texanguy
06-10 12:40 PM
i think you are missing the point. this will put things in perspective, that current stupid and archaic practice of giving 1 year AP to India and China EB folks is outdated and that current delays are more to the tune of 10 + years. This will create awareness!!!
I support this !
I do not support this.
one, We simply do not want a temporary fix to our big genuine bureaucratic issue. and two, we are not alone, there are others who are filing/have filed labor/i140s and are waiting to file 485s.
also, it will mellow down our resolve to overcome this injustice.
money is really not the issue, as if they issue a 10 year EAD, they are definitely gonna make it that much more expensive, and USCIS cannot delay EAD APs, as that would make our case even stronger.
I support this !
I do not support this.
one, We simply do not want a temporary fix to our big genuine bureaucratic issue. and two, we are not alone, there are others who are filing/have filed labor/i140s and are waiting to file 485s.
also, it will mellow down our resolve to overcome this injustice.
money is really not the issue, as if they issue a 10 year EAD, they are definitely gonna make it that much more expensive, and USCIS cannot delay EAD APs, as that would make our case even stronger.
wallpaper iphone wallpaper rainbow.
hebron
08-16 01:47 PM
If the employer did not pay you salary that he agreed to pay then you could complain to DOL. You stand a sure chance to get paid if you bring this to DOL's notice. You can do this anonymously. DOL would also slap your employer with a fine and he would be banned from hiring H1-B workers for few years.
MatsP
June 6th, 2005, 08:33 AM
Thanks. I will go back and reshoot this and experiment a bit. The scene wasn't lit by harsh light - high cloud as I recall. I actually deepended the shadows intentionally in the PS CS2 RAW converter - the original wasn't as contrasty. What is interesting is that while the actual exposure of the blown area should be well within tolerances (If I were still shooting B&W film I would have guessed it at around zone 8) it is just the one colour that is blown - and yellow is not one of the 3 channels so it must have actualy been 2 colours. I will have to keep an eye on my histogram display because I don't have the $ for a 1DSMkII!
Photoshop can show you a histogram of an individual colour. Ok, so it's not as good as viewing it on the camera when you shoot, but it's better than not being able to see it at all.... Also, you can view histogram for a portion of the image in Photoshop by selecting a portion and viewing that.
You could also view in R/G/B separately in PS by selecting that channel only... That way, you'll see the yellow on it's own.
Note that Yellow is a combination of RED and GREEN in the camera (as it's "not BLUE"), so look at both green and red in PS.
--
Mats
--
Mats
Photoshop can show you a histogram of an individual colour. Ok, so it's not as good as viewing it on the camera when you shoot, but it's better than not being able to see it at all.... Also, you can view histogram for a portion of the image in Photoshop by selecting a portion and viewing that.
You could also view in R/G/B separately in PS by selecting that channel only... That way, you'll see the yellow on it's own.
Note that Yellow is a combination of RED and GREEN in the camera (as it's "not BLUE"), so look at both green and red in PS.
--
Mats
--
Mats
2011 Rainbow Zap 99 Dazzling iPhone
caforum2
09-14 06:34 AM
for folks in US, you don't need to go to Chennai, You can chose whichever consulate you want. I choose New Delhi instead of Chennai recently and got appointment in 15 days in advance. I know Oct is full in Delhi, Kolkatta, Chennai and Mumbai. I would wait till Sept 20th to see Oct dats. Usually people book appointments and change the dates only closer to interview date.
more...
gcisadawg
04-12 12:14 AM
There is bigger problem than H1 approval i.e. overstaying. If overstay more then six months you will barred for 3 years. So go out as soon as possible and come back with another H1
Since his denial was on March 31st, would the overstay clock starts from March 31st or from original I-94 expiry date? My understanding was that one can work legally using H1B receipt notice. Hence, OP was legal atleast till March 31st, 2009, correct?
-GCisaDawg
Since his denial was on March 31st, would the overstay clock starts from March 31st or from original I-94 expiry date? My understanding was that one can work legally using H1B receipt notice. Hence, OP was legal atleast till March 31st, 2009, correct?
