franklin
09-21 08:40 PM
Well, it's time to break the news.:p I didn't attend the rally because
(1) the first and foremost reason: a recent surgey at my backbone , and I may not be able to walk for more than 15 minutes continuously.
(2) the second and honest opinion: Even If I were doing well, I wouldn't have attended the rally due to the yelling-nature of words from some of the Core leaders, and their pushy messages.
(3) the third and final point: The rally pictures and the rally experience of other members have impressed me very much and have totally changed my mind. So, next time, whereever you organize the rally, I will be there.:p
This is my honest opinion about my abscence. I hope noone will jump on me for my reasoning.
Regards,
IK
Thank you for your honest opinion.
1) totally understandable
2) I don't think there was any core member yelling, just a bunch of enthusiastic supporters. But I appreciate the feedback and understand the frustration. It takes different things to motivate different people, which is why I am looking for real feedback to improve moving forward. I'm sure you understand, politely asking once or twice many not get through the flurry of daily posts that happen on this board :)
3) That's good to know! There is a lot of work to do moving forward. I would suggest your joining your local chapter if you haven't done so already. If you don't have a local chapter - step up and make one! Which leads me to...
Core chaps and chapesses - I think it would a good idea to overhaul links on the navigation pages to reflect up to date contact members and chapter information.
(1) the first and foremost reason: a recent surgey at my backbone , and I may not be able to walk for more than 15 minutes continuously.
(2) the second and honest opinion: Even If I were doing well, I wouldn't have attended the rally due to the yelling-nature of words from some of the Core leaders, and their pushy messages.
(3) the third and final point: The rally pictures and the rally experience of other members have impressed me very much and have totally changed my mind. So, next time, whereever you organize the rally, I will be there.:p
This is my honest opinion about my abscence. I hope noone will jump on me for my reasoning.
Regards,
IK
Thank you for your honest opinion.
1) totally understandable
2) I don't think there was any core member yelling, just a bunch of enthusiastic supporters. But I appreciate the feedback and understand the frustration. It takes different things to motivate different people, which is why I am looking for real feedback to improve moving forward. I'm sure you understand, politely asking once or twice many not get through the flurry of daily posts that happen on this board :)
3) That's good to know! There is a lot of work to do moving forward. I would suggest your joining your local chapter if you haven't done so already. If you don't have a local chapter - step up and make one! Which leads me to...
Core chaps and chapesses - I think it would a good idea to overhaul links on the navigation pages to reflect up to date contact members and chapter information.
wallpaper Easter eggs coloring pages
naveenarjun
05-31 03:07 PM
http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/reference/b_three_sections_with_teasers/glossary.htm
I don't think it bodes well for anything that is sent to the Table. This Senate Language Glossary has what "motion to table" means, essentially something that senate does not want to Consider. This Amendment(1249) is said to have been ordered "to lie on the table" not sure if it is same as the motion to table. But, I think we should hope for an amendment that does not have a table associated with its status.
where does it say that this amendment has been ordered to lie on the table..can u please post the link.. I am looking at the amendments page and there is nothing of that sort...
I don't think it bodes well for anything that is sent to the Table. This Senate Language Glossary has what "motion to table" means, essentially something that senate does not want to Consider. This Amendment(1249) is said to have been ordered "to lie on the table" not sure if it is same as the motion to table. But, I think we should hope for an amendment that does not have a table associated with its status.
where does it say that this amendment has been ordered to lie on the table..can u please post the link.. I am looking at the amendments page and there is nothing of that sort...
ameryki
10-06 10:27 AM
Just a quick update I efiled on Sept 22nd 2009. Was assigned to LIN, Nebraska. Sent supporting documents the next day by first class mail. Received 2 copies of advance parole in the mail yesterday. Checked online this morning case was approved on October 2nd 2009. So basically from filing online to approval took 10 days total. I am amazed.
2011 Hunt for Easter Eggs!
Regal22
07-21 07:54 AM
Subject: Injustice :mad: for people with priority dates in '02, '03, '04 etc. who are still waiting for their labor certs to be processed using the traditional process - we want to file a case against DOL's lethargy - Let us join together and file a case against DOL and bring justice to this unjustified system.
