h1techSlave
07-17 11:24 AM
It is difficult to arrive at hard numbers using these kinds of analysis.
For example you say "Supposed 30K unskilled (or low skilled) labor is added (which neither creates jobs nor are employed). Now if they are added, the rate becomes 330000/10030000 or ~ 3.3%".
In reality there are no such human being exist. When a person comes here, he/she does contribute to the society. The person may not be in any official pay roll, but he buys stuff, he does work (in the house at least), he consumes services etc. Now such behavior by the hypothetically low skilled person has a positive contribution to the economy. May be the person took care of the house hold chorus of a young family, enabling the mom to take a Masters in computer science. Fast forward two years, the couple starts a successful software company which employs dozens of Americans.
The story line that you give is the same argument that NumbersUSA gives, which is that an additional person is just a job stealer; but I disagree.
Hello All,
I want to start an interesting discussion - not sure whether a thread already exists or a similar discussion has already taken place.
We all know about the current state of the economy and current unfortunate unemployment rate. We all also know that majority jobs lost are in construction, manufacturing etc. We also know that some people (who have no other choice) are targetting legal EB community as if they are responsible for all this mess.
I want people to discuss the other things like DV Lottery, Chain Family Migration or any other popular programs from labor/unemployment point of view. Please no intent to discuss it from any other angle at all.
These forms of migration bring a lot of uneducated (or less educated), unskilled (or low skilled) population/labor into the country which contribute higher for the unemployment rate (for both numerator and denomenator - rate = # unemployed/# total).
example: suppose in a hypothetical community of 10000000, 300000 are unemployed. They have 3% of unemployement rate.
Supposed 30K unskilled (or low skilled) labor is added (which neither creates jobs nor are employed). Now if they are added, the rate becomes 330000/10030000 or ~ 3.3%
This can be bad example but it was just to put a point forward.
Are there any statistics (again?) available about the effect of DV, chain family migration or any such program in the last 10-15 years towards the unemployment rate today? A lot of unskilled (or low skilled) labor was added to the economy which was OK during upward economy but cannot sustain at all in down economy like this.
Thanks,
M.
For example you say "Supposed 30K unskilled (or low skilled) labor is added (which neither creates jobs nor are employed). Now if they are added, the rate becomes 330000/10030000 or ~ 3.3%".
In reality there are no such human being exist. When a person comes here, he/she does contribute to the society. The person may not be in any official pay roll, but he buys stuff, he does work (in the house at least), he consumes services etc. Now such behavior by the hypothetically low skilled person has a positive contribution to the economy. May be the person took care of the house hold chorus of a young family, enabling the mom to take a Masters in computer science. Fast forward two years, the couple starts a successful software company which employs dozens of Americans.
The story line that you give is the same argument that NumbersUSA gives, which is that an additional person is just a job stealer; but I disagree.
Hello All,
I want to start an interesting discussion - not sure whether a thread already exists or a similar discussion has already taken place.
We all know about the current state of the economy and current unfortunate unemployment rate. We all also know that majority jobs lost are in construction, manufacturing etc. We also know that some people (who have no other choice) are targetting legal EB community as if they are responsible for all this mess.
I want people to discuss the other things like DV Lottery, Chain Family Migration or any other popular programs from labor/unemployment point of view. Please no intent to discuss it from any other angle at all.
These forms of migration bring a lot of uneducated (or less educated), unskilled (or low skilled) population/labor into the country which contribute higher for the unemployment rate (for both numerator and denomenator - rate = # unemployed/# total).
example: suppose in a hypothetical community of 10000000, 300000 are unemployed. They have 3% of unemployement rate.
Supposed 30K unskilled (or low skilled) labor is added (which neither creates jobs nor are employed). Now if they are added, the rate becomes 330000/10030000 or ~ 3.3%
This can be bad example but it was just to put a point forward.
Are there any statistics (again?) available about the effect of DV, chain family migration or any such program in the last 10-15 years towards the unemployment rate today? A lot of unskilled (or low skilled) labor was added to the economy which was OK during upward economy but cannot sustain at all in down economy like this.
Thanks,
M.
wallpaper Justin Bieber Karmaloop X
sanju
03-06 02:15 PM
You called office of which Senators?
Just a little update, Called up my Senator's office this morning..Started talking about country Cap issue, the guy knew everything about it, he took notes & promised he will pass it on to the Senator. Here's what I suggested him
1) Lift the Country Cap for Temporary period of time, may be just for 2 years.
2) Limit the Maximum waiting time, say if one applicant is waiting for 5 years than country cap should be exempted and he should be given a preference over a person who�s PD is just 1 year old.