-GCisaDawg
GooblyWoobly
07-18 06:25 PM
Wrong! Yes, you will be the new fee but then you will pay the same fee each year you renew your EAD. No fee payment only applies if you file your I-485 with the new fee structure.
If you are not planning on using EAD and she won't either then she needs to change status to H4.
Can someone else confirm this too? For Q2, I think you are wrong. Take this case....
Primary is on H1, derivative on H4, both apply for AOS, primary goes on EAD (thus invalidating H1, and in turn spouse's H4). So, the spouse just has AOS receipt number, and no H4. Is she out of status? Of course not. This is a very common scenario.
Also, for Q1, I765 is a completely different entity in the pay schedule http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/FinalUSCISFeeSchedule052907.pdf
So, why wouldn't I get the benefit of the higher fee if I pay that? Any source of information for you to say I will have to pay each year?
If you are not planning on using EAD and she won't either then she needs to change status to H4.
Can someone else confirm this too? For Q2, I think you are wrong. Take this case....
Primary is on H1, derivative on H4, both apply for AOS, primary goes on EAD (thus invalidating H1, and in turn spouse's H4). So, the spouse just has AOS receipt number, and no H4. Is she out of status? Of course not. This is a very common scenario.
Also, for Q1, I765 is a completely different entity in the pay schedule http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/FinalUSCISFeeSchedule052907.pdf
So, why wouldn't I get the benefit of the higher fee if I pay that? Any source of information for you to say I will have to pay each year?
more...
jgh_res
05-17 10:01 AM
Here is the link:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/17/dobbs.bushspeech/index.html
Posted article is below. Refer to the highlighted section :
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush's address from the Oval Office on border security and illegal immigration failed to satisfy either advocates of amnesty or those demanding that the government secure our borders and ports. Whether by design or not, however, the president did manage to advance public awareness of both crises.
The president finally acknowledged the unsustainable social and economic burdens of permitting millions of illegal aliens to forge documents, pressure our public schools and hospitals, and overtax our local and state budgets.
And the president, in asking for more border patrol officers and sending 6,000 National Guardsmen to our southern border to support the Border Patrol, also acknowledged the federal government's utter failure to protect the American people by securing our borders, across which as many as three million illegal aliens enter this country each year.
President Bush's five-point plan began with the words, "First, the United States must secure its borders." But the president did not assign any urgency to the national task of doing so. Deploying as many as 6,000 members of the National Guard to help secure our broken border with Mexico is positive step.
But the president's proposal to place those National Guardsmen in some sort of adjunct support role is peculiar at best, and without question, woefully inadequate. The president sounded as if he were trying to appease Mexico's President Vicente Fox, assuring him we would not militarize the border. If there is to be appeasement at all, that should fall to the Mexican government rather than President Bush.
Not only are millions of illegal aliens entering the United States each year across that border, but so are illegal drugs. More cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine and marijuana flood across the Mexican than from any other place, more than three decades into the war on drugs.
President Bush and all the open borders advocates should be held to account for not doing everything in their power to destroy the drug traffic across our borders, as well as illegal immigration.
If it is necessary to send 20,000 -- 30,000 National Guard troops to the border with Mexico to preserve our national sovereignty and protect the American people from rampant drug trafficking, illegal immigration and the threat of terrorists, than I cannot imagine why this president and this Congress would hesitate to do so.
And how can this president and this Congress begin to rationalize placing immigration reform, which has been neglected since the last amnesty 20 years ago, ahead of national security and the safety of all Americans?
President Bush went on to say that in order to secure our borders we must create a temporary guest worker program. What? Come again, Mr. President. The president knows better, and so do the American people. Control of our borders and ports is necessary to our national security and a temporary worker program is an exploitive luxury for corporate America.
The president also said we need to hold employers who hire illegal aliens accountable, but he failed to say how. What should be the penalties for these illegal employers? How large a fine should they receive? How many years in jail for the executives of such companies?
