gk_2000
02-17 11:16 AM
thanks ub27, gc_on_demand
Agreed. $5000 is about the same amount a single student paid to TVU, the diploma mill. This used to be the price 1 employee paid a fraud DCC for processing a Green card.
What more can I say....
.
What is the difference between the two? IMO, two words "Effective Marketing". Come on, where are the MBA's among us who can offer strategy? Actually I feel we are so backward that we don't even need MBA's to improve from here, just any simple ideas
Agreed. $5000 is about the same amount a single student paid to TVU, the diploma mill. This used to be the price 1 employee paid a fraud DCC for processing a Green card.
What more can I say....
.
What is the difference between the two? IMO, two words "Effective Marketing". Come on, where are the MBA's among us who can offer strategy? Actually I feel we are so backward that we don't even need MBA's to improve from here, just any simple ideas
wallpaper +gomez+vanity+fair+after+
subdhar
08-24 01:35 PM
did you get this approval from TSC or nebraska??
pappu
03-10 11:25 PM
Well, I am TOO depressed about the BEC performance. I know too many people are in same situation but I find myself "helpless" and at least i want to SCREAM......:mad:
The annonymous member who posted this message has not even logged back in to this website after posting the message and we are discussing this topic for days. If you start a new thread, dont just start it and run away. Try to see and respond to the discussion. If you post a question and your question is answered, it is always good to thank members that answered your question. All this helps build the community.
The annonymous member who posted this message has not even logged back in to this website after posting the message and we are discussing this topic for days. If you start a new thread, dont just start it and run away. Try to see and respond to the discussion. If you post a question and your question is answered, it is always good to thank members that answered your question. All this helps build the community.
2011 vanity fair. Selena Gomez
mqualique
05-01 02:14 PM
Applying EB PD but using Visa number from FB Quota would be a awesome. Not sure what complications this may cause on the FB side. This seems like a visa-leak (like memory leak) scenario from FB. This will put GC Holders dependents at a disadvantaged position as compared to us who don't have GC yet because EB PD will always be ahead to FB PD due to 'Visa-Leak'.
more...
gjoe
10-09 06:18 AM
Why do you think FIFO is scientifically impossible? If you beleive that weather forecast is reliable like most of the Americans do, making the FIFO system work more effeciently without wasting even a single visa is possible.
It is not necessary to issue the visa if the case is still pending for some reason, but if it has cleared all it has a visa number ready to complete the case. If all the visa numbers are allocated ( not necessarily issued) each year there will be no waste. There is no need to go back and recapture visa numbers because all visa numbers are already allocated. Obove all these reasons, those people with PD's as old as 1999 coming out from the BEC need not face another nightmare like first waiting for the I485 to become current before even he can file and then wait in the end of the queue for new applicants to move forward before having his case handled.
This GC system broke because the system was revamped without taking into account the whole process.
First I-485 is triggered by an act of the applicant (he has to apply). So USCIS is never going to know whether an earlier applicant is still out there trying to file his application or not. In fact I would blame the entire retrogression on USCIS' attempt at FIFO which is scientifically impossible. It only results in wastage of visa numbers. In 2004 USCIS wasted 47000 visa numbers, in 2006 it wasted 10000 visa numbers. What USCIS could think of doing is just approve whoever is approvable. So the visa bulletin has only 2 possible values "C" and "U". If an earlier I485 applicant is stuck in name check then he should take appropriate action (writing to senators, FL, GWB or file WoM) and get his case adjudicated.
There are a lot of misconceptions about AoS. Let me write it here.
1. A visa number is not needed to get AoS adjudicated. A visa number is only required to file the application. But USCIS' stand is that visa number is required both while filing and adjudicating. This according to the statutes and regulations is not true and valid. If USCIS screwed up and delayed adjudicating your application that is their problem. According to statutes and regulations a visa number is only required at the time the application is filed.
2. Neither Statutes nor regulations call for any fbi name check. Remember FBI name check is different from criminal back ground check or finger print check. The name check is an arbitrary decision by FBI and USCIS and will not stand in any court of law.