The manner in which the backlog reduction center have been processing the
labor certs seems to be very unfair for people like me and others who have been affected. I know of cases with priority dates as late as 2005 that have gone through the traditional process and have been approved already. And there are cases like mine and others with much earlier priority dates that haven't been done. This is very unfair and unjustified. It is like we have been standing in the queue for several hours and a person who came much later than me just sneaked into the queue and got his service done while I am still waiting for my turn. Also the fact that now the UCIS has made the filing of I-485 current adds more insult to the injury that I and others in my position have endured.
The fact that the I-485 was made current and then withdrawn was made a big deal and people wanted to file cases, whereas the plight of people like me who are still waiting for the labor cert to be cleared has been totally
ignored, inspite of the fact that people who applied for labor much later
have been approved through the traditional process.
We want to file a case ASAP with the DOL or other relevant
authority regarding this issue and the unfair way of the process that we
have been subjected to. So can all those folks who have been affected by this join and voice your support? We shoud put up this fight because this is in no way justified. Why would it be?
The next steps should be:
- Get all of the support we need from all affected folks ASAP
- Get in touch with a lawyer who can help us to prepare the case
- File the case in a court against DOL
- Make sure we get justice
Please join and show your support. Please help!!!
Risker,
I am very glad that you brought this point. Nothing would give me greater pleasure than suing the DOL. We may not sue DOL on their inability to clear the backlogs, but we can definitely sue them in their utter and deliberate disregard to FIFO procedures (mind that some people with priority dates in 2004, 2005 have already got their labor certifications, but some with priority dates in 2001, 2002 are still stuck). When I read on the DOL web site that they have tried to maintain FIFO, it makes me feel like puking.
Some folks have pointed that the lawsuit is not worth, as it has little chance of winning. To me personally, more than winning or loosing, it is a matter of bringing injustice to the light, as Gandhi has said something in this line: First step against injustice is to make it visible. This law suit will bring public scrutiny to the misdeeds of the DOL.
Even if all the backlogs get cleared by September 2007, severe damage has been already dealt to our lives. Though I am close to getting my labor clearance (I filed RRI few weeks back), I am strongly in favor of continuing with the law suit even after getting the labor clearance.
Let�s get IV�s attention and support in this area. Let�s talk to AILA. Let�s write letters to senators and house representatives (congresswoman Lofgren may be good person to start with). Let�s write to media personnel. Let�s do whatever needs to be done to expose this insult and injury to the immigrants who waited in the line for years and followed rules of the game.
The manner in which the backlog reduction center have been processing the
labor certs seems to be very unfair for people like me and others who have been affected. I know of cases with priority dates as late as 2005 that have gone through the traditional process and have been approved already. And there are cases like mine and others with much earlier priority dates that haven't been done. This is very unfair and unjustified. It is like we have been standing in the queue for several hours and a person who came much later than me just sneaked into the queue and got his service done while I am still waiting for my turn. Also the fact that now the UCIS has made the filing of I-485 current adds more insult to the injury that I and others in my position have endured.
The fact that the I-485 was made current and then withdrawn was made a big deal and people wanted to file cases, whereas the plight of people like me who are still waiting for the labor cert to be cleared has been totally
ignored, inspite of the fact that people who applied for labor much later
have been approved through the traditional process.
We want to file a case ASAP with the DOL or other relevant
authority regarding this issue and the unfair way of the process that we
have been subjected to. So can all those folks who have been affected by this join and voice your support? We shoud put up this fight because this is in no way justified. Why would it be?
The next steps should be:
- Get all of the support we need from all affected folks ASAP
- Get in touch with a lawyer who can help us to prepare the case
- File the case in a court against DOL
- Make sure we get justice
Please join and show your support. Please help!!!
Risker,
I am very glad that you brought this point. Nothing would give me greater pleasure than suing the DOL. We may not sue DOL on their inability to clear the backlogs, but we can definitely sue them in their utter and deliberate disregard to FIFO procedures (mind that some people with priority dates in 2004, 2005 have already got their labor certifications, but some with priority dates in 2001, 2002 are still stuck). When I read on the DOL web site that they have tried to maintain FIFO, it makes me feel like puking.
