Madhuri
09-01 04:05 PM
me too. I am a big fan of bee, logiclife, sunjoshi.
i m a big fan of the bee and ragz4u and sunjoshi
of course these daysi m interacting only with pappu...getting his "kangi" all set up
i m a big fan of the bee and ragz4u and sunjoshi
of course these daysi m interacting only with pappu...getting his "kangi" all set up
wallpaper Toyota MR2 Spyder with L
sledge_hammer
04-13 02:17 PM
What line of work are you in? Either send me a PM or post here.
I already transferred my H1 on 1st week of March within 1 day and worked on a 3-4 week project ( real Project from a good client) but now we are not been able to nail the next Project and this new company is very accurate about H1 ( they should be also ) - they will cancel my H1 after the last Pay stub.
They are trying their best and i'm trying my best but things not working out on H1B. I definitely have way more fit Jobs on EAD and that's why I posted this in the weekend.
If some real employer can transfer my H1 It will be quota exempt because I've I-140 approval.
I already transferred my H1 on 1st week of March within 1 day and worked on a 3-4 week project ( real Project from a good client) but now we are not been able to nail the next Project and this new company is very accurate about H1 ( they should be also ) - they will cancel my H1 after the last Pay stub.
They are trying their best and i'm trying my best but things not working out on H1B. I definitely have way more fit Jobs on EAD and that's why I posted this in the weekend.
If some real employer can transfer my H1 It will be quota exempt because I've I-140 approval.
yabadaba
07-09 04:26 PM
yea.. i did not read ur first post correctly..sorry
2011 Toyota MR2 Spyder MRS
vallabhu
01-14 12:22 PM
The source is Immigration-law.com
This bill was introduced by Rep. Shela Jackson-Lee of Texas. Here is the full-text of the bill. It is a shocker, highly prejudiced against the employment-based immigration. Another shocker is a proposal to increaase Diversity Visa from 55,000 to 110,000 when the general opinion in the Congress was even to eliminate the DV program.
SEC. 701. UNFAIR IMMIGRATION-RELATED EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES.
Section 274B (8 U.S.C. 1324b) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(5)--
(A) by amending the paragraph heading to read `Prohibition of Intimidation, Retaliation, or Unlawful Discrimination in Employment';
(B) by moving the text down and to the right 2 ems;
(C) by inserting before such text the following: `(A) IN GENERAL- '; and
(D) by adding at the end the following:
`(B) FEDERAL LABOR OR EMPLOYMENT LAWS- It is an unfair employment practice for any employer to directly or indirectly threaten any individual with removal or any other adverse consequences pertaining to that individual's immigration status or employment benefits for the purpose of intimidating, pressuring, or coercing any such individual not to exercise any right protected by State or Federal labor or employment law (including section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 157)), or for the purpose of retaliating against any such individual for having exercised or having stated an intention to exercise any such right.
`(C) DISCRIMINATION BASED ON IMMIGRATION STATUS- It is an unfair employment practice for any employer, except to the extent specifically authorized or required by law, to discriminate in any term or condition of employment against any individual employed by such employer on the basis of such individual's immigration status.'; and
(2) in subsection (c)(2), by adding at the end the following: `The Special Counsel shall not disclose to the Secretary of Homeland Security or any other government agency or employee, and shall not cause to be published in a manner that discloses to the Secretary of Homeland Security or any other government agency or employee, any information obtained by the Special Counsel in any manner concerning the immigration status of any individual who has filed a charge under this section, or the identity of any individual or entity that is a party or witness to a proceedings brought pursuant to such charge. The Secretary of Homeland Security may not rely, in whole or in part, in any enforcement action or removal proceeding, upon any information obtained as a result of the filing or prosecution of an unfair immigration-related employment practice charge. For purposes of this paragraph, the term `Special Counsel' includes individuals formerly appointed to the position of Special Counsel and any current or former employee of the office of the Special Counsel. Whoever knowingly uses, publishes, or permits information to be used in violation of this paragraph shall be fined not more than $10,000.'.
SEC. 702. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR TASK FORCE.
The Secretary of Labor, in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall conduct a national study of American workplaces to determine the causes, extent, circumstances, and consequences, of exploitation of undocumented alien workers by their employers. As part of this study, the Secretary of Labor shall create a plan for targeted review of Federal labor law enforcement in industries with a substantial immigrant workforce, for the purpose of identifying, monitoring, and deterring frequent or egregious violators of wage and hour, antidiscrimination, National Labor Relations Act, and workplace safety and health requirements. Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Labor shall submit to the Congress a report describing the results of the study and the Secretary's recommendations based on the study.