3. An FBI name check was never called for by USCIS on AoS applicants. It was only required for naturalization applicants. FBI screwed up by sending every one's name through this dreaded name check and now claims that it has too many names to check.
4. If your AoS application is pending for more than a year file a law suit against USCIS because USCIS violated regulations 103.2(b)(18). According to this regulation if an investigation is pending for 6 months district director should review it. At the end of 1 year he should again review it. After that it has to be escalated to higher authorities. Trust me this never happens. Violation of regulations is a serious offense.
So FIFO will never happen because USCIS cannot control who will apply when. Second FIFO is really bad because USCIS then has to keep shuffling its visa numbers around. Instead if it just approves anyone who is approvable atleast visa numbers would get used.
It is not necessary to issue the visa if the case is still pending for some reason, but if it has cleared all it has a visa number ready to complete the case. If all the visa numbers are allocated ( not necessarily issued) each year there will be no waste. There is no need to go back and recapture visa numbers because all visa numbers are already allocated. Obove all these reasons, those people with PD's as old as 1999 coming out from the BEC need not face another nightmare like first waiting for the I485 to become current before even he can file and then wait in the end of the queue for new applicants to move forward before having his case handled.
This GC system broke because the system was revamped without taking into account the whole process.
First I-485 is triggered by an act of the applicant (he has to apply). So USCIS is never going to know whether an earlier applicant is still out there trying to file his application or not. In fact I would blame the entire retrogression on USCIS' attempt at FIFO which is scientifically impossible. It only results in wastage of visa numbers. In 2004 USCIS wasted 47000 visa numbers, in 2006 it wasted 10000 visa numbers. What USCIS could think of doing is just approve whoever is approvable. So the visa bulletin has only 2 possible values "C" and "U". If an earlier I485 applicant is stuck in name check then he should take appropriate action (writing to senators, FL, GWB or file WoM) and get his case adjudicated.
There are a lot of misconceptions about AoS. Let me write it here.
1. A visa number is not needed to get AoS adjudicated. A visa number is only required to file the application. But USCIS' stand is that visa number is required both while filing and adjudicating. This according to the statutes and regulations is not true and valid. If USCIS screwed up and delayed adjudicating your application that is their problem. According to statutes and regulations a visa number is only required at the time the application is filed.
2. Neither Statutes nor regulations call for any fbi name check. Remember FBI name check is different from criminal back ground check or finger print check. The name check is an arbitrary decision by FBI and USCIS and will not stand in any court of law.
3. An FBI name check was never called for by USCIS on AoS applicants. It was only required for naturalization applicants. FBI screwed up by sending every one's name through this dreaded name check and now claims that it has too many names to check.
4. If your AoS application is pending for more than a year file a law suit against USCIS because USCIS violated regulations 103.2(b)(18). According to this regulation if an investigation is pending for 6 months district director should review it. At the end of 1 year he should again review it. After that it has to be escalated to higher authorities. Trust me this never happens. Violation of regulations is a serious offense.
So FIFO will never happen because USCIS cannot control who will apply when. Second FIFO is really bad because USCIS then has to keep shuffling its visa numbers around. Instead if it just approves anyone who is approvable atleast visa numbers would get used.
rmdsouza
06-24 04:21 PM
100% of anti-immigrant poll questions focus only on the Undocumented. We are only addressed as an afterthought.. mostly in the analysis nowhere else NADA. Here is a sampling of NumbersUSA poll questions..
Here is a sampling of the questions..
Public Opinion
NumbersUSA.com's goal of reducing annual legal and illegal immigration to more traditional numerical levels enjoys broad based public support. Virtually every major poll that has been conducted in the past decade finds that a majority of Americans support lower immigration numbers. As many of the following polls suggest, what we are for is the same thing a majority of Americans are for. CLICK HERE for our Public Opinion Archive.
Prefer Lower Numbers
Sixty-seven percent of Americans approve of the U.S. government deporting illegal immigrants to the country they came from.
Opinion Research Corporation/Lou Dobbs poll, June 8-11, 2006
Sixty-seven percent of Americans would you like to see the number of illegal immigrants currently in this country decreased.