Some folks have pointed that the lawsuit is not worth, as it has little chance of winning. To me personally, more than winning or loosing, it is a matter of bringing injustice to the light, as Gandhi has said something in this line: First step against injustice is to make it visible. This law suit will bring public scrutiny to the misdeeds of the DOL.
Even if all the backlogs get cleared by September 2007, severe damage has been already dealt to our lives. Though I am close to getting my labor clearance (I filed RRI few weeks back), I am strongly in favor of continuing with the law suit even after getting the labor clearance.
Let�s get IV�s attention and support in this area. Let�s talk to AILA. Let�s write letters to senators and house representatives (congresswoman Lofgren may be good person to start with). Let�s write to media personnel. Let�s do whatever needs to be done to expose this insult and injury to the immigrants who waited in the line for years and followed rules of the game.
more...
nave_kum
07-22 03:24 AM
07/21/2007: RFE/NOID Flexible Time Frame Rule and Need for USCIS Discretion for Pe-July 17, 2007 EB-485 Filers
July VB Fiasco was a tragic event in the American immigration history and we are grateful that the USCIS rectified the problem on July 17, 2007 by reversing its decision to deny July 2007 EB-485 applications. We do not have specific statisics on EB-485 filers from July 2, 2007 until July 17, 2007. However, for the two reasons, among others, a large number of applicants sent in EB-485 applications during the period. Firstly, they more or less anticipated that either DOS or USCIS would rectify the problems because of the potential serious flaws in their decisions. Secondly, AILF was preparing class action lawsuits and they wanted to make it sure that they took advantage of being a member of the class without actually being named as plaintiffs. One time, people thought it was a smart move and right thing to do it, even though this reporter suggested to the people to wait until August VB was released.
Currently, these early filers are literally going through nightmares, hardships, and sleepless nights because of the two reasons. The first reason is that their cases have been on hold and no Receipt Notices have been issued. The second reason is that recently the USCIS revised its rule (1) allowing the adjudicating officers to exercise a discretion and issue a RFE with the response time of less than 12 weeks and (2) to exercise a discretion to either reject or deny a petition or an application without issuing RFE when the "initial evidence" is missing in the filing. Combination of these facts is currently creating a turmoil to these filers for the two reasons. There are some filers who submitted I-140/I-485 application without a sufficient documentation in haste, for instance, medical report, or other flaws in the submitted evidence. These people are restless not knowing whether their application could be rejected or denied, indeed a truly deadly consequences. The circumstances force them to wonder whether they should refile the petition/application before August 17, 2007 not to take any chances. There are, however, two hurdles to such decision. One is the recent denial of I-140 petitions by the adjudicators if the petition was not accompanied by the "original" labor certification. The another reason is no fixed rule or policy on the filing of multiple I-485 applications. This creates a fear that their second filing may also be rejected or denied. They are thus trapped! The second victims are international travelers. If the application is either rejected or denied and they are present in the U.S., they will be able to refile it after correcting the flaws in their initial evidence before August 17, 2007. However, when they are not present in the U.S., they will be deprived of such opportunities, which may be considered "deadly." Some people are still present in the U.S. at this time, but because of business or personal emergency, they will have to travel outside of the country using their H-1B/H-4 or L-1/L-2 visa. If their cases are rejcted or denied during their absence, they will not be able to refile it timely before August 17, 2007. They are trapped again! Their act which was considered a right thing to do to one time turns out to be a nightmare. Who would have anticipated the nightmare?
We urge the USCIS to consider the following actions to relieve these applicants from the unnecesary hardship:
Under he RFE/NOID Flexible Timeframe rule, a decision to reject or deny without a RFE remains a "discretion" of the individual adjudicator in each case. This reporter proposes that considering the unusual circumstances involving the July VB fiasco and the USCIS unusual remedial action at the last minute, the USCIS exempts these filers from the rule and make it mandatory to issue RFE before rejection or denial unless the following flaws are found in the filing:
No filing fee checks or flaws in the filing fee checks
Missing signatures in the forms
Missing forms
Missing underlying certified labor certification application for I-140 petitions (either original or copy).