He specifically told me 'your second point is very good, I'll certainly share these with the Senator'...
I urge you guys to contact your senators & Congressmen/Congresswomen
We have a group which is focusing on this issue, if you want to join us here's the link
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/yourvoiceiv/
Just a little update, Called up my Senator's office this morning..Started talking about country Cap issue, the guy knew everything about it, he took notes & promised he will pass it on to the Senator. Here's what I suggested him
1) Lift the Country Cap for Temporary period of time, may be just for 2 years.
2) Limit the Maximum waiting time, say if one applicant is waiting for 5 years than country cap should be exempted and he should be given a preference over a person who�s PD is just 1 year old.
He specifically told me 'your second point is very good, I'll certainly share these with the Senator'...
I urge you guys to contact your senators & Congressmen/Congresswomen
We have a group which is focusing on this issue, if you want to join us here's the link
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/yourvoiceiv/
gc_peshwa
04-15 01:51 AM
Spread the word about this campaign with ure friends,colleagues, lets 'DOS proof' our future :-)
2011 justin bieber purple shoes
plassey
07-24 09:58 AM
These are some good options but don't agree fully with F-1 strategy. For F-1 u have to show non immigrant intent. So u can delay ur marriage registeration. I think it is better if he applies for F-1 without disclosing that he is married.
People, First of all, if you don�t have answers please dont post junk!
Options:
1. Bring him to USA on F-1. With a good GRE, TOEFL score, an admit from a good university and a true passion to do M.S. will help get a F-1 Visa. Also, your friend can pay for his first semester fees, which will also help to build a strong F-1 case.
2. Look for a job for him in a public/non-profit organization where you don�t have a lot of H-1 restrictions. Ask him to build up his skill set and be prepared to do any kind of employment.
3. I am not too familiar with "Follow-to-join" process, but that might be an option. ***May not be applicable, but just a thought***
4. Like someone mentioned, both of you relocate to Canada, where its easier to get Perm residency.
5. Ask her to apply for Citizenship whenever she is eligible, so that, its much easier to bring the spouse in. ***Might take a few years, but it still is an option***
Hope these help.
People, First of all, if you don�t have answers please dont post junk!
Options:
1. Bring him to USA on F-1. With a good GRE, TOEFL score, an admit from a good university and a true passion to do M.S. will help get a F-1 Visa. Also, your friend can pay for his first semester fees, which will also help to build a strong F-1 case.
2. Look for a job for him in a public/non-profit organization where you don�t have a lot of H-1 restrictions. Ask him to build up his skill set and be prepared to do any kind of employment.
3. I am not too familiar with "Follow-to-join" process, but that might be an option. ***May not be applicable, but just a thought***
4. Like someone mentioned, both of you relocate to Canada, where its easier to get Perm residency.
5. Ask her to apply for Citizenship whenever she is eligible, so that, its much easier to bring the spouse in. ***Might take a few years, but it still is an option***
Hope these help.
more...
atulnayak1
02-19 12:03 PM
Franks Red Hot sauce, I put that sh&t on EVERYTHING!
Alabaman
08-21 02:52 PM
If your calculations are right then this is really really bad.
more...
roseball
04-02 12:53 PM
Thank you gc28262. It's just that my attorney havent seen this issue with Pre PERM cases. May be it is because PERM had more specific questions to answer so that there is little flexibility. Form 750 which was used before PERM did not have that many specific questions regarding labor conditions. So there was room for interpretation.
Thanks for murthy's link. Yes, It makes sense Gald I extended my H1 after returning on AP. So I am better positioned there.
Yes, actually the USCIS has argued the same in their revocation response which is that my labor requirements on Form 9089 aren't flexible enough to transfer me to EB3.
----
What your attorney is suggesting I believe is the right approach at this time. I would consult a reputed attorney and take his/her advise before taking any action. I would also have your company start a new PERM case in parallel, just incase. Yes, ETA-750 provides a little more flexibility w.r.t EB2 to EB3 downgrades when compared to 9089, but it depends on the educational requirements mentioned on the form. But your approach should be to get I-485 approval based on earlier I-140 and if that doesn't work out, then request for a downgrade. Hope it works out for you, good luck.
Thanks for murthy's link. Yes, It makes sense Gald I extended my H1 after returning on AP. So I am better positioned there.
Yes, actually the USCIS has argued the same in their revocation response which is that my labor requirements on Form 9089 aren't flexible enough to transfer me to EB3.