It would have been inspiring to hear the president say that he and his friend Vicente Fox had discussed illegal immigration and drug trafficking and reached an agreement that both our country's militaries would be used to create a joint border security force, one that working together would ensure the integrity of the Untied States/Mexico border.
Wouldn't it have been nice as well for this president to suggest that the U.S. government would also take seriously its responsibilities to create a new and efficient immigration system to accommodate the backlog of millions of people trying to do the right thing? The same agency that would have to oversee Mr. Bush's amnesty program could not begin to do so because the Citizenship and Immigration Services already faces a backlog of millions of people who are trying to enter this country lawfully.
Aside from the fact that both political parties are complicit with corporate America and special interests in placing so-called immigration reform ahead of border and port security speaks volumes about our elected officials' commitment to the national interest and the weight and influence of corporate America over both parties.
Mr. President, I don't think the American people will tolerate this much longer.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/17/dobbs.bushspeech/index.html
Posted article is below. Refer to the highlighted section :
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush's address from the Oval Office on border security and illegal immigration failed to satisfy either advocates of amnesty or those demanding that the government secure our borders and ports. Whether by design or not, however, the president did manage to advance public awareness of both crises.
The president finally acknowledged the unsustainable social and economic burdens of permitting millions of illegal aliens to forge documents, pressure our public schools and hospitals, and overtax our local and state budgets.
And the president, in asking for more border patrol officers and sending 6,000 National Guardsmen to our southern border to support the Border Patrol, also acknowledged the federal government's utter failure to protect the American people by securing our borders, across which as many as three million illegal aliens enter this country each year.
President Bush's five-point plan began with the words, "First, the United States must secure its borders." But the president did not assign any urgency to the national task of doing so. Deploying as many as 6,000 members of the National Guard to help secure our broken border with Mexico is positive step.
But the president's proposal to place those National Guardsmen in some sort of adjunct support role is peculiar at best, and without question, woefully inadequate. The president sounded as if he were trying to appease Mexico's President Vicente Fox, assuring him we would not militarize the border. If there is to be appeasement at all, that should fall to the Mexican government rather than President Bush.
Not only are millions of illegal aliens entering the United States each year across that border, but so are illegal drugs. More cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine and marijuana flood across the Mexican than from any other place, more than three decades into the war on drugs.
President Bush and all the open borders advocates should be held to account for not doing everything in their power to destroy the drug traffic across our borders, as well as illegal immigration.
If it is necessary to send 20,000 -- 30,000 National Guard troops to the border with Mexico to preserve our national sovereignty and protect the American people from rampant drug trafficking, illegal immigration and the threat of terrorists, than I cannot imagine why this president and this Congress would hesitate to do so.
And how can this president and this Congress begin to rationalize placing immigration reform, which has been neglected since the last amnesty 20 years ago, ahead of national security and the safety of all Americans?
President Bush went on to say that in order to secure our borders we must create a temporary guest worker program. What? Come again, Mr. President. The president knows better, and so do the American people. Control of our borders and ports is necessary to our national security and a temporary worker program is an exploitive luxury for corporate America.
The president also said we need to hold employers who hire illegal aliens accountable, but he failed to say how. What should be the penalties for these illegal employers? How large a fine should they receive? How many years in jail for the executives of such companies?
It would have been inspiring to hear the president say that he and his friend Vicente Fox had discussed illegal immigration and drug trafficking and reached an agreement that both our country's militaries would be used to create a joint border security force, one that working together would ensure the integrity of the Untied States/Mexico border.
Wouldn't it have been nice as well for this president to suggest that the U.S. government would also take seriously its responsibilities to create a new and efficient immigration system to accommodate the backlog of millions of people trying to do the right thing? The same agency that would have to oversee Mr. Bush's amnesty program could not begin to do so because the Citizenship and Immigration Services already faces a backlog of millions of people who are trying to enter this country lawfully.