SEC. 703. RECRUITMENT OF AMERICAN WORKERS.
Section 214 is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (m) (as added by section 105 of Public Law 106-313), (n) (as added by section 107(e) of Public Law 106-386), (o) (as added by section 1513(c) of Public Law 106-386), (o) (as added by section 1102(b) of the Legal Immigration Family Equity Act), and (p) (as added by section 1503(b) of the Legal Immigration Family Equity Act) as subsections (n), (o), (p), (q), and (r), respectively; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
`(s)(1) No petition to accord employment status under the nonimmigrant classifications described in sections 101(a)(15)(E)(iii) and (H) shall be granted in the absence of an affidavit from the petitioner describing the efforts that were made to recruit an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence or a citizen of the United States before resorting to a petition to obtain a foreign employee. The recruitment efforts must have included substantial attempts to find employees in minority communities. Recruitment efforts in minority communities should include at least one of the following, if appropriate for the employment being advertised:
`(A) Advertise the availability of the job opportunity for which the employer is seeking a worker in local newspapers in the labor market that is likely to be patronized by a potential worker for at least 5 consecutive days.
`(B) Undertake efforts to advertise the availability of the job opportunity for which the employer is seeking a worker through advertisements in public transportation systems.
`(C) To the extent permitted by local laws and regulations, engage in recruitment activities in secondary schools, recreation centers, community centers, and other places throughout the communities within 50 miles of the job site that serve minorities.
`(2)(A) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall impose a 10 percent surcharge on all fees collected for petitions to accord employment status and shall use these funds to establish an employment training program which will include unemployed workers in the United States who need to be trained or retrained. The purpose of this program shall be to increase the number of lawful permanent residents and citizens of the United States who are available for employment in the occupations that are the subjects of such petitions. At least 50 percent of the funds generated by this provision must be used to train American workers in rural and inner-city areas.
`(B) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall reserve and make available to the Secretary of Labor a portion of the funds collected under this paragraph. Such funds shall be used by the Secretary of Labor to establish an `Office to Preserve American Jobs' within the Department of Labor. The purpose of this office shall be to establish policies intended to ensure that employers in the United States will hire available workers in the United States before resorting to foreign labor, giving substantial emphasis to hiring minority workers in the United States.'.
This bill was introduced by Rep. Shela Jackson-Lee of Texas. Here is the full-text of the bill. It is a shocker, highly prejudiced against the employment-based immigration. Another shocker is a proposal to increaase Diversity Visa from 55,000 to 110,000 when the general opinion in the Congress was even to eliminate the DV program.
SEC. 701. UNFAIR IMMIGRATION-RELATED EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES.
Section 274B (8 U.S.C. 1324b) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(5)--
(A) by amending the paragraph heading to read `Prohibition of Intimidation, Retaliation, or Unlawful Discrimination in Employment';
(B) by moving the text down and to the right 2 ems;
(C) by inserting before such text the following: `(A) IN GENERAL- '; and
(D) by adding at the end the following:
`(B) FEDERAL LABOR OR EMPLOYMENT LAWS- It is an unfair employment practice for any employer to directly or indirectly threaten any individual with removal or any other adverse consequences pertaining to that individual's immigration status or employment benefits for the purpose of intimidating, pressuring, or coercing any such individual not to exercise any right protected by State or Federal labor or employment law (including section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 157)), or for the purpose of retaliating against any such individual for having exercised or having stated an intention to exercise any such right.
`(C) DISCRIMINATION BASED ON IMMIGRATION STATUS- It is an unfair employment practice for any employer, except to the extent specifically authorized or required by law, to discriminate in any term or condition of employment against any individual employed by such employer on the basis of such individual's immigration status.'; and
(2) in subsection (c)(2), by adding at the end the following: `The Special Counsel shall not disclose to the Secretary of Homeland Security or any other government agency or employee, and shall not cause to be published in a manner that discloses to the Secretary of Homeland Security or any other government agency or employee, any information obtained by the Special Counsel in any manner concerning the immigration status of any individual who has filed a charge under this section, or the identity of any individual or entity that is a party or witness to a proceedings brought pursuant to such charge. The Secretary of Homeland Security may not rely, in whole or in part, in any enforcement action or removal proceeding, upon any information obtained as a result of the filing or prosecution of an unfair immigration-related employment practice charge. For purposes of this paragraph, the term `Special Counsel' includes individuals formerly appointed to the position of Special Counsel and any current or former employee of the office of the Special Counsel. Whoever knowingly uses, publishes, or permits information to be used in violation of this paragraph shall be fined not more than $10,000.'.