----
What your attorney is suggesting I believe is the right approach at this time. I would consult a reputed attorney and take his/her advise before taking any action. I would also have your company start a new PERM case in parallel, just incase. Yes, ETA-750 provides a little more flexibility w.r.t EB2 to EB3 downgrades when compared to 9089, but it depends on the educational requirements mentioned on the form. But your approach should be to get I-485 approval based on earlier I-140 and if that doesn't work out, then request for a downgrade. Hope it works out for you, good luck.
2010 These and many other Supra Society Shoes that Justin Bieber wears can be
ksairi
08-17 04:47 PM
See all of you in rally !.
more...
madhu345
07-27 09:06 AM
I don't think its required to work 100% while you an EAD, most of us apply EAD for spouses along with us, but how many are going to start work?
hair Justin Bieber Supra Purple
wandmaker
04-03 06:59 PM
Have had unfortunate turn of events and need your guidance.
I had a valid approved h1 petition and i-94 for 2005 through company A.
Company filed for extension of h1 in 2007 and received approved h1 and i-94 valid till 2010. Did not travel out of the country at that time.
Filed for AOS 485, EAD, AP in 2007. Traveled and entered US using AP in 2008.
USCIS did inquiry and has revoked 2005 h1 because of incorrect LCA filing by the company. They have also said that because of incorrect LCA filing, I am in violation of h1 status. Attorneys have advised that USCIS will retroactive hold me as 'out-of-status' but not unlawful present as I was working in good faith based on an approved petition and unexpired i-94s.
The 2007 h1 was also filed in similar fashion as the 2005 h1.
Although USCIS has not revoked current 2007-2010 h1, there is a possibility of that happening. The 485 might be denied in that case.
The only option is to get on h4 by applying from consulate in India.
Since I will be now answering yes to question 38 (have you violated terms of US visa, or unlawful present..?) I have also shown as intent to immigrate based on my 485 filing.
I want to know my chances of getting an h4 approved.
You need to add more clarity to bold words... For instance, if your work location in LCA was New York and you worked in San Francisco - Man you are in trouble..... Please post what was incorrect on the LCA and also fill in the profile, if you want the folks to consider responding to your query. My 2 cents.
I had a valid approved h1 petition and i-94 for 2005 through company A.
Company filed for extension of h1 in 2007 and received approved h1 and i-94 valid till 2010. Did not travel out of the country at that time.
Filed for AOS 485, EAD, AP in 2007. Traveled and entered US using AP in 2008.
USCIS did inquiry and has revoked 2005 h1 because of incorrect LCA filing by the company. They have also said that because of incorrect LCA filing, I am in violation of h1 status. Attorneys have advised that USCIS will retroactive hold me as 'out-of-status' but not unlawful present as I was working in good faith based on an approved petition and unexpired i-94s.
The 2007 h1 was also filed in similar fashion as the 2005 h1.
Although USCIS has not revoked current 2007-2010 h1, there is a possibility of that happening. The 485 might be denied in that case.
The only option is to get on h4 by applying from consulate in India.
Since I will be now answering yes to question 38 (have you violated terms of US visa, or unlawful present..?) I have also shown as intent to immigrate based on my 485 filing.
I want to know my chances of getting an h4 approved.
You need to add more clarity to bold words... For instance, if your work location in LCA was New York and you worked in San Francisco - Man you are in trouble..... Please post what was incorrect on the LCA and also fill in the profile, if you want the folks to consider responding to your query. My 2 cents.
more...
Dakota Newfie
07-13 09:36 AM
Since the topic of giving preference to professional athletes has come up, I'd like to relay an the experience I had when I came to the U.S. for a job interview in August of '01; when going through U.S. customs at Logan Airport (this was pre 9/11), I was arbitrarily "singled out for interrogation" for TWO HOURS! During that time, a customs official made some small talk with me while we waited for the supervisor to arrive and he asked me if I was a hockey player (since I am Canadian) to which I replied "no"; he then informed me that was too bad because otherwise I would pass through without any problems or questions! Too bad they didn't "single out" Atta and the boys the same way two weeks later- or maybe they went through as hockey players!
hot Womens mar bieberjustin ieber
a_tyagi26
02-02 12:10 PM
Assume:
This mean from the date this bill gets enacted, one should stay in USA for five years continuously.
It's impossible, atleast for me. I can't even think that I won't be able to go to India for 5 years. It would be a torture on my soul. This kind of clause works for an un-documented immigrant, who don't have a choice to leave but not for legal immigrant.
What my company tell me to go to another country say some Brazil to implement project and infrastructure and I had to stay 2 months? Then I have to start afresh ?
I believe you need more than 6months of stay for it to be called as continous presence. Anyone shed some light.
This mean from the date this bill gets enacted, one should stay in USA for five years continuously.