Aside from the fact that both political parties are complicit with corporate America and special interests in placing so-called immigration reform ahead of border and port security speaks volumes about our elected officials' commitment to the national interest and the weight and influence of corporate America over both parties.
Mr. President, I don't think the American people will tolerate this much longer.
2010 Desktop Wallpapers Rainbow.
Templarian
11-26 12:24 AM
:lol: Fixed. but I refuse to use a jpeg
more...
mchundi
02-16 06:02 PM
Let us put it this way. Short term we can get some benefits of the 90 k visas that can be recaptured (140k according to the Ombudsman - 50k which went to Schedule A last year) But now 90k , regardless of whether it frees numbers for all countries, is going to be a short lived relief . With so many cases coming out of the backlog, there has to be some long term solution for this. All the comprehensive immigration bills had been talking of raising the per country quota by a couple of % but you have to also see that they are redistributing the allocations to EB1, 2 and 3. So I guess in the long run, there is no other option but to increase the overall quota
In the long run yes, we need to think big. One reason i brought this up as several of the immigration bills were to be taken up last year, but the Senate is not allocating enough time to discuss this. The house for its part passed a partisan bill with very little benefits for the legal immigrants.
If the discussion on some of the controversial issues in the "CIR" get ugly things may be postponed to the next year(Not much activity may be planned as we get closer to elections, most house members may go back to campaigning).
90k is not much, but the way USCIS works is odd. Because they cannot process 90k +140K petetions in a short time, it will allow everybody to file I-485 and get portability.
--MC
In the long run yes, we need to think big. One reason i brought this up as several of the immigration bills were to be taken up last year, but the Senate is not allocating enough time to discuss this. The house for its part passed a partisan bill with very little benefits for the legal immigrants.
If the discussion on some of the controversial issues in the "CIR" get ugly things may be postponed to the next year(Not much activity may be planned as we get closer to elections, most house members may go back to campaigning).
90k is not much, but the way USCIS works is odd. Because they cannot process 90k +140K petetions in a short time, it will allow everybody to file I-485 and get portability.
--MC
hair Rainbow iPhone Wallpaper
Hermione
09-27 08:49 AM
Law abiding? I beg to differ. Application for asylum goes to court only if the petitioner spent more than one year illegally in the US.
That does not change the fact that the immigration system is broken, I just want to point out that what is considered to be "law abiding" or "law breaker" is aften very-very relative. We are all in the same boat.
That does not change the fact that the immigration system is broken, I just want to point out that what is considered to be "law abiding" or "law breaker" is aften very-very relative. We are all in the same boat.
more...
AK01
03-26 10:48 PM
Don't listen to those who would tell you that you need 5 years after your degree was awarded. TALK TO A FREAKING LAWYER.
Simply untrue.. The magic word is: progressive, progressive, progressive...
From horse's mouth:
http://www.immigrationlinks.com/news/news215.htm
(see example from the above link below). If you file EB-2 without MS and your 5-years of experience is not post Bachelor's (or the underlying job doesn't require 5-years of post Bachelor's experience), your I-140 will be denied. If you file it, and it doesn't get denied, then the adjudicator made a mistake and consider yourself lucky.
EB-2 is Masters or BS + 5 years of progressive experience. Both for job requirement and alien qualification.
From the link:
The following are examples of actual statements contained at blocks 14 and 15 of the ETA-750. They are by no means exhaustive. Their inclusion here is intended to simply illustrate concepts discussed in this memorandum.
Position 1: Staff Software Engineer
ETA 750 Item 14:
Education - B.S. (or foreign equiv.) comp. science, elec. eng., or related field.
Experience - 5 years job offered or 5 years related occupation software engineer.
ETA 750 Item 15:
Exp. must include: design & development of major software subsystems; RDBMS internals; operating system internals; complex systems software design; symmetric multiprocessing and large scale network systems.