Opinion Research Corporation/Lou Dobbs poll, June 8-11, 2006
Fifty-seven percent of registered voters believe the illegal immigration situation in the United States is "very serious" and twenty-nine percent believe it is "somewhat serious."
FOX News/Opinion Dynamics Poll, May 16-18, 2006
Fifty-five percent of registered voters "favor" trying to send as many illegal immigrants back to their home countries as possible.
FOX News/Opinion Dynamics Poll, May 16-18, 2006
Seventy-seven percent of Americans think the United States is not doing enough to keep illegal immigrants from coming into this country.
ABC News/Washington Post Poll, May 11-15, 2006
Fifty-seven percent of Americans think the May 1, 2006 illegal alien solidarity protests did more to hurt their cause than help.
NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll, April 21-24, 2006
Informed that U.S. population is projected to grow to 420 million by 2050, fifty-seven percent of respondents believed that the present U.S. population of 300 million or less would be best for the country in the long run.
Roper ASW Poll conducted for Negative Population Growth (NPG), April 14-16, 2006
Six of ten Americans, according to the poll, favor annual immigration (now one million yearly) of less than 600,000 a year. Forty-five percent of respondents favored annual immigration of less than 300,000. Overall, seventy-two percent of respondents favor an annual immigration level that is less than the current one million.
Roper ASW Poll conducted for Negative Population Growth (NPG), April 14-16, 2006
Fifty-six percent of Americans agree that a practical way to reduce to near zero the number of resident illegal aliens is legislation making penalties for illegal presence so severe that illegal immigrants would leave voluntarily rather than run the risk of being caught and penalized.
Roper ASW Poll conducted for Negative Population Growth (NPG), April 14-16, 2006
They have effectively blocked our goals by muddying the issue of undocumented and legals. To the average Joe on the street.. immigrant == undocumented
Id like to see how many people will say No to the question " Do you support increase of Green Cards to immigrants already here playing by the rules, paying taxes, Soc Sec etc without benefits, and waiting in line for an average of 6-7 years"
Hell, quite a few of the poll questions say the "amnesty" is unfair to those people who play by the rules...
I say.. focus our efforts on us for the time being.. differentiate ourselves from the undocumented..
Here is a sampling of the questions..
Public Opinion
NumbersUSA.com's goal of reducing annual legal and illegal immigration to more traditional numerical levels enjoys broad based public support. Virtually every major poll that has been conducted in the past decade finds that a majority of Americans support lower immigration numbers. As many of the following polls suggest, what we are for is the same thing a majority of Americans are for. CLICK HERE for our Public Opinion Archive.
Prefer Lower Numbers
Sixty-seven percent of Americans approve of the U.S. government deporting illegal immigrants to the country they came from.
Opinion Research Corporation/Lou Dobbs poll, June 8-11, 2006
Sixty-seven percent of Americans would you like to see the number of illegal immigrants currently in this country decreased.
Opinion Research Corporation/Lou Dobbs poll, June 8-11, 2006
Fifty-seven percent of registered voters believe the illegal immigration situation in the United States is "very serious" and twenty-nine percent believe it is "somewhat serious."
FOX News/Opinion Dynamics Poll, May 16-18, 2006
Fifty-five percent of registered voters "favor" trying to send as many illegal immigrants back to their home countries as possible.
FOX News/Opinion Dynamics Poll, May 16-18, 2006
Seventy-seven percent of Americans think the United States is not doing enough to keep illegal immigrants from coming into this country.
ABC News/Washington Post Poll, May 11-15, 2006
Fifty-seven percent of Americans think the May 1, 2006 illegal alien solidarity protests did more to hurt their cause than help.
NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll, April 21-24, 2006
Informed that U.S. population is projected to grow to 420 million by 2050, fifty-seven percent of respondents believed that the present U.S. population of 300 million or less would be best for the country in the long run.
Roper ASW Poll conducted for Negative Population Growth (NPG), April 14-16, 2006
Six of ten Americans, according to the poll, favor annual immigration (now one million yearly) of less than 600,000 a year. Forty-five percent of respondents favored annual immigration of less than 300,000. Overall, seventy-two percent of respondents favor an annual immigration level that is less than the current one million.