It's impossible, atleast for me. I can't even think that I won't be able to go to India for 5 years. It would be a torture on my soul. This kind of clause works for an un-documented immigrant, who don't have a choice to leave but not for legal immigrant.
What my company tell me to go to another country say some Brazil to implement project and infrastructure and I had to stay 2 months? Then I have to start afresh ?
I believe you need more than 6months of stay for it to be called as continous presence. Anyone shed some light.
more...
house Justin Bieber Supra Hail
fide_champ
09-16 04:33 PM
here is an article from murthy about unemployment benefits:
MurthyDotCom : Unemployment Benefits and Impact on U.S. Immigration (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_unembe.html)
MurthyDotCom : Unemployment Benefits and Impact on U.S. Immigration (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_unembe.html)
tattoo justin bieber purple shoes.
logiclife
04-06 01:28 AM
As of 10:25 PM PST wednesday, here is where the Senate stands:
1. Bill Frist has proposed a 3-tier solution for 11 million undocumented immigrants.
Tier 1:
Illegals who have been here 5+ years can apply for guestworker program and GC(later) without returning home. Plus the usual - fines, back-taxes, english learning, apologizing to Uncle Sam (ok, I made the last one up ;))
Tier 2:
Illegals who have been here between 2-5 years have to go to port-of-entry to get guest-worker visa and then re-enter and eventually apply for GC.
Tier 3:
Illegals who have been here for less than 2 years have to go back to home country and apply for guest-worker visa (Back to the end of the line). In other words, deportation.
Bill Frist worked this compromise arrangement for the undocumented. Main players behind the scenes are supposed to be Chuck Hagel, Mel Martinez, John McCain and Lindsey Graham on this 3-tier approach of compromise bill.
2. Parliamentary Procedures:
Frist:
Bill Frist went to the Senate floor Wednesday night (around 9:30 PM EST) with a parliamentary motion to send the compromise to the Judiciary Committee for ratification, then scheduled a vote for Friday to cut off debate on that motion.
Reid
Harry Reid has filed a motion to invoke cloture, scheduled for 10:30 AM EST on Thursday. If the cloture succeeds then the debate on SJC version of the bill will be over and a final vote will follow. The SJC bill goes pretty much as-is to a final vote where a simple majority(51 votes) will be enough for it to pass the Senate.
3. The analysis:
The whole thing started when Kyl proposed an amendment to exclude illegals who had felonies to gaining permenant residency or citizenship. That would exclude hundred of thousands who had deportation orders pending or who had been deported by again re-entered.
Democrats, afraid that the original intent of SJC version - mainly to bring people out of shadows will fail if republicans keep chipping away at the provisions with amendments like Kyl's amendment.
So Reid, in a high-risk game, filed a motion for cloture. He probably has 38-40 Democrats on his side plus around 18 republicans. However, nothing is guaranteed. Most of media articles say that his motion will fail. In a rare chance that he succeeds, he will have the "Bargaining power" because of 60 senators' support for him and the SJC version and he will have a lot of fun at the expense of Kyl/Cronyn/Sessions etc. This is highly unusual. Cloture is usually filed by the majority party that wants the minority to shut up and force an up-or-down vote. In this case, THE MINORITY leader has filed a motion for cloture. A total reversal of roles.
4. Our Interest
First of all, from view-point of immigration voice, we would ideally want Reid's cloture to fail, Bill Frists' latest compromise to get ratified in SJC, come back to floor for debates and amendments and succeed on Friday. Dems and Republicans "Kiss and make-up" and everyone gets something. Here's why: If the motion of Reid succeeds, the scope of getting it changed for 485 filing and removing hard-cap gets smaller as SJC version will be popular with 60-plus senators and Reid would be unwilling to play with delicate balance. On the other side, if Dems fail, then Frist's bill would be open for debates and amendments, making it possible to get provisions to make OUR lives better.
However, on the flip side, if Reid fails then whatever Frist brings to table will have almost no support of Dems. Then he too risks getting filibustered when HE files for cloture on his 3-tier version. He wont have 60 votes of his own to beat fillibuster because Dems would oppose him for being tough on illegals and Republicans like Cornyn-Kyl-Sessions etc would also oppose him because the 3-tier version would still have traces of Amnesty and its "Loose" on illegals.
