baburob2
01-12 05:41 PM
Well Bush has been talking about this from year 2004 start i believe. it is time the congress acts i wish.
wallpaper Bethenny Frankel was
vvpandya
01-11 02:48 AM
I had an appointment on Jan 10th, 1 pm got the stamped passport same evening at 6 pm from the VFS office
subahjaani
01-12 01:48 PM
Just mailed letter to President and a copy to Immivoice.
2011 Bethenny Frankel Signing #39;The
caliguy
10-06 01:11 AM
@ SOP
Can you please provide me the sequence to call TSC using the POJ method? Based on what I read earlier in another thread, it was mentioned to choose option 4 which is to reports cases that were seperated. I tried that, reached an IO. IO told me that I should not be calling that number to check the status of my case. Do I need to choose another option?
Thanks!
Caliguy,
POJ method can be used for all cases that are current and in the processing window...just keep on trying ur luck and I am sure you'll land a decent CSR who will be much much more useful and worth your trials and efforts.
Be persistent and you have every right to be after all you came this far.
Write to Janet Napolitano and mention that you are unfairly getting delayed and that you want to know what is holding your application and all checks and clearances done and visa number is available...
SoP
Can you please provide me the sequence to call TSC using the POJ method? Based on what I read earlier in another thread, it was mentioned to choose option 4 which is to reports cases that were seperated. I tried that, reached an IO. IO told me that I should not be calling that number to check the status of my case. Do I need to choose another option?
Thanks!
Caliguy,
POJ method can be used for all cases that are current and in the processing window...just keep on trying ur luck and I am sure you'll land a decent CSR who will be much much more useful and worth your trials and efforts.
Be persistent and you have every right to be after all you came this far.
Write to Janet Napolitano and mention that you are unfairly getting delayed and that you want to know what is holding your application and all checks and clearances done and visa number is available...
SoP
more...
CADude
09-28 11:33 AM
Please write to your congressman/senator/USCIS Compaint dept, if you have not done so far. Template and details are available in this tread. Thank you.
kaisersose
03-26 02:07 PM
This is plain stupidity. These employers should first take a good look at an EAD and a GC. As for as work authorization is concerned, both these cards provide us with the same rights. The EAD says �The person identified is authorized to work in the US for the validity of this card� where as the GC says �The person identified by the card is authorized to work and remain in the US�.
So why does the legal department come into picture here? Is it because of the expiry date associated with EAD�s? If that�s the case even a GC has got an expiration date (a later date maybe). Does that mean that an additional budget is required to hire GC holders?
I was thinking exactly like you until she educated me on this yesterday.
The problem with the EAD is you are invoking AC21. There are several possible problems here including
1. Complying with AC21 requirements of job code, 180 days after 485 RD, etc.
2. Invoking AC21 without 140 approval. This is not against the law, but is risky in case of a 140 RFE.
There are more reasons, but these ought to provide enough clarity on the problem. It is in the employer's interest to ensure that the candidate does not have any such issues; issues which will lead to termination of employment. The Recruiter cannot check DOL job codes and USCIS documents. That is the job of Legal which means $$$.
So if the hiring manager does not have a budget for these extra costs or if he has an equally good candidate who is a GC holder or a citizen, it is easier to go with him or her.
So why does the legal department come into picture here? Is it because of the expiry date associated with EAD�s? If that�s the case even a GC has got an expiration date (a later date maybe). Does that mean that an additional budget is required to hire GC holders?
I was thinking exactly like you until she educated me on this yesterday.
The problem with the EAD is you are invoking AC21. There are several possible problems here including
1. Complying with AC21 requirements of job code, 180 days after 485 RD, etc.
2. Invoking AC21 without 140 approval. This is not against the law, but is risky in case of a 140 RFE.
There are more reasons, but these ought to provide enough clarity on the problem. It is in the employer's interest to ensure that the candidate does not have any such issues; issues which will lead to termination of employment. The Recruiter cannot check DOL job codes and USCIS documents. That is the job of Legal which means $$$.