Should the filers decide to refile it before August 17, 2007, the USCIS should accept a copy of the certified labor certification application rather than rejection or denial of the refiled I-140 petition. In fact, it has been the INS/USCIS tradition to accept I-140 petition with a copy of the certified labor certification application inasmuch as the original was on file with the agency, albeit in other file of the same applicant or other applicants. Accordingly, it should be a matter of adhering to the tradition and to instruct the adjudicators not to reject such refiling on the issue of a copy of the certified labor certification application. Additionally, inasmuch as there is an evidence that the labor certification has been certified by the DOL but the applicant was unable to submit the original or copy because the application was lost or yet to be delivered to the applicant, such I-140 which was filed during the period should not be rejected or denied. Again, it has been a tradition of the agency to request a duplicate certified labor certification from the DOL by the agency itself when there was a proof of certification. We urge the USCIS to exercise the discretion and instruct the adjudicators not to reject or deny I-140 filed during the problem period for the reasons of missing "original."
Foregoing actions will relieve these filers from most of the nightmares or status of being trapped. It is thus strongly urged that the leaders of the USCIS extend a compassion on a human level and exercise a discretion immediately to take the foregoing actions. This reporter has been receiving hundres of emails from these filers and had to share the pains and emotional despair since there was no answer to the foregoing issues under the curcumstances. Since the deadline of filing is August 17, 2007, the USCIS should swiftly release an announcement to relieve these people from the problem "effectively." On behalf of all these trapped, this reporter personally pleas the leaders of the USCIS to act quickly.
July VB Fiasco was a tragic event in the American immigration history and we are grateful that the USCIS rectified the problem on July 17, 2007 by reversing its decision to deny July 2007 EB-485 applications. We do not have specific statisics on EB-485 filers from July 2, 2007 until July 17, 2007. However, for the two reasons, among others, a large number of applicants sent in EB-485 applications during the period. Firstly, they more or less anticipated that either DOS or USCIS would rectify the problems because of the potential serious flaws in their decisions. Secondly, AILF was preparing class action lawsuits and they wanted to make it sure that they took advantage of being a member of the class without actually being named as plaintiffs. One time, people thought it was a smart move and right thing to do it, even though this reporter suggested to the people to wait until August VB was released.
Currently, these early filers are literally going through nightmares, hardships, and sleepless nights because of the two reasons. The first reason is that their cases have been on hold and no Receipt Notices have been issued. The second reason is that recently the USCIS revised its rule (1) allowing the adjudicating officers to exercise a discretion and issue a RFE with the response time of less than 12 weeks and (2) to exercise a discretion to either reject or deny a petition or an application without issuing RFE when the "initial evidence" is missing in the filing. Combination of these facts is currently creating a turmoil to these filers for the two reasons. There are some filers who submitted I-140/I-485 application without a sufficient documentation in haste, for instance, medical report, or other flaws in the submitted evidence. These people are restless not knowing whether their application could be rejected or denied, indeed a truly deadly consequences. The circumstances force them to wonder whether they should refile the petition/application before August 17, 2007 not to take any chances. There are, however, two hurdles to such decision. One is the recent denial of I-140 petitions by the adjudicators if the petition was not accompanied by the "original" labor certification. The another reason is no fixed rule or policy on the filing of multiple I-485 applications. This creates a fear that their second filing may also be rejected or denied. They are thus trapped! The second victims are international travelers. If the application is either rejected or denied and they are present in the U.S., they will be able to refile it after correcting the flaws in their initial evidence before August 17, 2007. However, when they are not present in the U.S., they will be deprived of such opportunities, which may be considered "deadly." Some people are still present in the U.S. at this time, but because of business or personal emergency, they will have to travel outside of the country using their H-1B/H-4 or L-1/L-2 visa. If their cases are rejcted or denied during their absence, they will not be able to refile it timely before August 17, 2007. They are trapped again! Their act which was considered a right thing to do to one time turns out to be a nightmare. Who would have anticipated the nightmare?