5. What's Happening Wednesday night:
Harry Reid has promised he will be up all night in his PJs and review Frist's 3-tier solution. Cookes and milk are on the way from IV to him for some midnight reading. But he makes no promises. Cornyn and Kyl are still unhappy as 3-tier bill still smells of amnesty. McCain is angry at Reid and will support his party's stand and oppose Reid's motion for cloture. (edited)
Harry Reid
http://www.grassrootspa.com/uploaded_images/HarryRedi44333-734905.jpg
Bill Frist
http://skaroff.com/blog/wp-content/photos/images389071_Frist.jpg
1. Bill Frist has proposed a 3-tier solution for 11 million undocumented immigrants.
Tier 1:
Illegals who have been here 5+ years can apply for guestworker program and GC(later) without returning home. Plus the usual - fines, back-taxes, english learning, apologizing to Uncle Sam (ok, I made the last one up ;))
Tier 2:
Illegals who have been here between 2-5 years have to go to port-of-entry to get guest-worker visa and then re-enter and eventually apply for GC.
Tier 3:
Illegals who have been here for less than 2 years have to go back to home country and apply for guest-worker visa (Back to the end of the line). In other words, deportation.
Bill Frist worked this compromise arrangement for the undocumented. Main players behind the scenes are supposed to be Chuck Hagel, Mel Martinez, John McCain and Lindsey Graham on this 3-tier approach of compromise bill.
2. Parliamentary Procedures:
Frist:
Bill Frist went to the Senate floor Wednesday night (around 9:30 PM EST) with a parliamentary motion to send the compromise to the Judiciary Committee for ratification, then scheduled a vote for Friday to cut off debate on that motion.
Reid
Harry Reid has filed a motion to invoke cloture, scheduled for 10:30 AM EST on Thursday. If the cloture succeeds then the debate on SJC version of the bill will be over and a final vote will follow. The SJC bill goes pretty much as-is to a final vote where a simple majority(51 votes) will be enough for it to pass the Senate.
3. The analysis:
The whole thing started when Kyl proposed an amendment to exclude illegals who had felonies to gaining permenant residency or citizenship. That would exclude hundred of thousands who had deportation orders pending or who had been deported by again re-entered.
Democrats, afraid that the original intent of SJC version - mainly to bring people out of shadows will fail if republicans keep chipping away at the provisions with amendments like Kyl's amendment.
So Reid, in a high-risk game, filed a motion for cloture. He probably has 38-40 Democrats on his side plus around 18 republicans. However, nothing is guaranteed. Most of media articles say that his motion will fail. In a rare chance that he succeeds, he will have the "Bargaining power" because of 60 senators' support for him and the SJC version and he will have a lot of fun at the expense of Kyl/Cronyn/Sessions etc. This is highly unusual. Cloture is usually filed by the majority party that wants the minority to shut up and force an up-or-down vote. In this case, THE MINORITY leader has filed a motion for cloture. A total reversal of roles.
4. Our Interest
First of all, from view-point of immigration voice, we would ideally want Reid's cloture to fail, Bill Frists' latest compromise to get ratified in SJC, come back to floor for debates and amendments and succeed on Friday. Dems and Republicans "Kiss and make-up" and everyone gets something. Here's why: If the motion of Reid succeeds, the scope of getting it changed for 485 filing and removing hard-cap gets smaller as SJC version will be popular with 60-plus senators and Reid would be unwilling to play with delicate balance. On the other side, if Dems fail, then Frist's bill would be open for debates and amendments, making it possible to get provisions to make OUR lives better.
However, on the flip side, if Reid fails then whatever Frist brings to table will have almost no support of Dems. Then he too risks getting filibustered when HE files for cloture on his 3-tier version. He wont have 60 votes of his own to beat fillibuster because Dems would oppose him for being tough on illegals and Republicans like Cornyn-Kyl-Sessions etc would also oppose him because the 3-tier version would still have traces of Amnesty and its "Loose" on illegals.
5. What's Happening Wednesday night:
Harry Reid has promised he will be up all night in his PJs and review Frist's 3-tier solution. Cookes and milk are on the way from IV to him for some midnight reading. But he makes no promises. Cornyn and Kyl are still unhappy as 3-tier bill still smells of amnesty. McCain is angry at Reid and will support his party's stand and oppose Reid's motion for cloture. (edited)
Harry Reid
http://www.grassrootspa.com/uploaded_images/HarryRedi44333-734905.jpg
Bill Frist
http://skaroff.com/blog/wp-content/photos/images389071_Frist.jpg
more...
pictures Justin Bieber#39;s last high
sagar_nyc
02-10 05:31 PM
My I 140 got approved in 2006. And my lawyer got approval notice. He also gave me copy of it. I just registered my I 140 case number on USCIS site. I was stunned to find out the status that
Current Status: Notice Returned as Undeliverable.
On September 19, 2006, the post office returned the notice we last sent you on this case I140 IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER as undeliverable. This may have serious effects on processing this case. Please call 1-800-375-5283 to update your mailing address for this notice to be re-sent.