So if the hiring manager does not have a budget for these extra costs or if he has an equally good candidate who is a GC holder or a citizen, it is easier to go with him or her.
more...
gcisadawg
08-20 01:07 PM
DOS has alloted most unused visa # into EB2 category this year, and EB3 was stuck due to no additional unused EB1 visas.
Visa Bulletin mentioned they did this in according to the requirements of Section 202(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. But actually this might be a misunderstanding of Section 202(a)(5) and Section 203(b) - There is NO words in the act on how to allot unused visa # to differnt categories. Even the country limit and category limit would not apply if there are unused visas #. The allotment Mr. Charles Oppenheimer did horizontal spillover caused longer and more backlogs of EB3.
Congress has a concern on the backlogs and Bush's administration promised to reduce backlogs as much as they can. If Immigration and Nationality Act allows the government to spillover the unused visa # to EB2 & EB3, and a more humane and fair system should take care of early priority date first and do whatever the government has promised, should we ask Mr. Charles Oppenheimer to think about alloting some unused visas to EB3 so it can move forword a little bit?
That is not true...If you look at the Visa Bullettin, it says
First: Priority Workers: 28.6% of the worldwide employment-based preference level, plus any numbers not required for fourth and fifth preferences.
Second: Members of the Professions Holding Advanced Degrees or Persons of Exceptional Ability: 28.6% of the worldwide employment-based preference level, plus any umbers not required by first preference.
Third: Skilled Workers, Professionals, and Other Workers: 28.6% of the worldwide level, plus any numbers not required by first and second preferences, not more than 10,000 of which to "Other Workers".
Based on the above EB1 spills over to EB2 first.....Eb3 gets unused EB2.
EB3 gets EB1 only if it is not used by EB1.
I'm EB3-I with Oct 2003 PD and I understand your frustration. There is hope only if a legislation change happens. Based on my calculation, there are about 50K to 60K EB3-I pending before me.
Thanks,
G
Visa Bulletin mentioned they did this in according to the requirements of Section 202(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. But actually this might be a misunderstanding of Section 202(a)(5) and Section 203(b) - There is NO words in the act on how to allot unused visa # to differnt categories. Even the country limit and category limit would not apply if there are unused visas #. The allotment Mr. Charles Oppenheimer did horizontal spillover caused longer and more backlogs of EB3.
Congress has a concern on the backlogs and Bush's administration promised to reduce backlogs as much as they can. If Immigration and Nationality Act allows the government to spillover the unused visa # to EB2 & EB3, and a more humane and fair system should take care of early priority date first and do whatever the government has promised, should we ask Mr. Charles Oppenheimer to think about alloting some unused visas to EB3 so it can move forword a little bit?
That is not true...If you look at the Visa Bullettin, it says
First: Priority Workers: 28.6% of the worldwide employment-based preference level, plus any numbers not required for fourth and fifth preferences.
Second: Members of the Professions Holding Advanced Degrees or Persons of Exceptional Ability: 28.6% of the worldwide employment-based preference level, plus any umbers not required by first preference.
Third: Skilled Workers, Professionals, and Other Workers: 28.6% of the worldwide level, plus any numbers not required by first and second preferences, not more than 10,000 of which to "Other Workers".
Based on the above EB1 spills over to EB2 first.....Eb3 gets unused EB2.
EB3 gets EB1 only if it is not used by EB1.
I'm EB3-I with Oct 2003 PD and I understand your frustration. There is hope only if a legislation change happens. Based on my calculation, there are about 50K to 60K EB3-I pending before me.
Thanks,
G
2010 images Bethenny Frankel, of
skynet2500
10-15 10:20 AM
I was able to contact NSC using POJ today. Got same response- File is with IO for review.
I could reach IO yesterday. representative said that me and my wife's cases are preadjudicated. Not sure if I could believe this...