It is unclear whether this job requires 5 years of experience following receipt of the baccalaureate. For this reason, the adjudicator should request that the petitioner provide a supplemental statement clarifying whether the position requires five years of post-baccalaureate experience that is truly progressive in nature. If the supplemental statement establishes that the minimum qualifications for the position require a member of the professions holding an advanced degree and, assuming the beneficiary possesses these qualifications, the petition should be approved.
Simply untrue.. The magic word is: progressive, progressive, progressive...
From horse's mouth:
http://www.immigrationlinks.com/news/news215.htm
(see example from the above link below). If you file EB-2 without MS and your 5-years of experience is not post Bachelor's (or the underlying job doesn't require 5-years of post Bachelor's experience), your I-140 will be denied. If you file it, and it doesn't get denied, then the adjudicator made a mistake and consider yourself lucky.
EB-2 is Masters or BS + 5 years of progressive experience. Both for job requirement and alien qualification.
From the link:
The following are examples of actual statements contained at blocks 14 and 15 of the ETA-750. They are by no means exhaustive. Their inclusion here is intended to simply illustrate concepts discussed in this memorandum.
Position 1: Staff Software Engineer
ETA 750 Item 14:
Education - B.S. (or foreign equiv.) comp. science, elec. eng., or related field.
Experience - 5 years job offered or 5 years related occupation software engineer.
ETA 750 Item 15:
Exp. must include: design & development of major software subsystems; RDBMS internals; operating system internals; complex systems software design; symmetric multiprocessing and large scale network systems.
It is unclear whether this job requires 5 years of experience following receipt of the baccalaureate. For this reason, the adjudicator should request that the petitioner provide a supplemental statement clarifying whether the position requires five years of post-baccalaureate experience that is truly progressive in nature. If the supplemental statement establishes that the minimum qualifications for the position require a member of the professions holding an advanced degree and, assuming the beneficiary possesses these qualifications, the petition should be approved.
hot Download This Wallpaper
anilsal
12-26 11:08 PM
Will become 3 nights in a row for you folks. But you are welcome to attend the next IL state chapter concall.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2708
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2708
more...
house iPhone wallpapers
TheOmbudsman
08-24 01:22 PM
Stupid answer:
Less than what Indians would like.
in EB3, EB2 and EB1
Less than what Indians would like.
in EB3, EB2 and EB1
tattoo iPhone Wallpaper:DC Rainbow
Maverick_2008
02-22 09:32 PM
Even TSC is getting s..l..o..w now for 140.
Maverick_2008
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=NSC
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=TSC
TSC
485: went from May 24 to April 10, 2007 :(
140: June 23, 2007
NSC
485: July 30, 3007
140: Jan 22, 2007
Maverick_2008
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=NSC
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=TSC
TSC
485: went from May 24 to April 10, 2007 :(
140: June 23, 2007
NSC
485: July 30, 3007
140: Jan 22, 2007
more...
pictures Rainbow Backdrop iPhone
eb3retro
03-30 04:25 PM
did 5 trips in the past 2 years (few of them official) using AP. Changed jobs twice in EAD not filed ac21. As long as you have valid AP, you are good to go to enter. make sure you remain calm and answer any questions in POE. You will be fine.
dresses Rainbow Transparent
santb1975
02-15 05:41 PM
I will keep you posted on how this goes.
May you have plenty of supporters coming your way.
I am happy to report that one brave Dallas member called up and we both will be collecting letters at the DFW Temple on Sunday.
May you have plenty of supporters coming your way.
I am happy to report that one brave Dallas member called up and we both will be collecting letters at the DFW Temple on Sunday.
more...
makeup Rainbow
Munshi75
04-07 11:00 AM
I am almost sure that if your work place (physical presence ) happens to be at a Not-for -profit organization, you case would be a cap-exempt one. However, last year USCIS and lawyers association had a lengthy debate about the legal -wordings, over this issue and i have no idea what happened afterwards
girlfriend iPhone wallpapers
cableman
08-15 07:44 PM
If you are sick of the GC retrogression and Canada is not your cup of tea, UK is another option for you. You can calculate your points online to see if you are qualified for the UK Highly Skilled Migrant Programme (HSMP). It is always good to more than one option.
http://www.workpermit.com/uk/hsmp_calculator.htm
:cool:
http://www.workpermit.com/uk/hsmp_calculator.htm
:cool:
hairstyles Landscape iPhone Wallpaper
hpandey
03-02 11:36 AM
Looks like your PD is current. You might get your GC anytime. That is another factor I would consider if your GC gets approved before you get married.