I immediately contacted my lawyer. He said that Since He have original approved copy of I140 , I should not worry about it.
I tried even contacting IO. But IO told me that regarding I140 only employer or attorney can call to discuss further. She didn't give me any answers.
Gurus what you think?
Current Status: Notice Returned as Undeliverable.
On September 19, 2006, the post office returned the notice we last sent you on this case I140 IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER as undeliverable. This may have serious effects on processing this case. Please call 1-800-375-5283 to update your mailing address for this notice to be re-sent.
I immediately contacted my lawyer. He said that Since He have original approved copy of I140 , I should not worry about it.
I tried even contacting IO. But IO told me that regarding I140 only employer or attorney can call to discuss further. She didn't give me any answers.
Gurus what you think?
dresses justin bieber purple shoes.
GCapplicant
07-30 01:59 PM
U R really lucky
more...
makeup Justin Bieber Purple Studio
satyasaich
02-10 09:24 AM
First of all, you can go any consulate in india, which ever gives you earliest date.
Nowadays, one can get a visa appointment within 10days. But have you asked someone in india to pay Rs.4600 in HDFC bank towards visa appointment? You have to send the first 2 pages of your passport (scan & email or fax) so that someone can carry that to HDFC to fill the application. It takes 2 days to get activated in the system. THEN ONLY, you can go online and provide all the details, look for dates available. Once you select the option of "citizen of india, but working in US" it opens up option to chose from any of the 4 consulates.
Most important thing is YOU MUST carry the original HDFC bank receipt (yellow colour) alongwith your appointment letter (downloaded) and passport.
Make sure that YOU WILL take the print out of the application (2 sides of the same page). Yes even in delhi also, you can take your passport personally on the next day at VFS office (somewhere in delhi). but to do so, you MUST present the pink copy of the HDFC receipt
Good Luck
Thanks everybody for your suggestions. Unfortunately canada is not a option. I have sent an email to Chennai consulate for emergency appointment request. Have to wait and see how it goes. Will update you all with any information I find out.
Thanks
Nowadays, one can get a visa appointment within 10days. But have you asked someone in india to pay Rs.4600 in HDFC bank towards visa appointment? You have to send the first 2 pages of your passport (scan & email or fax) so that someone can carry that to HDFC to fill the application. It takes 2 days to get activated in the system. THEN ONLY, you can go online and provide all the details, look for dates available. Once you select the option of "citizen of india, but working in US" it opens up option to chose from any of the 4 consulates.
Most important thing is YOU MUST carry the original HDFC bank receipt (yellow colour) alongwith your appointment letter (downloaded) and passport.
Make sure that YOU WILL take the print out of the application (2 sides of the same page). Yes even in delhi also, you can take your passport personally on the next day at VFS office (somewhere in delhi). but to do so, you MUST present the pink copy of the HDFC receipt
Good Luck
Thanks everybody for your suggestions. Unfortunately canada is not a option. I have sent an email to Chennai consulate for emergency appointment request. Have to wait and see how it goes. Will update you all with any information I find out.
Thanks
girlfriend Justin Bieber Supra Kids Shoes
Al6200
04-24 07:00 PM
DirectX/OpenGL can be used in a windowed environment, so even if you just want to do Win32 stuff DirectX can enhance it.
hairstyles Supra Justin Bieber Shoes
GotGC??
03-09 12:36 PM
No surprises here...from Murthy Bulletin:
2. Employment-Based Visa Number Predictions
We are often asked by our clients at the Murthy Law Firm to predict the movement of immigrant visa numbers. We have some useful information for MurthyDotCom and MurthyBulletin readers in this regard. Charles Oppenheim, Chief of Immigrant Visa Control and Reporting Division at the U.S. Department of State (DOS) was a guest speaker at a February 28, 2007 Washington D.C. Chapter meeting of the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), which was attended by several attorneys from our firm. Mr. Oppenheim was kind enough to share his office’s visa number / Visa Bulletin expectations for 2007.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF RETROGRESSION
Mr. Oppenheim discussed the historical background that has led to the current retrogression situation. Retrogression is not something new or unfamiliar in immigration law, as long-time MurthyDotCom and MurthyBulletin readers may recall. For many, however, who may have become involved in the green card process since 2001, it is new and, of course, highly problematic. Employment-based (or EB) numbers were current from 2001 through 2005 due to a legislative "fix." This legislation authorized prior, unused immigrant visa numbers from several earlier years to be recaptured and put back into the immigration system. That quota of recaptured numbers was exhausted during Fiscal Year (FY) 2005. As a result, in FYs 2005, 2006 and 2007 we have witnessed severe backlogs in the EB3 categories for all countries and, starting in FY2006, in the EB2 categories for China and India.