I could reach IO yesterday. representative said that me and my wife's cases are preadjudicated. Not sure if I could believe this...
more...
desi3933
01-30 06:33 AM
Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair Employment Practices
Civil Rights Divison Office of Special Counsel Did You Know Page (http://www.justice.gov/crt/osc/htm/engperliwdiss.php)
Employers may not request more or different documents than are required to verify employment eligibility, reject reasonably genuine-looking documents, or specify certain documents over others with the purpose or intent of discriminating on the basis of citizenship status or national origin. U.S. citizens and all work authorized individuals are protected from document abuse.
Civil Rights Divison Office of Special Counsel Home Page (http://www.justice.gov/crt/osc/htm/Webtypes2005.php)
.
Civil Rights Divison Office of Special Counsel Did You Know Page (http://www.justice.gov/crt/osc/htm/engperliwdiss.php)
Employers may not request more or different documents than are required to verify employment eligibility, reject reasonably genuine-looking documents, or specify certain documents over others with the purpose or intent of discriminating on the basis of citizenship status or national origin. U.S. citizens and all work authorized individuals are protected from document abuse.
Civil Rights Divison Office of Special Counsel Home Page (http://www.justice.gov/crt/osc/htm/Webtypes2005.php)
.
hair Proud parents Bethenny Frankel
kanakabyraju
08-20 11:12 AM
Here is the link
Vonage - Residential Calling Plans - Premium Unlimited Plan (http://www.vonage.com/residential_calling_plans/vonage_world/?refer_id=WEBHB090201001W1)
Vonage - Residential Calling Plans - Premium Unlimited Plan (http://www.vonage.com/residential_calling_plans/vonage_world/?refer_id=WEBHB090201001W1)
more...
whitecollarslave
04-17 04:13 PM
I think you may have confused them by stating that you possess a H-1B and a valid EAD. You need to get H-1B out of the picture. Assuming you have AOS pending, you don't need H-1B to be in status.
They way I read the email, it clearly states that if you are on H-1B you are not protected from citizenship status discrimination. However, you are not complaining about discrimination on your H-1B status. You are not asking for sponsorship. I think you need to forget that you have H-1B. That is completely IRRELEVANT. Once you use your EAD, your H-1B is automatically invalidated. You need to say that you have have EAD and AP (with pending AOS). Whether you have EAD/AP because you are EB immigrant, FB immigrant, asylee or refugee SHOULD NOT MATTER.
My suggestion is that you don't give up. Call them and explain them again by keeping the H-1B status out of picture. Somebody denied you employment based on the fact that you have EAD. You have EAD for work authorization and pending AOS as legal status. Thats all you need. Remember, that you can be in the same situation of pending AOS and EAD even if you are not on H-1B. Your current H-1B has nothing to do with this. If I were you, I would file the charges.
In addition, you may want to contact ACLU. They might be able to line up a lawyer for you. Although, I think they will probably just advise you to file a complaint to OSC.
If you want to talk with me on the phone, PM me.
PS: I am not a lawyer.
They way I read the email, it clearly states that if you are on H-1B you are not protected from citizenship status discrimination. However, you are not complaining about discrimination on your H-1B status. You are not asking for sponsorship. I think you need to forget that you have H-1B. That is completely IRRELEVANT. Once you use your EAD, your H-1B is automatically invalidated. You need to say that you have have EAD and AP (with pending AOS). Whether you have EAD/AP because you are EB immigrant, FB immigrant, asylee or refugee SHOULD NOT MATTER.
My suggestion is that you don't give up. Call them and explain them again by keeping the H-1B status out of picture. Somebody denied you employment based on the fact that you have EAD. You have EAD for work authorization and pending AOS as legal status. Thats all you need. Remember, that you can be in the same situation of pending AOS and EAD even if you are not on H-1B. Your current H-1B has nothing to do with this. If I were you, I would file the charges.
In addition, you may want to contact ACLU. They might be able to line up a lawyer for you. Although, I think they will probably just advise you to file a complaint to OSC.
If you want to talk with me on the phone, PM me.
