay also offer the IB program.
vinayh
11-18 09:30 PM
I recently booked visa appointment at Chennai.
1. Use IE. I had issues with firefox
2. You will be allowed to pick the appointment date at the very end. In fact that is the last step of the online visa appointment booking process.
1. Use IE. I had issues with firefox
2. You will be allowed to pick the appointment date at the very end. In fact that is the last step of the online visa appointment booking process.
harivenkat
05-06 09:33 PM
Senator Bob Menendez (New Jersey)'s no. is (202) 224-4744
I called him yesterday... his staff is very friendly they take your name and message and pass it on to him,,, today Senator Menendez has chided Obama
Immigration overhaul: Sen. Menendez chides Obama; Sen. Schumer appeals to Arizona governor - latimes.com (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-immigration-20100507,0,1561517.story)
Senator chides Obama as pressure rises on immigration
A Democratic leader says the president must treat the overhaul with more urgency. Schumer writes to the Arizona governor, hoping to delay a controversial state law.
By Peter Nicholas, Tribune Washington Bureau
A key Senate Democratic leader said President Obama must treat the immigration crisis with far more urgency, as pressure over the issue intensified across the country Thursday.
Sen. Robert Menendez of New Jersey, an Obama ally and one of a handful of Democratic senators shaping an immigration proposal presented last week, faulted the president for suggesting on Wednesday that an immigration bill won't be finished until 2011 at the earliest.
"Telling people we're not going to get a legislative solution this year, or to suggest maybe that it's not possible this year, is not in the best interests of the nation," Menendez said in an interview in the Capitol.
At the same time, legislators and activists took steps Thursday to head off policies that they contend unfairly target illegal immigrants. Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) asked Arizona's governor in a letter to delay enactment of a tough new law that criminalizes the failure to carry immigration papers. Schumer also asked for a meeting with the governor, Republican Jan Brewer.
And one Latino advocacy group, unhappy with what it sees as Obama's aggressive deportation practices, said it would attempt to end-run the president. The group said it would send a Mother's Day letter to First Lady Michelle Obama, telling her that deporting people is destructive to families.
The developments reflected mounting frustration over the immigration question. Speaking at a Cinco de Mayo reception in the Rose Garden on Wednesday, Obama promised to "begin work" on an immigration bill this year, but set no deadline for completion.
His press secretary, Robert Gibbs, sounded a more pessimistic note at a briefing Thursday. Asked why the White House doesn't push ahead with an immigration bill as it has with other legislation that lacked a bipartisan consensus, Gibbs said: "Well, because there's not enough support to move forward."
Even if prospects for an immigration overhaul are dwindling, the White House shouldn't give up, proponents insisted. Menendez said he had asked the White House to host a major summit devoted to the issue, modeled after the healthcare summit in February. Invitations would go to House and Senate lawmakers from both parties, with a block of time set aside for hashing out differences.
A White House official who was asked about that idea Thursday said: "We are continuing to examine all of the options for moving forward with a bipartisan conversation."
Always a divisive issue, illegal immigration is generating renewed bitterness on the right and left of the political spectrum. Part of the upheaval springs from the Arizona law. But advocates for Latino interests are also resentful of the Obama administration's enforcement policies.
A memo by the head of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement showed that the agency wants to deport 400,000 people a year � more than double the number in 2005.
Menendez called on the president to order a less punitive approach. Deporting people when "counting is taking place" during the decennial census is "reason alone" for suspending the practice, he said.
In the hope that Michelle Obama might prove a softer touch, the National Alliance of Latin American and Caribbean Communities said it would send a letter to the first lady inviting her to intervene.
Michelle Obama has taken a largely apolitical posture since her husband became president. Choosing sides on such a fraught issue would be out of character, but the alliance is appealing to her "as a mother."
"Deportations have reached record levels under President Obama's administration. For each person deported, there are young children left behind who are denied the right to be cared for by their parents," the letter to Michelle Obama reads.
With Arizona's law scheduled to go into effect in July, Schumer hopes to derail it by convincing Brewer that a better solution is on the horizon.
He asked her to wait one year while Congress puts in place an immigration system that would provide tough border security, a foolproof identification system so that undocumented workers can't get jobs, and a path to legal status for the 11 million people living in the United States illegally.
Delaying the Arizona law would require state legislative action. Arizona officials did not respond to requests for comment.
Conceding that Republican support is lacking in the U.S. Senate, Schumer also asked Brewer to help round up GOP votes, including those of Arizona's two senators, John McCain and Jon Kyl. So far, no Republican lawmaker has agreed to support the effort.