Roper ASW Poll conducted for Negative Population Growth (NPG), April 14-16, 2006
Fifty-six percent of Americans agree that a practical way to reduce to near zero the number of resident illegal aliens is legislation making penalties for illegal presence so severe that illegal immigrants would leave voluntarily rather than run the risk of being caught and penalized.
Roper ASW Poll conducted for Negative Population Growth (NPG), April 14-16, 2006
They have effectively blocked our goals by muddying the issue of undocumented and legals. To the average Joe on the street.. immigrant == undocumented
Id like to see how many people will say No to the question " Do you support increase of Green Cards to immigrants already here playing by the rules, paying taxes, Soc Sec etc without benefits, and waiting in line for an average of 6-7 years"
Hell, quite a few of the poll questions say the "amnesty" is unfair to those people who play by the rules...
I say.. focus our efforts on us for the time being.. differentiate ourselves from the undocumented..
more...
mnkaushik
08-27 01:32 PM
..f(p)light still seems to be wheeling on the runway as compared to NSC's soaring high approvals. Any thoughts?:confused:
May be just may be because TSC approved a lot of cases for the current PD 2 years ago and have less cases than NSC.
May be just may be because TSC approved a lot of cases for the current PD 2 years ago and have less cases than NSC.
2010 Click to view full size image
desi3933
07-28 04:23 PM
well said.
Actions speak louder than words. How many % people visit this forum after getting GC!
____________________
Not a legal advice.
........
self interest is the ONLY binding factor amongst 'highly skilled' workers
....
.....
Peace!
Actions speak louder than words. How many % people visit this forum after getting GC!
____________________
Not a legal advice.
........
self interest is the ONLY binding factor amongst 'highly skilled' workers
....
.....
Peace!
more...
gc_eb2_waiter
11-30 03:51 PM
Please check your message.
hair and Selena Gomez at Vanity
hebbar77
05-08 02:43 PM
Please contribute...
If I contribute will IV make EB2 unavailable?
If I contribute will IV make EB2 unavailable?
more...
nefrateedi
09-18 05:21 PM
Hello,
As my lawyer has used his checks to pay my 485/765/131 fees, there is no way of knowing whether the checks have been cashed. I did called my attorney a couple of times last week and he told me that checks are NOT yet cashed.
So I'm still waiting to hear from the lawyer abt the receipts.
And it looks like your package was handled at NSC itself, instead of getting transfered to TSC or CSC, hence the LIN#.
I will let you know once my receipts are in.
Thx
Yup, it was receipted at Nebraska. By the way, I tried entering my receipt #s on the website again, and this time it worked...:D
As my lawyer has used his checks to pay my 485/765/131 fees, there is no way of knowing whether the checks have been cashed. I did called my attorney a couple of times last week and he told me that checks are NOT yet cashed.
So I'm still waiting to hear from the lawyer abt the receipts.
And it looks like your package was handled at NSC itself, instead of getting transfered to TSC or CSC, hence the LIN#.
I will let you know once my receipts are in.
Thx
Yup, it was receipted at Nebraska. By the way, I tried entering my receipt #s on the website again, and this time it worked...:D
hot girlfriend Selena Gomez at
Administrator2
03-08 05:19 PM
Also you seems to be straying from the original intent of the thread...
mirage,
The original intent of the thread is flawed and against the very purpose of creating such a thread. We have explained you during the phone conversation that it is not the right time to pick up country limits issue. We have run this by our strategist again and they have also advised us that its not the right time for this issue. Others on the forum, including unitednations, have also made an attempt to explain you the issues we are all dealing with. You are free to do whatever you think is best for you. We think that your actions are likely to harm the community effort. So in the best interest of the community effort, please be cautioned that we will be forced to ban you from this site if you continue this on the forum.
All the Best.
mirage,
The original intent of the thread is flawed and against the very purpose of creating such a thread. We have explained you during the phone conversation that it is not the right time to pick up country limits issue. We have run this by our strategist again and they have also advised us that its not the right time for this issue. Others on the forum, including unitednations, have also made an attempt to explain you the issues we are all dealing with. You are free to do whatever you think is best for you. We think that your actions are likely to harm the community effort. So in the best interest of the community effort, please be cautioned that we will be forced to ban you from this site if you continue this on the forum.