Filing six months in advance seems to be a better idea.
Filing six months in advance seems to be a better idea.
mdforgc
04-07 08:46 PM
Guys
I think this is the time we have to work on the house conference committee members to the best. This is where we are gonna have probs. Core guys-- Can we step up some campaign for this- what is QGAs take on this? Dont mak eit public if it is sensitive.
I think this is the time we have to work on the house conference committee members to the best. This is where we are gonna have probs. Core guys-- Can we step up some campaign for this- what is QGAs take on this? Dont mak eit public if it is sensitive.
ABC of GC
06-08 06:30 AM
Its not abt H1-B abuse, its abt the way it was brought up. Instead of looking into his own house (USCIS and DOL) Sen.Durbin held Indian companies responsible and almost started bashing them. Little did he anticipate that they will come back in this way.
H1-B abuse is a different issue. Sen. Durbin should have looked into rulemaking part of the game than bashing players of the game.
When the US was instrumental in doing WTO negotiations during late 90's (BTW-your's truely grew up during that period witnessing this through newspaper articles - was an exact reversal of roles played by India and US then)they never realized that globalizing markets would lead to globalizing labor market also. Now, IT has become a virtual industry with a pretty much open labor market. Professionals making Rs.50000 ($1200) are competing with those making $5000 a month. US politicians made a classic judgement error in 90's. Now, protectionist measures are being brought in by the very same people who championed globalization for a decade.
The letter puts things in perspective for sen. Durbin. It seems to carry a veiled warning about backlash of these protectionist measures on the US companies doing business in India. Starting from McDonalds,subway,coke (now even Walmart) to Ford, GM, IBM, Pfizer, Merck, Novartis, Abott, J&J, JP Morgan, Bank of America and many more have huge business interests in India. The size of Indian market totals upto atleast 0.8 billion human individuals with need for housing, auto, computers, electronics, healthcare, finance, consumer products etc. Losing an inch of it can make an international co. nervous.
As far as Indian consumers go they now have options- British, German, Japanese, French and now even the Indian companies.
Durbin tried to scare a cat, unfortunately for him it turned out to be a big wild cat- aTiger.
Well Said
H1-B abuse is a different issue. Sen. Durbin should have looked into rulemaking part of the game than bashing players of the game.
When the US was instrumental in doing WTO negotiations during late 90's (BTW-your's truely grew up during that period witnessing this through newspaper articles - was an exact reversal of roles played by India and US then)they never realized that globalizing markets would lead to globalizing labor market also. Now, IT has become a virtual industry with a pretty much open labor market. Professionals making Rs.50000 ($1200) are competing with those making $5000 a month. US politicians made a classic judgement error in 90's. Now, protectionist measures are being brought in by the very same people who championed globalization for a decade.
The letter puts things in perspective for sen. Durbin. It seems to carry a veiled warning about backlash of these protectionist measures on the US companies doing business in India. Starting from McDonalds,subway,coke (now even Walmart) to Ford, GM, IBM, Pfizer, Merck, Novartis, Abott, J&J, JP Morgan, Bank of America and many more have huge business interests in India. The size of Indian market totals upto atleast 0.8 billion human individuals with need for housing, auto, computers, electronics, healthcare, finance, consumer products etc. Losing an inch of it can make an international co. nervous.
As far as Indian consumers go they now have options- British, German, Japanese, French and now even the Indian companies.
Durbin tried to scare a cat, unfortunately for him it turned out to be a big wild cat- aTiger.
Well Said
No comments:
Post a Comment