We urge the USCIS to consider the following actions to relieve these applicants from the unnecesary hardship:
Under he RFE/NOID Flexible Timeframe rule, a decision to reject or deny without a RFE remains a "discretion" of the individual adjudicator in each case. This reporter proposes that considering the unusual circumstances involving the July VB fiasco and the USCIS unusual remedial action at the last minute, the USCIS exempts these filers from the rule and make it mandatory to issue RFE before rejection or denial unless the following flaws are found in the filing:
No filing fee checks or flaws in the filing fee checks
Missing signatures in the forms
Missing forms
Missing underlying certified labor certification application for I-140 petitions (either original or copy).
Should the filers decide to refile it before August 17, 2007, the USCIS should accept a copy of the certified labor certification application rather than rejection or denial of the refiled I-140 petition. In fact, it has been the INS/USCIS tradition to accept I-140 petition with a copy of the certified labor certification application inasmuch as the original was on file with the agency, albeit in other file of the same applicant or other applicants. Accordingly, it should be a matter of adhering to the tradition and to instruct the adjudicators not to reject such refiling on the issue of a copy of the certified labor certification application. Additionally, inasmuch as there is an evidence that the labor certification has been certified by the DOL but the applicant was unable to submit the original or copy because the application was lost or yet to be delivered to the applicant, such I-140 which was filed during the period should not be rejected or denied. Again, it has been a tradition of the agency to request a duplicate certified labor certification from the DOL by the agency itself when there was a proof of certification. We urge the USCIS to exercise the discretion and instruct the adjudicators not to reject or deny I-140 filed during the problem period for the reasons of missing "original."
Foregoing actions will relieve these filers from most of the nightmares or status of being trapped. It is thus strongly urged that the leaders of the USCIS extend a compassion on a human level and exercise a discretion immediately to take the foregoing actions. This reporter has been receiving hundres of emails from these filers and had to share the pains and emotional despair since there was no answer to the foregoing issues under the curcumstances. Since the deadline of filing is August 17, 2007, the USCIS should swiftly release an announcement to relieve these people from the problem "effectively." On behalf of all these trapped, this reporter personally pleas the leaders of the USCIS to act quickly.
gcformeornot
04-26 01:22 PM
continue.....
more...
newgcor
07-19 12:15 PM
My employer filed my I140 on June 20th 2007. But they have not received the receipt notivce till date. it has been more than 4 weeks.
What should I do to get the receipt notice from USCIS?. Can we file 485 with a covering letter ststing my 140 receipt notice has not been received for more than 4 or 5 weeks.. Please help me..
What should I do to get the receipt notice from USCIS?. Can we file 485 with a covering letter ststing my 140 receipt notice has not been received for more than 4 or 5 weeks.. Please help me..
2010 Easter Coloring Pages, Free
santb1975
04-27 10:12 AM
You made us cross the 3000 milemark. Thankyou. We are at $3086 now. Let us keep gong folks
Good Morning Friends !
Just Contributed $100 via PayPal
jimytomy :)
---------------------------------
Good Morning Friends !
Just Contributed $100 via PayPal
jimytomy :)
---------------------------------
more...
rajuseattle
08-21 01:52 AM
I had a similar experience, i took matter with the consul general, other than making an apology in the written e-mail I dont think he took any steps in improving the Customer Service @ SFO consulate office. I sent them US postal Money order, so i dont think they duped me...it just cost me extra $20.
Babu mentality is still their for any Govt of india employee and no matter what position they are holding, they all behave same, very rude and corrupt minded, always looking for an opportunity to make quick bucks using their position. Though in your case if you would have write the money order or cashier's check in favor of the consul general, Govt of india account, i dont think they have any legal way to encash these check or money orders in favor of them.
I guess the fraud is when folks send them $20 bills, thats very easy way of stealing the money and especially when they send you the PIO card in the same original envelope which you sent. Something suspicious. Write to WAshington DC office and see if they take any action.