PREDICTIONS FOR EB IMMIGRANT VISA NUMBERS
Employment-Based First Preference / EB1
Mr. Oppenheim stated that the employment-based first preference (EB1) category is expected to remain current for all countries of chargeability, including India and China. This is likely throughout the remainder of FY2007 (ending September 30, 2007).
Mr. Oppenheim explained what he referred to as the “trickling effect” of unused visa numbers between EB categories. This trickling effect has resulted in the EB1 category's having remained current. The numbers in the employment-based fourth preference (EB4) and employment-based fifth preference (EB5) categories that are unused are transferred up to the EB1 category. Without this trickling affect, the EB1 category would not remain current for India and China.
This also has an impact on EB2, as unused EB1 numbers trickle down to EB2. There are not enough numbers for India and China, however, to allow the EB2 for these two countries to become current. But it has helped to move EB2 forward for these two countries, to some extent.
Employment-Based Second Preference / EB2
The employment-based second preference (EB2) category is expected to remain at its current cutoff dates for nationals of India and China. These dates have been stagnant at April 22, 2005 for China and January 8, 2003 for India for a few months.
Employment-Based Third Preference / EB3
No forward movement is expected for the employment-based third preference (EB3) category. In fact, as predicted in the March Visa Bulletin and confirmed by Mr. Oppenheim, there is a strong possibility that the EB3 numbers that are not in the "worldwide" chargeability will further retrogress, or move backward. This is expected to occur in the summer of 2007. This backward movement is based upon excessive demand for the limited supply of visa numbers. This will adversely affect nationals of India and China.
Double Dipping
Another problem important to note is one of “doubling dipping” for visa numbers by some individuals. As explained by Mr. Oppenheim, if an employment-based beneficiary filed for adjustment of status in the U.S. and for consular processing overseas, that individual could acquire two visa numbers if both cases are approved. This would result in a wasted immigrant visa number. As a result of this scenario, the DOS and the USCIS are planning a system that would coordinate their visa number allocation, so that each will be aware if the other has already issued a visa number for a particular individual, to prevent waste of this kind.
CONCLUSION
We appreciate Mr. Oppenheim's continued willingness to address matters related to visa numbers and the Visa Bulletin. [The most recent Visa Bulletin chart is always available to our readers on MurthyDotCom.] The lack of employment-based visa numbers is a source of great frustration for many and Mr. Oppenheim's predictions do not assuage that feeling. It is better to have an understanding of the reality of the situation, however, than to operate in ignorance or with unrealistic expectations. The shortage of visa numbers, once again, underscores the need for legislation in this area, to increase the numbers, change the counting of the numbers (from one per person to one per family), or to revamp the system entirely.
2. Employment-Based Visa Number Predictions
We are often asked by our clients at the Murthy Law Firm to predict the movement of immigrant visa numbers. We have some useful information for MurthyDotCom and MurthyBulletin readers in this regard. Charles Oppenheim, Chief of Immigrant Visa Control and Reporting Division at the U.S. Department of State (DOS) was a guest speaker at a February 28, 2007 Washington D.C. Chapter meeting of the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), which was attended by several attorneys from our firm. Mr. Oppenheim was kind enough to share his office’s visa number / Visa Bulletin expectations for 2007.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF RETROGRESSION
Mr. Oppenheim discussed the historical background that has led to the current retrogression situation. Retrogression is not something new or unfamiliar in immigration law, as long-time MurthyDotCom and MurthyBulletin readers may recall. For many, however, who may have become involved in the green card process since 2001, it is new and, of course, highly problematic. Employment-based (or EB) numbers were current from 2001 through 2005 due to a legislative "fix." This legislation authorized prior, unused immigrant visa numbers from several earlier years to be recaptured and put back into the immigration system. That quota of recaptured numbers was exhausted during Fiscal Year (FY) 2005. As a result, in FYs 2005, 2006 and 2007 we have witnessed severe backlogs in the EB3 categories for all countries and, starting in FY2006, in the EB2 categories for China and India.
PREDICTIONS FOR EB IMMIGRANT VISA NUMBERS
Employment-Based First Preference / EB1
Mr. Oppenheim stated that the employment-based first preference (EB1) category is expected to remain current for all countries of chargeability, including India and China. This is likely throughout the remainder of FY2007 (ending September 30, 2007).