PS: I am not a lawyer.
hot Bethenny Frankel, of Bravo#39;s
eb_retrogession
02-09 02:45 PM
Guest-worker program on Bush radar
By Mike Madden
The Arizona Republic (Phoenix), February 6, 2006
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0206gop-immigration0206.html
By Mike Madden
The Arizona Republic (Phoenix), February 6, 2006
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0206gop-immigration0206.html
more...
house Bethenny Frankel Bridezilla
desi3933
08-07 12:54 PM
Point noted thank you!
I appreciate that.
May I ask to share your legal defense for this point, when you have one?
Thanks!
I appreciate that.
May I ask to share your legal defense for this point, when you have one?
Thanks!
tattoo Reality star Bethenny Frankel,
drirshad
01-04 11:48 AM
Can we atleast run it by Attorney Khanna rskhanna@immigration.com or Mattew Of immigration-law.com get a feedback of the possibilities.
more...
pictures photo | Bethenny Frankel
desighee
08-25 02:17 PM
Let it be 5000 min/pm. Still, 5000 min/month give about 2.7 hours per day. Talking 2.7 hours to India per 24 hours is unusual for many. I don't even get 30 minutes to talk. Even if we want to talk 2.7 hours you will be distrbing people in India, as they may be watching cricket or Tv serials.:)
Any way, this pan is simply superb compare to the situation before 10 years. Compare to many phone providers/cable compaines, vonage customer service is simply great, at least in my experience.
only down side of free 2.7 hrs/day is that the in-laws would now expect more calls from their US son in laws:) IV could you please hide this discussion from the inlaws in india?
Any way, this pan is simply superb compare to the situation before 10 years. Compare to many phone providers/cable compaines, vonage customer service is simply great, at least in my experience.
only down side of free 2.7 hrs/day is that the in-laws would now expect more calls from their US son in laws:) IV could you please hide this discussion from the inlaws in india?
dresses Reality star, Bethenny Frankel
chanduv23
01-09 12:01 PM
Over the past couple of days I have had 10 of my friends/colleagues who have signed the letter and they have been mailed out to the president. I also have copies of them to mail out to IV once I have all that I can get..
I plan to call my Senators & Congressman's office's today too. I believe we need to get through to our friends and colleagues and talk about the issues in this letter. I have yet to come across one person who does not agree that our situation needs the attention of the administration.
I know I can get a few more of these letters signed by the end of this week.
Anyone out there who has more letters going out??:D
Lets have some healthy competition!
Your first post is outstanding. Welcome to IV. Please join your state chapter so that you can help in a more organized manner.
Thanks for all the help and support.
I plan to call my Senators & Congressman's office's today too. I believe we need to get through to our friends and colleagues and talk about the issues in this letter. I have yet to come across one person who does not agree that our situation needs the attention of the administration.
I know I can get a few more of these letters signed by the end of this week.
Anyone out there who has more letters going out??:D
Lets have some healthy competition!
Your first post is outstanding. Welcome to IV. Please join your state chapter so that you can help in a more organized manner.
Thanks for all the help and support.
more...
makeup ethenny frankel adds 12159 1
gc4me
11-10 09:44 PM
I got the RFE at last. I invoked AC21. The RFE for me is asking for 2 evidences
01. Why in Form I-693 medical examiner submitted x-ray but no skin test (we did it because we had the TB vaccination in childhood and skin test would come positive and we had to take x-ray anyway) ---Not an Issue, we can answer that
02. Submit current dated EVL for your new employer. No issue. we can answer that
For my wife also asking for 2 evidences:
01. About the same medical issue.
02. Provide her non-immigrant status between Feb 2003 to Jan 2004.
I don't know what do. Looks like we are doomed. My wife came here with H4 in 2000, was provided I-94 from the airport for 3 years (till Jan 2003), we didn't know then that we have to file a I-539 extension for H4 extension (even couple of my friends had the same idea). We knew that as long as I am on H1, she would maintain H4. I came to know in Jan 2004 and then we applied for I-539. I know this is stupid but that what happened. Anybody has any experience please reply..please please. We are really sleepless this time.