SEC. 702. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR TASK FORCE.
The Secretary of Labor, in consultation with the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall conduct a national study of American workplaces to determine the causes, extent, circumstances, and consequences, of exploitation of undocumented alien workers by their employers. As part of this study, the Secretary of Labor shall create a plan for targeted review of Federal labor law enforcement in industries with a substantial immigrant workforce, for the purpose of identifying, monitoring, and deterring frequent or egregious violators of wage and hour, antidiscrimination, National Labor Relations Act, and workplace safety and health requirements. Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Labor shall submit to the Congress a report describing the results of the study and the Secretary's recommendations based on the study.
SEC. 703. RECRUITMENT OF AMERICAN WORKERS.
Section 214 is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (m) (as added by section 105 of Public Law 106-313), (n) (as added by section 107(e) of Public Law 106-386), (o) (as added by section 1513(c) of Public Law 106-386), (o) (as added by section 1102(b) of the Legal Immigration Family Equity Act), and (p) (as added by section 1503(b) of the Legal Immigration Family Equity Act) as subsections (n), (o), (p), (q), and (r), respectively; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
`(s)(1) No petition to accord employment status under the nonimmigrant classifications described in sections 101(a)(15)(E)(iii) and (H) shall be granted in the absence of an affidavit from the petitioner describing the efforts that were made to recruit an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence or a citizen of the United States before resorting to a petition to obtain a foreign employee. The recruitment efforts must have included substantial attempts to find employees in minority communities. Recruitment efforts in minority communities should include at least one of the following, if appropriate for the employment being advertised:
`(A) Advertise the availability of the job opportunity for which the employer is seeking a worker in local newspapers in the labor market that is likely to be patronized by a potential worker for at least 5 consecutive days.
`(B) Undertake efforts to advertise the availability of the job opportunity for which the employer is seeking a worker through advertisements in public transportation systems.
`(C) To the extent permitted by local laws and regulations, engage in recruitment activities in secondary schools, recreation centers, community centers, and other places throughout the communities within 50 miles of the job site that serve minorities.
`(2)(A) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall impose a 10 percent surcharge on all fees collected for petitions to accord employment status and shall use these funds to establish an employment training program which will include unemployed workers in the United States who need to be trained or retrained. The purpose of this program shall be to increase the number of lawful permanent residents and citizens of the United States who are available for employment in the occupations that are the subjects of such petitions. At least 50 percent of the funds generated by this provision must be used to train American workers in rural and inner-city areas.
`(B) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall reserve and make available to the Secretary of Labor a portion of the funds collected under this paragraph. Such funds shall be used by the Secretary of Labor to establish an `Office to Preserve American Jobs' within the Department of Labor. The purpose of this office shall be to establish policies intended to ensure that employers in the United States will hire available workers in the United States before resorting to foreign labor, giving substantial emphasis to hiring minority workers in the United States.'.
more...
eadguru
11-07 08:43 AM
I opened Service Request 10 days back, still no luck.
Please let me know, which center you opened Service Request and is there any phone number, I can call USCIS.
Please let me know, which center you opened Service Request and is there any phone number, I can call USCIS.
meridiani.planum
03-14 12:33 AM
I heard companies like TCS Wipro HCL (all desi outsourcing firms) have now started to again apply for H1B instead of L1...are they doing green cards too?
Yes, some of them do.
And depending on your luck/contacts/influence you might even extract an EB-1A out of them and get your GC in 6-9 months.
Yes, some of them do.
And depending on your luck/contacts/influence you might even extract an EB-1A out of them and get your GC in 6-9 months.
more...
Houstonguy
07-13 10:55 AM
Signed and forwarded to all known affected friends
2010 2001 White Toyota MR2 Spyder
dilbert_cal
04-26 12:21 AM
WillGetGC2005
Alright my last understanding was wrong.