Schumer wrote that a comprehensive immigration bill is the best remedy.
"I simply do not believe the remedy Arizona has enacted will succeed in resolving the problem it is designed to address," he wrote.
I called him yesterday... his staff is very friendly they take your name and message and pass it on to him,,, today Senator Menendez has chided Obama
Immigration overhaul: Sen. Menendez chides Obama; Sen. Schumer appeals to Arizona governor - latimes.com (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-immigration-20100507,0,1561517.story)
Senator chides Obama as pressure rises on immigration
A Democratic leader says the president must treat the overhaul with more urgency. Schumer writes to the Arizona governor, hoping to delay a controversial state law.
By Peter Nicholas, Tribune Washington Bureau
A key Senate Democratic leader said President Obama must treat the immigration crisis with far more urgency, as pressure over the issue intensified across the country Thursday.
Sen. Robert Menendez of New Jersey, an Obama ally and one of a handful of Democratic senators shaping an immigration proposal presented last week, faulted the president for suggesting on Wednesday that an immigration bill won't be finished until 2011 at the earliest.
"Telling people we're not going to get a legislative solution this year, or to suggest maybe that it's not possible this year, is not in the best interests of the nation," Menendez said in an interview in the Capitol.
At the same time, legislators and activists took steps Thursday to head off policies that they contend unfairly target illegal immigrants. Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) asked Arizona's governor in a letter to delay enactment of a tough new law that criminalizes the failure to carry immigration papers. Schumer also asked for a meeting with the governor, Republican Jan Brewer.
And one Latino advocacy group, unhappy with what it sees as Obama's aggressive deportation practices, said it would attempt to end-run the president. The group said it would send a Mother's Day letter to First Lady Michelle Obama, telling her that deporting people is destructive to families.
The developments reflected mounting frustration over the immigration question. Speaking at a Cinco de Mayo reception in the Rose Garden on Wednesday, Obama promised to "begin work" on an immigration bill this year, but set no deadline for completion.
His press secretary, Robert Gibbs, sounded a more pessimistic note at a briefing Thursday. Asked why the White House doesn't push ahead with an immigration bill as it has with other legislation that lacked a bipartisan consensus, Gibbs said: "Well, because there's not enough support to move forward."
Even if prospects for an immigration overhaul are dwindling, the White House shouldn't give up, proponents insisted. Menendez said he had asked the White House to host a major summit devoted to the issue, modeled after the healthcare summit in February. Invitations would go to House and Senate lawmakers from both parties, with a block of time set aside for hashing out differences.
A White House official who was asked about that idea Thursday said: "We are continuing to examine all of the options for moving forward with a bipartisan conversation."
Always a divisive issue, illegal immigration is generating renewed bitterness on the right and left of the political spectrum. Part of the upheaval springs from the Arizona law. But advocates for Latino interests are also resentful of the Obama administration's enforcement policies.
A memo by the head of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement showed that the agency wants to deport 400,000 people a year � more than double the number in 2005.
Menendez called on the president to order a less punitive approach. Deporting people when "counting is taking place" during the decennial census is "reason alone" for suspending the practice, he said.
In the hope that Michelle Obama might prove a softer touch, the National Alliance of Latin American and Caribbean Communities said it would send a letter to the first lady inviting her to intervene.
Michelle Obama has taken a largely apolitical posture since her husband became president. Choosing sides on such a fraught issue would be out of character, but the alliance is appealing to her "as a mother."
"Deportations have reached record levels under President Obama's administration. For each person deported, there are young children left behind who are denied the right to be cared for by their parents," the letter to Michelle Obama reads.
With Arizona's law scheduled to go into effect in July, Schumer hopes to derail it by convincing Brewer that a better solution is on the horizon.
He asked her to wait one year while Congress puts in place an immigration system that would provide tough border security, a foolproof identification system so that undocumented workers can't get jobs, and a path to legal status for the 11 million people living in the United States illegally.
Delaying the Arizona law would require state legislative action. Arizona officials did not respond to requests for comment.
Conceding that Republican support is lacking in the U.S. Senate, Schumer also asked Brewer to help round up GOP votes, including those of Arizona's two senators, John McCain and Jon Kyl. So far, no Republican lawmaker has agreed to support the effort.
Schumer wrote that a comprehensive immigration bill is the best remedy.
"I simply do not believe the remedy Arizona has enacted will succeed in resolving the problem it is designed to address," he wrote.
0 comments:
Post a Comment