01. Why in Form I-693 medical examiner submitted x-ray but no skin test (we did it because we had the TB vaccination in childhood and skin test would come positive and we had to take x-ray anyway) ---Not an Issue, we can answer that
02. Submit current dated EVL for your new employer. No issue. we can answer that
For my wife also asking for 2 evidences:
01. About the same medical issue.
02. Provide her non-immigrant status between Feb 2003 to Jan 2004.
I don't know what do. Looks like we are doomed. My wife came here with H4 in 2000, was provided I-94 from the airport for 3 years (till Jan 2003), we didn't know then that we have to file a I-539 extension for H4 extension (even couple of my friends had the same idea). We knew that as long as I am on H1, she would maintain H4. I came to know in Jan 2004 and then we applied for I-539. I know this is stupid but that what happened. Anybody has any experience please reply..please please. We are really sleepless this time.
girlfriend Bethenny Frankle Pregnant Pics
bayarea07
09-12 09:04 PM
Hello all,
Will it make sense to put the posters for this campaigns in local grocery stores and mandirs over the weekend, so as to create more awareness.
Will it make sense to put the posters for this campaigns in local grocery stores and mandirs over the weekend, so as to create more awareness.
hairstyles Bethenny Frankel
Caliber
06-16 11:21 AM
Let me ask you a simple question.. WHY ARE YOU SUPPORTING THIS FRAUDULANT ACTIVITY??? .... think for a minute and then decide whether to reply me back or not.. bye....
Dear L1Fraud,
Please let me know if you need support from me. You can PM me.
When I complained to ICE and other authorities, I did not seek any support from this forum as there are many free raiders and will only pull you down. I and Angelfire did all alone. Angelfire did most of the job.
For any one who is opposing this, my question:
Why should US give us Green Cards? Why should they even extend H1 beyond 6 years?. If they do not extend H1, always new guys can keep coming on L1/H1 and the cost to employers will be much less. USCIS can have lots of money for H1 renewals. Only the body shoppers and end clients will benefit. Are you supporting more body shopping?
L1 dumping is VIOLATION. They can not work at client's place. When there is a competition, it should be on fair terms. If your pay is XXX K, other H1 or US Citizen/GC holder will compete with you for that salary plus minus 5-10 %. But these OUTSOURCE company's that dump L1 are competing for that job with 30-40 K. Can you guys believe this? Ask that guy from that BIG outsouce company, he will tell you, he is on H1. Take him for a drink, he will cry infront of you that he is paid peanuts and is on L1. He took this job as he wants to come to US and that his spouse can work. So he can afford to work for that peanut. Can H1 holder compete with these guys where our spouses can not work? Even Citizens and GC's can not compete due to cost of living being higher.
If you are on H1, at least you can not cheat on W2. But in L1, there is no minimum wage rule.
If you do not want to support the OP, it is OK. But do not stop some one trying to correct the violations.
Dear L1Fraud: May I request you to please become Donor? You can post such things in Donor forum and there you can have some meaningful debate and not personal attacks.
Dear L1Fraud,
Please let me know if you need support from me. You can PM me.
When I complained to ICE and other authorities, I did not seek any support from this forum as there are many free raiders and will only pull you down. I and Angelfire did all alone. Angelfire did most of the job.
For any one who is opposing this, my question:
Why should US give us Green Cards? Why should they even extend H1 beyond 6 years?. If they do not extend H1, always new guys can keep coming on L1/H1 and the cost to employers will be much less. USCIS can have lots of money for H1 renewals. Only the body shoppers and end clients will benefit. Are you supporting more body shopping?
L1 dumping is VIOLATION. They can not work at client's place. When there is a competition, it should be on fair terms. If your pay is XXX K, other H1 or US Citizen/GC holder will compete with you for that salary plus minus 5-10 %. But these OUTSOURCE company's that dump L1 are competing for that job with 30-40 K. Can you guys believe this? Ask that guy from that BIG outsouce company, he will tell you, he is on H1. Take him for a drink, he will cry infront of you that he is paid peanuts and is on L1. He took this job as he wants to come to US and that his spouse can work. So he can afford to work for that peanut. Can H1 holder compete with these guys where our spouses can not work? Even Citizens and GC's can not compete due to cost of living being higher.