So to recap what I understand :-
You have a PD of 2002 in EB3. Have approved I-140 and pending 485.
What you want to do is file a new labor in EB2, use your approved I-140 to change PD to 2002 and then file 485 in EB2.
Since you have a 485 filed, why would you want another 485 ?
Possible reason :- You think EB3 is retrogressed right now - so the final approval may not come for another 2 years possibly ( i.e. if no bills pass )
If you convert your case to EB2 which is current, you may have your actual GC much sooner.
Now to your question - what happens if the old employer revokes I-140.
I've come across different answers to it. There are lawyers who believe that once your 140 is approved, the PD is yours for life. Only time you will lose it is if the 140 is revoked due to fraud. Normal revocation request from employer will not impact it. Some lawyers are of the opinion that it may not work this way. This is an untested scenario - atleast to my knowledge. There is some risk in it but you can minimize it by first asking the new employer to file a PERM in EB2, get it approved, file for I-140 in Premium and change your PD. Once all of this is done, you should change your company to the new employer ( provided dates are still current for EB2 ). This way you run very little risk.
If I were you, I would use AC-21 to change employers. The process you are trying to go is a long one and its going to take time. But yes, there are distinct advantages in getting over with this process and probably I might had been tempted to do it too :-)
Sorry for the long winded answer - the short answer is revocation of I-140 by your previous employer will not impact your PD transfer. But its not for certain - its believed to be so by some lawyers. ( I've talked to 3 of them on this issue and majority feels it will not impact )
Alright my last understanding was wrong.
So to recap what I understand :-
You have a PD of 2002 in EB3. Have approved I-140 and pending 485.
What you want to do is file a new labor in EB2, use your approved I-140 to change PD to 2002 and then file 485 in EB2.
Since you have a 485 filed, why would you want another 485 ?
Possible reason :- You think EB3 is retrogressed right now - so the final approval may not come for another 2 years possibly ( i.e. if no bills pass )
If you convert your case to EB2 which is current, you may have your actual GC much sooner.
Now to your question - what happens if the old employer revokes I-140.
I've come across different answers to it. There are lawyers who believe that once your 140 is approved, the PD is yours for life. Only time you will lose it is if the 140 is revoked due to fraud. Normal revocation request from employer will not impact it. Some lawyers are of the opinion that it may not work this way. This is an untested scenario - atleast to my knowledge. There is some risk in it but you can minimize it by first asking the new employer to file a PERM in EB2, get it approved, file for I-140 in Premium and change your PD. Once all of this is done, you should change your company to the new employer ( provided dates are still current for EB2 ). This way you run very little risk.
If I were you, I would use AC-21 to change employers. The process you are trying to go is a long one and its going to take time. But yes, there are distinct advantages in getting over with this process and probably I might had been tempted to do it too :-)
Sorry for the long winded answer - the short answer is revocation of I-140 by your previous employer will not impact your PD transfer. But its not for certain - its believed to be so by some lawyers. ( I've talked to 3 of them on this issue and majority feels it will not impact )
more...
smarth
06-02 11:34 AM
Hi,
I received today RFE on my I-485 from NSC, still my attorney didn't receive the notice.
Please tell what kind of RFE generally they give.
Thanks
I received today RFE on my I-485 from NSC, still my attorney didn't receive the notice.
Please tell what kind of RFE generally they give.
Thanks
hair 00-03 Toyota MR2 Spyder 2dr
GCard_Dream
07-28 03:59 PM
I am planning a family trip to Mexico for few days and would like to get some suggestion or personal experience on how to re-enter to United States. Here is my situation:
Wife has a valid H4 stamp in her passport which is good for another year. We also applied for travel document after we filed for I-485 but she has never used that travel document. Now the question is what do we use for her, H4 or travel doc, when we re-enter US from Mexico? I can't think of any reason why she shouldn't be able to use her H4 to re-enter but the fact that she also has a travel document, will the officer require her to use travel doc and enter and parole. In that case, does she lose her H4 status and just become a parole or should she not even show the travel doc and just the H4.
Any help will be very much appreciated.
Wife has a valid H4 stamp in her passport which is good for another year. We also applied for travel document after we filed for I-485 but she has never used that travel document. Now the question is what do we use for her, H4 or travel doc, when we re-enter US from Mexico? I can't think of any reason why she shouldn't be able to use her H4 to re-enter but the fact that she also has a travel document, will the officer require her to use travel doc and enter and parole. In that case, does she lose her H4 status and just become a parole or should she not even show the travel doc and just the H4.