All the Best.
more...
house hairstyles selena gomez vanity
fundo14
12-18 03:32 PM
Hi,
Our case was filed on July 2, 2007 at TSC.
We have got EADs, APs long back but did not get any FP notice.
Last week we got a letter saying that to speed up processing on your case we have transfered your case to NSC.(don't knw what it means)..but no FP notice till date.:confused:
anyone from July2 filers here waiting for FP notice still?
PD: Dec-2003/EB3
140: Approved
Thanks
Our case was filed on July 2, 2007 at TSC.
We have got EADs, APs long back but did not get any FP notice.
Last week we got a letter saying that to speed up processing on your case we have transfered your case to NSC.(don't knw what it means)..but no FP notice till date.:confused:
anyone from July2 filers here waiting for FP notice still?
PD: Dec-2003/EB3
140: Approved
Thanks
tattoo +gomez+vanity+fair+photo+
jindhal
09-23 04:46 PM
With recapture, with country cap removal, with any other fixes that you can think of until you are not feeding yourself from my plate
more...
pictures selena gomez vanity fair photo
royus77
06-22 04:56 PM
My situation is not any better. I am working for a GA based company since 2001 got stuck in the backlog center with Priority Date Oct 2003 (labor apporved in Nov 2006 I-140 applied in May). After calling the company HR for 30-40 times in last one week I was able to talk to HR guy, he said the ceo will allow only those who have approved I-140 to apply for I-485. He also said then once priority date retogressed again I will be able to get 3 years H1B ext. that will be good for me.:mad: I think these desi blood sucking compnies will be obsolete in couple of years. If USCIS make the rules better.
I was thinking of disclosing my employers name but then I will never be able to file I-485
Its a universal truth that Desi companies are blood suckers still we will work with them .....who to blame ???????
I was thinking of disclosing my employers name but then I will never be able to file I-485
Its a universal truth that Desi companies are blood suckers still we will work with them .....who to blame ???????
dresses Selena Gomez On Vanity
alex99
07-02 09:51 AM
Sent on Jun 30 to reach on 2'nd July.
more...
makeup +gomez+vanity+fair+oscar+
.jpg "hairstyles selena gomez vanity")
prem_goel
08-26 06:21 PM
I think anytime 6 months before the expiry of your current H1B extension.
So if USCIS takes an year to process my extension, what are the impacts to me after the current H-1B expires? Would I have issues in traveling?
So if USCIS takes an year to process my extension, what are the impacts to me after the current H-1B expires? Would I have issues in traveling?
girlfriend Selena Gomez Vanity Fair
Springflower
09-12 01:48 PM
I have received receipts for I-485/EAD/AP applications for me and my wife on September 10th, 2007. They came from CA service center (numbers start with: WAC).
--------------------------------------------------------------
Contributed $50. Signed up for $50/month recurring contribution.
PD: March 2004 (EB3 - India)
Labor approved: Jan 2006
I-140 approved: Feb 2006 (NSC)
I-485/EAD/AP applied: July 6th, 2007 (NSC)
Checks cashed: 09/08/2007
Receipts received: 09/10/2007
--------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------
Contributed $50. Signed up for $50/month recurring contribution.
PD: March 2004 (EB3 - India)
Labor approved: Jan 2006
I-140 approved: Feb 2006 (NSC)
I-485/EAD/AP applied: July 6th, 2007 (NSC)
Checks cashed: 09/08/2007
Receipts received: 09/10/2007
--------------------------------------------------------------
hairstyles selena gomez vanity fair billy
PDOCT05
10-03 02:31 PM
I just called USCIS and IO said they just started entering data to the applications for july 2nd and 3rd filers..we can expect some thing in next 10 days...:):p
avi_ny
09-04 03:39 PM
:) My Checks got cashed today, I can see SRC receipt number on the back. More details in my signature.
tiny
11-19 01:14 PM
Done
No comments:
Post a Comment