Babu mentality is still their for any Govt of india employee and no matter what position they are holding, they all behave same, very rude and corrupt minded, always looking for an opportunity to make quick bucks using their position. Though in your case if you would have write the money order or cashier's check in favor of the consul general, Govt of india account, i dont think they have any legal way to encash these check or money orders in favor of them.
I guess the fraud is when folks send them $20 bills, thats very easy way of stealing the money and especially when they send you the PIO card in the same original envelope which you sent. Something suspicious. Write to WAshington DC office and see if they take any action.
hair Easter Egg coloring page
rimzhim
02-12 11:30 AM
I agree with a_yaja,
We all came from H1B root. We pass that barrier and want to shut gate!!
This is not fare. Remember, when some people have opposed I 485 filling provision in Feb 15, many of our members hammered them with selfish label !
How come we suggest to stop H1B?
It should not be shut down, I agree, we came here on H1B. But the number of H1B allowed per yr should not exceed the number of GCs given every yr. that i think is what go_go_guy was saying.
We all came from H1B root. We pass that barrier and want to shut gate!!
This is not fare. Remember, when some people have opposed I 485 filling provision in Feb 15, many of our members hammered them with selfish label !
How come we suggest to stop H1B?
It should not be shut down, I agree, we came here on H1B. But the number of H1B allowed per yr should not exceed the number of GCs given every yr. that i think is what go_go_guy was saying.
more...
acecupid
06-16 02:44 PM
Dear Folks, I have a question:
For example, if someone's Advance Parole document validity is terminating on (say for ex), July 16, 2009, then, should the person apply for renewing his/her application prior to July 16, 2009? In other words, should a person's application to renew his/her AP document be made prior to the termination of the current one, OR, could this application for renewal be made after the current AP document's validity expires (in this case after July 16, 2009)? Thanks a lot, friends.
USCIS accepts AP renewal applications 120 days in advance of expiring AP. The normal processing time for AP is approx 1-2 months (usually it is about a month). Keep in mind that the new AP which is issued will have an immediate effective date from the date of issue and the start date will not be from the expiry date of old AP. So in most cases you will end up losing some days or even months. If you do not forsee any immediate need to travel you should wait till 30-40 days prior to old AP expiry and then apply. If your travel plans are unknown and you may have to travel if an urgent situation arises, then you should apply 120-90 days in advance to make sure you have AP validity at all times. You will obviously lose some days or months... but then who says everything that USCIS does is fair :)
For example, if someone's Advance Parole document validity is terminating on (say for ex), July 16, 2009, then, should the person apply for renewing his/her application prior to July 16, 2009? In other words, should a person's application to renew his/her AP document be made prior to the termination of the current one, OR, could this application for renewal be made after the current AP document's validity expires (in this case after July 16, 2009)? Thanks a lot, friends.
USCIS accepts AP renewal applications 120 days in advance of expiring AP. The normal processing time for AP is approx 1-2 months (usually it is about a month). Keep in mind that the new AP which is issued will have an immediate effective date from the date of issue and the start date will not be from the expiry date of old AP. So in most cases you will end up losing some days or even months. If you do not forsee any immediate need to travel you should wait till 30-40 days prior to old AP expiry and then apply. If your travel plans are unknown and you may have to travel if an urgent situation arises, then you should apply 120-90 days in advance to make sure you have AP validity at all times. You will obviously lose some days or months... but then who says everything that USCIS does is fair :)
hot happy easter coloring words.
srkamath
07-17 07:36 PM
The current interpretation of spilling over to EB2 before EB3 is CORRECT. If there are three preference categories, EB1,2,3, then it is in the best national interest to maximize allocations to higher preference categories. Note that Eb3 and 4 are even lower preferences, they get only 7.1% each and NO SPILLOVERS. The preference system is in the order of EB1,2,3,4,5 - that is the law.
Is it fair to EB3 ? - NO as they have to wait much longer.
USCIS and DOS are trying hard to get all EB2 to become current asap. By doing so..