If you are on H1, at least you can not cheat on W2. But in L1, there is no minimum wage rule.
If you do not want to support the OP, it is OK. But do not stop some one trying to correct the violations.
Dear L1Fraud: May I request you to please become Donor? You can post such things in Donor forum and there you can have some meaningful debate and not personal attacks.
jayz
01-10 03:24 PM
And I got my coworkers to send a letter as well...
Have you?
Have you?
pappu
09-10 08:51 AM
all, the list of co-sponsors is now up to 28 (plus main sponsor - Rep Lofgren).
the chances are improving but as some great person has said - It aint over until it's over...
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-5882
HR 5882
Sponsor:
Rep. Zoe Lofgren [D-CA]hide cosponsors
Cosponsors [as of 2008-09-09]
Rep. Neil Abercrombie [D-HI]
Rep. Michael Capuano [D-MA]
Rep. John Carter [R-TX]
Rep. Henry Cuellar [D-TX]
Rep. Artur Davis [D-AL]
Rep. Thomas Davis [R-VA]
Rep. Lloyd Doggett [D-TX]
Rep. Anna Eshoo [D-CA]
Rep. Gabrielle Giffords [D-AZ]
Rep. Wayne Gilchrest [R-MD]
Rep. Raul Grijalva [D-AZ]
Rep. Michael Honda [D-CA]
Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee [D-TX]
Rep. Doris Matsui [D-CA]
Rep. Michael McCaul [R-TX]
Rep. James Moran [D-VA]
Rep. Sue Myrick [R-NC]
Rep. Jerrold Nadler [D-NY]
Rep. Grace Napolitano [D-CA]
Rep. Edward Pastor [D-AZ]
Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard [D-CA]
Rep. Linda S�nchez [D-CA]
Rep. Loretta Sanchez [D-CA]
Rep. James Sensenbrenner [R-WI]
Rep. Peter Sessions [R-TX]
Rep. John Shadegg [R-AZ]
Rep. Jackie Speier [D-CA]
Rep. Melvin Watt [D-NC]
We should all feel proud that many co-sponsors are a result of efforts of IV and its members.When members ask proof of success, this is one of them.
the chances are improving but as some great person has said - It aint over until it's over...
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-5882
HR 5882
Sponsor:
Rep. Zoe Lofgren [D-CA]hide cosponsors
Cosponsors [as of 2008-09-09]
Rep. Neil Abercrombie [D-HI]
Rep. Michael Capuano [D-MA]
Rep. John Carter [R-TX]
Rep. Henry Cuellar [D-TX]
Rep. Artur Davis [D-AL]
Rep. Thomas Davis [R-VA]
Rep. Lloyd Doggett [D-TX]
Rep. Anna Eshoo [D-CA]
Rep. Gabrielle Giffords [D-AZ]
Rep. Wayne Gilchrest [R-MD]
Rep. Raul Grijalva [D-AZ]
Rep. Michael Honda [D-CA]
Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee [D-TX]
Rep. Doris Matsui [D-CA]
Rep. Michael McCaul [R-TX]
Rep. James Moran [D-VA]
Rep. Sue Myrick [R-NC]
Rep. Jerrold Nadler [D-NY]
Rep. Grace Napolitano [D-CA]
Rep. Edward Pastor [D-AZ]
Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard [D-CA]
Rep. Linda S�nchez [D-CA]
Rep. Loretta Sanchez [D-CA]
Rep. James Sensenbrenner [R-WI]
Rep. Peter Sessions [R-TX]
Rep. John Shadegg [R-AZ]
Rep. Jackie Speier [D-CA]
Rep. Melvin Watt [D-NC]
We should all feel proud that many co-sponsors are a result of efforts of IV and its members.When members ask proof of success, this is one of them.