Any help will be very much appreciated.
more...
bsbawa10
05-31 07:22 PM
I am going to apply for a position in Oracle but do not know if it files green card or not. I am reluctant to ask this in the interview.(They may prefer somebody who does not need it) . Also I wonder if there is any wait time for them to file the green card after joining. I posted this because I think some of you might be working for Oracle and might be knowing. Anybody knows the answer , please reply here or send me a private message.
hot mr2 spyder body kit
gbof
10-09 10:08 PM
:) Even if USCIS says that they cant predict future cut-off dates, its not going to slow down the prediction-pundits on IV. Soon we'll have a thread out for December Visa Bulletin prediction!!
I vaguely remember a big guy from uscis presenting a awafully hopeless picture on forward movement (just before june/luly 09), there was a generous spill over in sep09 and dates moved forward (hopefully neverto go back). I donot believe what these non serious guys say. Let us hope for the best.
I vaguely remember a big guy from uscis presenting a awafully hopeless picture on forward movement (just before june/luly 09), there was a generous spill over in sep09 and dates moved forward (hopefully neverto go back). I donot believe what these non serious guys say. Let us hope for the best.
more...
house A 3vz-fe gen2 MR2 swap with a
anilsal
01-26 12:30 AM
Can we contact journos like Neil Cavuto, Sheryl Casone to talk about how giving GC to legals like us can stimulate economy in someway?
I noticed these Business section journos are endlessly talking about ways to prevent the recession.
We can suggest them to talk about recapturing of visas & giving the legals GCs as it can contribute towards (to some extent) a possible stimualtion to the economy(it will surely add to the percentage...) surely we are boosting the spending by making high earning legals spend more on say housing or Autos by giving them GCs...
Not sure if IV gurus are thinking on these lines.
Vivek
Vivek, suggestions are always welcome. But we get more folks suggesting than those that actively do something for IV's cause.
I am wondering if you would want to contact these journalists as an IV member. If you want more information or any other details, PM me your email address and phone number and we can co-ordinate off line.
The immediate need of the hour is the administrative fixes campaign success.
I noticed these Business section journos are endlessly talking about ways to prevent the recession.
We can suggest them to talk about recapturing of visas & giving the legals GCs as it can contribute towards (to some extent) a possible stimualtion to the economy(it will surely add to the percentage...) surely we are boosting the spending by making high earning legals spend more on say housing or Autos by giving them GCs...
Not sure if IV gurus are thinking on these lines.
Vivek
Vivek, suggestions are always welcome. But we get more folks suggesting than those that actively do something for IV's cause.
I am wondering if you would want to contact these journalists as an IV member. If you want more information or any other details, PM me your email address and phone number and we can co-ordinate off line.
The immediate need of the hour is the administrative fixes campaign success.
tattoo Toyota Mr2 Spyder Front Right
GCOP
03-30 02:36 PM
Sorry to learn your situation and wish you good Luck to pass the exam, next time when you will the chance of re-entry. Hopefully you will get that chance very soon. Also thanks for sharing your story. Once again, Good Luck to you.
more...
pictures Toyota Mr2 Mrs Body Kit
gk_2000
12-02 07:22 PM
The bill also says...
1. The illegal's application needs to be processed expeditiously.
2. The USCIS can not increase the fee for that
Means...the 2 million illegals will be put ahead of the legals who are rotting in line for years. To process these docs, USCIS needs more resource and needs to hire more people but they can not increase the fee. So USCIS will come after the legals and increase their fee. These democrats wants to rob legals and reward illegas.
and you are hoping once this bill passed they will consider us...YOU MADE MY DAY.
so WTFs
Hopefully, the bill would have been vetted enough by the time it passes, and these areas cleaned up. This would be a good test for the US political system
1. The illegal's application needs to be processed expeditiously.
2. The USCIS can not increase the fee for that
Means...the 2 million illegals will be put ahead of the legals who are rotting in line for years. To process these docs, USCIS needs more resource and needs to hire more people but they can not increase the fee. So USCIS will come after the legals and increase their fee. These democrats wants to rob legals and reward illegas.
and you are hoping once this bill passed they will consider us...YOU MADE MY DAY.
so WTFs
Hopefully, the bill would have been vetted enough by the time it passes, and these areas cleaned up. This would be a good test for the US political system
dresses Toyota MR2
pappu
06-27 07:36 PM
From: National Immigration Forum
Web: http://www.immigrationforum.org
Recess
Congress is out for its 4th of July recess. It has been a while since the last update went out, but not much has been happening—certainly not compared to one year ago, as a major immigration reform bill was being killed by filibuster in the Senate.