1. USCIS / DOS will look efficient (only EB3 will be backlogged)
2. 2010 onwards EB3 will get a lot more spillovers
Of course, if we have EB3 to EB2 conversions by the thousands, then the DOL - USCIS combo will clamp down on it, they will scrutinize the cases even more, slow down the processing and we will have EB2 and EB3 retrogressed for a decade.
Is it fair to EB3 ? - NO as they have to wait much longer.
USCIS and DOS are trying hard to get all EB2 to become current asap. By doing so..
1. USCIS / DOS will look efficient (only EB3 will be backlogged)
2. 2010 onwards EB3 will get a lot more spillovers
Of course, if we have EB3 to EB2 conversions by the thousands, then the DOL - USCIS combo will clamp down on it, they will scrutinize the cases even more, slow down the processing and we will have EB2 and EB3 retrogressed for a decade.
more...
house coloring pages easter eggs
Macaca
09-15 09:05 PM
To feel today
what one felt yesterday
isn't to feel -
it's to remember today what was felt yesterday,
to be today's living corpse of
what yesterday was lived and lost
Fernando Pessoa, The Book of Disquiet
what one felt yesterday
isn't to feel -
it's to remember today what was felt yesterday,
to be today's living corpse of
what yesterday was lived and lost
Fernando Pessoa, The Book of Disquiet
tattoo Easter Coloring Pages are fun
gunabcd
07-17 10:39 PM
I'm still wishing (and i'll be honest) USCIS come up with a reason/regulation/rule that will delay EAD for everyone until BEC people are able to file 485 OR in Oct they retrogress only till March 2005
This is not how you should have said, delay EAD for others just because people are struck at BEC. Comeon buddy show some wisdom, you should have said USCIS come out with a plan where as soon as BEC labor is cleared, they accept the applications for 485.
The reason i said that: the manpower/funds that will be spent on the 1M+ EADs can be made available to BECs (if possible) and get the BEC job done quicker. EADs will be delayed only by a few months. Also don't forget the "OR..." part dude.
This is not how you should have said, delay EAD for others just because people are struck at BEC. Comeon buddy show some wisdom, you should have said USCIS come out with a plan where as soon as BEC labor is cleared, they accept the applications for 485.
The reason i said that: the manpower/funds that will be spent on the 1M+ EADs can be made available to BECs (if possible) and get the BEC job done quicker. EADs will be delayed only by a few months. Also don't forget the "OR..." part dude.
more...
pictures coloring pages for easter.
Rockford
09-04 02:36 PM
You still have time to arrange your plans and attend! Here�s why you should come:
..................... Rather, I invite you to think this way: Do it because it�s right! Do it for yourself! Think to yourself that you would do this even if you were the only person attending the rally. Think of Gandhi. Think of Martin Luther King.
.................... If you do not attend the rally, it will be a once-in-a-lifetime lost opportunity! LET�S GO! WE CAN DO THIS TOGETHER!!!!!!!!!!!
Jaime , Very good post and very encouraging. It will change at least a few minds.
.............
Lot of people consider it below dignity to do something about GC related stuff, many just want to live they way they are, no ambitions, no motivation to work towards a change.
............- most of these wake up late in morning, go to work, watch TV , lazy in weekends , play cards, chat on phone , always spend a lot of hours on the internet researching for some crappy deals on electronic goods - the time, if well spent is worth more than what they save on buying the item.
...................
Chanduv23 , I know you are a very active member in these forums and feel very strongly about these efforts. I can probably understand your frustration, But I don't think we can embrace/attract people by alienating them.
It is pretty broad generalization to say those who don't/can't attend the rally or those who does not have a positive disposition about the rally are bunch of lazy, TV watching , cards playing , bargain hunting , un-ambitious people.
Let us move with a positive message. :) :) .
..................... Rather, I invite you to think this way: Do it because it�s right! Do it for yourself! Think to yourself that you would do this even if you were the only person attending the rally. Think of Gandhi. Think of Martin Luther King.
.................... If you do not attend the rally, it will be a once-in-a-lifetime lost opportunity! LET�S GO! WE CAN DO THIS TOGETHER!!!!!!!!!!!