Mr. Oppenheim explained what he referred to as the “trickling effect” of unused visa numbers between EB categories. This trickling effect has resulted in the EB1 category's having remained current. The numbers in the employment-based fourth preference (EB4) and employment-based fifth preference (EB5) categories that are unused are transferred up to the EB1 category. Without this trickling affect, the EB1 category would not remain current for India and China.
This also has an impact on EB2, as unused EB1 numbers trickle down to EB2. There are not enough numbers for India and China, however, to allow the EB2 for these two countries to become current. But it has helped to move EB2 forward for these two countries, to some extent.
Employment-Based Second Preference / EB2
The employment-based second preference (EB2) category is expected to remain at its current cutoff dates for nationals of India and China. These dates have been stagnant at April 22, 2005 for China and January 8, 2003 for India for a few months.
Employment-Based Third Preference / EB3
No forward movement is expected for the employment-based third preference (EB3) category. In fact, as predicted in the March Visa Bulletin and confirmed by Mr. Oppenheim, there is a strong possibility that the EB3 numbers that are not in the "worldwide" chargeability will further retrogress, or move backward. This is expected to occur in the summer of 2007. This backward movement is based upon excessive demand for the limited supply of visa numbers. This will adversely affect nationals of India and China.
Double Dipping
Another problem important to note is one of “doubling dipping” for visa numbers by some individuals. As explained by Mr. Oppenheim, if an employment-based beneficiary filed for adjustment of status in the U.S. and for consular processing overseas, that individual could acquire two visa numbers if both cases are approved. This would result in a wasted immigrant visa number. As a result of this scenario, the DOS and the USCIS are planning a system that would coordinate their visa number allocation, so that each will be aware if the other has already issued a visa number for a particular individual, to prevent waste of this kind.
CONCLUSION
We appreciate Mr. Oppenheim's continued willingness to address matters related to visa numbers and the Visa Bulletin. [The most recent Visa Bulletin chart is always available to our readers on MurthyDotCom.] The lack of employment-based visa numbers is a source of great frustration for many and Mr. Oppenheim's predictions do not assuage that feeling. It is better to have an understanding of the reality of the situation, however, than to operate in ignorance or with unrealistic expectations. The shortage of visa numbers, once again, underscores the need for legislation in this area, to increase the numbers, change the counting of the numbers (from one per person to one per family), or to revamp the system entirely.
vadik78
03-01 12:45 PM
Hi,
I saw immigrationvioce discussions on immigrationportal.com and decided to visit the site to obtain additional information regarding the community. I was trying to find a bullet-point list of immigration voice goals/priorities, however i did not find one.
I am not sure if I missed it or it just does not exist. If it does not exist, maybe it is a good idea to publish the list in the "about us" section or in the FAQ sections. I noticed that there was some info available in the about us section, however it was quite generic.
What I was thinking is that it would be a good idea to publish short-term and long term goals in a fairly detailed format, for example:
Short term:
1) Fight name check delays:
1a. educate the congress about name check delays
1b. ask the congress to implement service requrements for name check processing (i.e. 6 months completion for X%, respond to name check inquiry for name check pending for more than 6 months within Y days/weeks, etc)
2) Fight retrogression:
2a. Educate the congress about restogression
2b. Ask the congress to re-capture unsused visa numbers
2c. Increase visa allocation for EB categories
I think that such information would be good for new/potential members.
I saw immigrationvioce discussions on immigrationportal.com and decided to visit the site to obtain additional information regarding the community. I was trying to find a bullet-point list of immigration voice goals/priorities, however i did not find one.
I am not sure if I missed it or it just does not exist. If it does not exist, maybe it is a good idea to publish the list in the "about us" section or in the FAQ sections. I noticed that there was some info available in the about us section, however it was quite generic.
What I was thinking is that it would be a good idea to publish short-term and long term goals in a fairly detailed format, for example:
Short term:
1) Fight name check delays:
1a. educate the congress about name check delays
1b. ask the congress to implement service requrements for name check processing (i.e. 6 months completion for X%, respond to name check inquiry for name check pending for more than 6 months within Y days/weeks, etc)
2) Fight retrogression:
2a. Educate the congress about restogression
2b. Ask the congress to re-capture unsused visa numbers
2c. Increase visa allocation for EB categories
I think that such information would be good for new/potential members.
sanju_dba
08-03 04:37 PM
Dear Registered OP,
I guess you have accidentally choose IV to post your issue,
the key word search "Frustation" on google might have drove you here,
not your mistake! try this website (http://www.atkins.com/Homepage.aspx) :D
I guess you have accidentally choose IV to post your issue,
the key word search "Frustation" on google might have drove you here,
not your mistake! try this website (http://www.atkins.com/Homepage.aspx) :D
No comments:
Post a Comment