On the one hand, the Forum, and thousands of issue advocacy organizations in politically-gridlocked Washington, are waiting for a new Congress and a new President. On the other hand, there is never a time when we are not defending against the bad ideas that immigration restrictionists and their friends in Congress are trying to slip through Congress.
There is little chance of having positive legislation enacted this year. There are, however, some proposals being considered. In the House, Rep. Zoe Lofgren, with co-sponsors from both parties has put a couple of bills into the hopper that would offer modest relief for immigrants waiting for visas. H.R. 5882 would “re-capture” immigrant visas that went unused during the years 1992 to 2007, and would make changes in the law to prevent visas from going unused in the future. This would effectively make available an additional 225,000 visas on a one-time basis, with about 93,000 of those visas going to the family preferences.
H.R. 5921 would eliminate the per-country ceiling for employment-based immigrant visas, and raise the per-country limit for family-based visas.
In the Senate, we will at some point see further action on AgJOBS, and proposals related to seasonal non-agricultural workers and high-skilled temporary workers.
Even for these modest reforms, prospects for passage are uncertain.
Oversight and Accountability
If there is any good news coming out of Washington, it is that Congress, after giving boatloads of money to the immigration enforcement agencies, is starting to ask for some accountability.
There have been some hearings, including a hearing in the House on June 4th on the subject of deaths in immigration detention, where some of the egregious misconducts of Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) has been questioned. There have also been hearings to examine immigration enforcement proposals still being considered. Several committees (including the Immigration Subcommittee) have considered mandatory electronic employment verification plans. The Shuler/Tancredo “SAVE” Act, the proposal that has the most momentum (if you can call it that at this point) now has 190 signatures on a discharge petition that, if it gains 217 signatures, will force a vote on the House floor. Since April 1, it has gained just five signatures. We expect there will be more hearings where Congress will exercise its oversight responsibilities over the Department of Homeland Security, and in part these hearings will continue to point to the need to fix our broken immigration system.
The Appropriations Season
We are getting in to the appropriations season and, legislatively, the action will turn to the 12 spending bills that Congress must pass by September 30 to keep the various government agencies running. (Given the current gridlock, no one actually expects Congress to complete its work on the spending bills; more likely temporary spending bills will be passed to tide the government over until a new Congress is in place.)
Spending bills offer the greatest chance for mischief. Immigration restrictionists will no doubt offer amendment after amendment to make life more miserable for immigrants. In this election season, the main function of these proposals will not necessarily be to pass them into law, but to gain material for 30-second campaign advertisements in which anti-immigrant members of Congress will attack their opponents as being soft on immigration, national security, etc.
There is, unfortunately, always the chance that one of these proposals actually passes, and this will require the vigilance of immigration advocates in Washington in the coming weeks.
There is also the chance that some good proposals may find their way into the spending bills. In the House, the bill controlling spending for the Department of Homeland Security has passed with a number of reporting requirements for ICE—in keeping with the new interest by Congress in holding the enforcement agencies accountable.
The target date for adjournment for the summer is August 8. After that date, the House and Senate will be safely out of Washington until September, after the party conventions.
Immigrants and the 2008 Elections
The real action is taking place outside the beltway. In preparation for the upcoming elections, there will be much focus on getting immigrants registered to vote and turned out to vote. This weekend, on June 28, there will be a kickoff in Chicago of the New Americans Vote 2008 campaign, which is a collaborative effort of the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, Center for Community Change, Fair Immigration Reform Movement, National Council of La Raza, NDN, America’s Voice, United Food and Commercial Workers and the We Are America Alliance. The campaign combines training, organizing and electoral civic engagement targeting immigrant communities in 17 states. Speaking at the kickoff will be Senator Dick Durbin and Representatives Luis Gutierrez and Jan Schakowsky. For more, see:
http://icirr.org/node/2882
Immigrants are eager to weigh in on the immigration debate, and it is expected they will be doing this in unprecedented numbers in polling places across the country this fall. Building up to the elections, organizations including the Forum will be tracking the story of how the immigration issue is being used by politicians. It is expected that we will see a repeat of 2006—Republican candidates will use the immigration issue to play on the fears of their constituents in the hope of gaining votes, the debate will be ugly, and Democrats may or may not take a more moderate view.