Jaime , Very good post and very encouraging. It will change at least a few minds.
.............
Lot of people consider it below dignity to do something about GC related stuff, many just want to live they way they are, no ambitions, no motivation to work towards a change.
............- most of these wake up late in morning, go to work, watch TV , lazy in weekends , play cards, chat on phone , always spend a lot of hours on the internet researching for some crappy deals on electronic goods - the time, if well spent is worth more than what they save on buying the item.
...................
Chanduv23 , I know you are a very active member in these forums and feel very strongly about these efforts. I can probably understand your frustration, But I don't think we can embrace/attract people by alienating them.
It is pretty broad generalization to say those who don't/can't attend the rally or those who does not have a positive disposition about the rally are bunch of lazy, TV watching , cards playing , bargain hunting , un-ambitious people.
Let us move with a positive message. :) :) .
dresses coloring pages easter
ajobha
09-21 03:54 PM
Hi Guyz,
First off, kudos to all the friends who attended the rally. I really appreciate the efforts and thank all of them.
I just thought of starting this thread for people who did not attend. Please explain in one or two sentences why you did not attend. Whether it was a personal reason, whether u were scared, didn't care, forgot, didn't know! etc.
My reason:
I really wanted a green card, but because India is growing so fast, I really don't think I want it so badly anymore. So, I did not have the motivation to go ...
First off, kudos to all the friends who attended the rally. I really appreciate the efforts and thank all of them.
I just thought of starting this thread for people who did not attend. Please explain in one or two sentences why you did not attend. Whether it was a personal reason, whether u were scared, didn't care, forgot, didn't know! etc.
My reason:
I really wanted a green card, but because India is growing so fast, I really don't think I want it so badly anymore. So, I did not have the motivation to go ...
more...
makeup Free Easter Basket Clipart
eb3retro
06-23 05:27 PM
just called, and the lady bet with me as to what bills do I want the Rep to support and named all the 3 bills...way to go..
girlfriend Basket of Easter Eggs 1
Eternal_Hope
06-24 02:26 PM
I called just now.
Keep the momentum going. It takes less than a minute.
Let's do it this time.
----------------
member Texas IV
Keep the momentum going. It takes less than a minute.
Let's do it this time.
----------------
member Texas IV
hairstyles Click the Easter eggs coloring
arunmurthy
10-01 05:56 PM
You still dont know how to write Hindi. I was appreciating psaxena's hindi comment.
Arunmurthy, Yes i can. chaval kha ke soja balak. Eat rice and sleep. please dont make any noise.
Tu dhokla kha ke so ja cheeee
Cheeee bole to Chakka in Mumbai language
:)
Arunmurthy, Yes i can. chaval kha ke soja balak. Eat rice and sleep. please dont make any noise.
Tu dhokla kha ke so ja cheeee
Cheeee bole to Chakka in Mumbai language
:)
nomad
07-23 05:19 PM
My case with PD of Aug 2002( EB3) was stuck at PBEC until May 23, 2007. PBEC had closed my case multiple times, and had to really fight to get it reopen and finally certified. I have sent emails to Sec. of Labor ( Elaine Chao) twice. Her office was helpful in opening my case. I got reply from her office within a month too. Also, I mailed senators too. Try to talk to senators from your states. I know and understand the pain of you guys, whose cases are stuck at BECs. Personally, I feel that you guys should mail Sec. of Labor, and let her have the attention of these cases. This is really injustice!
JunRN
09-12 10:44 PM
Ofcourse, if Republicans also voted yes, CIR would have passed.
For me it's simple, majority of Republicans are anti-immigrant while majority of Democrats are pro-immigrants. The vote can speak for itself.
Look at the % on the vote:
FOR CIR (Democrat: 70%, Republicans: 22%)
Now, another reality check is HR5882.
For me it's simple, majority of Republicans are anti-immigrant while majority of Democrats are pro-immigrants. The vote can speak for itself.
Look at the % on the vote:
FOR CIR (Democrat: 70%, Republicans: 22%)
Now, another reality check is HR5882.
No comments:
Post a Comment