Web: http://www.immigrationforum.org
Recess
Congress is out for its 4th of July recess. It has been a while since the last update went out, but not much has been happening—certainly not compared to one year ago, as a major immigration reform bill was being killed by filibuster in the Senate.
On the one hand, the Forum, and thousands of issue advocacy organizations in politically-gridlocked Washington, are waiting for a new Congress and a new President. On the other hand, there is never a time when we are not defending against the bad ideas that immigration restrictionists and their friends in Congress are trying to slip through Congress.
There is little chance of having positive legislation enacted this year. There are, however, some proposals being considered. In the House, Rep. Zoe Lofgren, with co-sponsors from both parties has put a couple of bills into the hopper that would offer modest relief for immigrants waiting for visas. H.R. 5882 would “re-capture” immigrant visas that went unused during the years 1992 to 2007, and would make changes in the law to prevent visas from going unused in the future. This would effectively make available an additional 225,000 visas on a one-time basis, with about 93,000 of those visas going to the family preferences.
H.R. 5921 would eliminate the per-country ceiling for employment-based immigrant visas, and raise the per-country limit for family-based visas.
In the Senate, we will at some point see further action on AgJOBS, and proposals related to seasonal non-agricultural workers and high-skilled temporary workers.
Even for these modest reforms, prospects for passage are uncertain.
Oversight and Accountability
If there is any good news coming out of Washington, it is that Congress, after giving boatloads of money to the immigration enforcement agencies, is starting to ask for some accountability.
There have been some hearings, including a hearing in the House on June 4th on the subject of deaths in immigration detention, where some of the egregious misconducts of Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) has been questioned. There have also been hearings to examine immigration enforcement proposals still being considered. Several committees (including the Immigration Subcommittee) have considered mandatory electronic employment verification plans. The Shuler/Tancredo “SAVE” Act, the proposal that has the most momentum (if you can call it that at this point) now has 190 signatures on a discharge petition that, if it gains 217 signatures, will force a vote on the House floor. Since April 1, it has gained just five signatures. We expect there will be more hearings where Congress will exercise its oversight responsibilities over the Department of Homeland Security, and in part these hearings will continue to point to the need to fix our broken immigration system.
The Appropriations Season
We are getting in to the appropriations season and, legislatively, the action will turn to the 12 spending bills that Congress must pass by September 30 to keep the various government agencies running. (Given the current gridlock, no one actually expects Congress to complete its work on the spending bills; more likely temporary spending bills will be passed to tide the government over until a new Congress is in place.)
Spending bills offer the greatest chance for mischief. Immigration restrictionists will no doubt offer amendment after amendment to make life more miserable for immigrants. In this election season, the main function of these proposals will not necessarily be to pass them into law, but to gain material for 30-second campaign advertisements in which anti-immigrant members of Congress will attack their opponents as being soft on immigration, national security, etc.
There is, unfortunately, always the chance that one of these proposals actually passes, and this will require the vigilance of immigration advocates in Washington in the coming weeks.
There is also the chance that some good proposals may find their way into the spending bills. In the House, the bill controlling spending for the Department of Homeland Security has passed with a number of reporting requirements for ICE—in keeping with the new interest by Congress in holding the enforcement agencies accountable.
The target date for adjournment for the summer is August 8. After that date, the House and Senate will be safely out of Washington until September, after the party conventions.
Immigrants and the 2008 Elections
The real action is taking place outside the beltway. In preparation for the upcoming elections, there will be much focus on getting immigrants registered to vote and turned out to vote. This weekend, on June 28, there will be a kickoff in Chicago of the New Americans Vote 2008 campaign, which is a collaborative effort of the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, Center for Community Change, Fair Immigration Reform Movement, National Council of La Raza, NDN, America’s Voice, United Food and Commercial Workers and the We Are America Alliance. The campaign combines training, organizing and electoral civic engagement targeting immigrant communities in 17 states. Speaking at the kickoff will be Senator Dick Durbin and Representatives Luis Gutierrez and Jan Schakowsky. For more, see:
http://icirr.org/node/2882
Immigrants are eager to weigh in on the immigration debate, and it is expected they will be doing this in unprecedented numbers in polling places across the country this fall. Building up to the elections, organizations including the Forum will be tracking the story of how the immigration issue is being used by politicians. It is expected that we will see a repeat of 2006—Republican candidates will use the immigration issue to play on the fears of their constituents in the hope of gaining votes, the debate will be ugly, and Democrats may or may not take a more moderate view.
more...
makeup Toyota MR2 Body Kits
sundevil
03-17 06:12 PM
This employer already hurt you by revoking your 140 and seems like you are not a big fan of his. Why don't you file a WH4 form with DOL for Feb'08 to Apr'08 salary. That way it becomes your ex-employer problem and you can explain your status all the way from Jan'08 to Apr'08.
I was working with a company until November 2007. I went to India in Dec and came back in Feb and was out of project until April 2008. During this time my relation with my employer gone bad and he threatened to cancel my H1. I transferred my H1 to the new company and is on project and is working with them from May 2008 till now. For the 8 months I worked in 2008 I got a total salary of 50,000 based on annual salary of $75K. This is less than the prevailing wages. Since my W2 is only $50,000 I'm worried about my immigration prospects. My previous employer withdrew my I140 application. I�m in my 6th year and just started my Labor process with the new company.
My current company is ready to help me, but they cannot run any payroll for last year, but can provide bonus for last year to make the total of last year up to $60k. They are a small co. and have never done this before.
How can we include this bonus in my W2 (I haven't filed my taxes so far, the company also hasn't filed their 2008 taxes)
I was working with a company until November 2007. I went to India in Dec and came back in Feb and was out of project until April 2008. During this time my relation with my employer gone bad and he threatened to cancel my H1. I transferred my H1 to the new company and is on project and is working with them from May 2008 till now. For the 8 months I worked in 2008 I got a total salary of 50,000 based on annual salary of $75K. This is less than the prevailing wages. Since my W2 is only $50,000 I'm worried about my immigration prospects. My previous employer withdrew my I140 application. I�m in my 6th year and just started my Labor process with the new company.
My current company is ready to help me, but they cannot run any payroll for last year, but can provide bonus for last year to make the total of last year up to $60k. They are a small co. and have never done this before.
How can we include this bonus in my W2 (I haven't filed my taxes so far, the company also hasn't filed their 2008 taxes)
girlfriend 2000-2004 TOYOTA MR2 SPYDER
abhay
01-19 09:40 PM
Hi All
Mine is EB2 Category, On May 18th 2009 USCIS sent an RFE and my case status on USCIS website changed to this
"On May 18, 2009, we mailed a notice requesting initial evidence in this case. Please follow the instructions on the notice to submit the evidence requested. Meanwhile, processing of this case is on hold until we either receive the evidence or the opportunity to submit it expires. Once you submit the evidence requested and a decision is made, you will be notified by mail. If you move while this case is pending, please use our Change of Address online tool to update your case with your new address or call our customer service center at 1-800-375-5283."
My Lawyer submitted the response for RFE with in 30 days (Sometimes in June before June 18th). My online status never changed and my lawyer assured that she has signature proof of receipt from FedEx, After 60 days, after pressure from me her paralegal sent an email to me Saying that she spoke with some one named XYZ from Texas Service center and he said that they have received the response, I waited until December and the status still not changed so I decided to call USCIS, they opened case for me on Dec 10th since it was outside processing time, and on Jan 17th 2010, I received a letter from USCIS with the reulst of investigation and it said+
"Status of this service request is:
The TSC has not received your response as of to date.
XM271"
I panicked and wrote an email to my lawyer and he said that
They just looked on the online status for your letter and Please be careful not to do separate inquiries apart from the lawyer as they now might not allow the lawyer to get case update for you. It is important to have on channel for updates since files get moved around and can get lost. If you wanted us to do the inquiries, please let us know and we can see if they will still let us. we are sure everything is fine as we have confirmation they got the response. We charge hourly at $250 per hour for time spent on the case beyond an initial inquiry."
I am going to contact my employer and express my concerns and see what they can do.
My questions are
Does the online status never get updated sometimes?
Does contacting USCIS directly creates problems for contacting USCIS on my behalf?
Any suggestion for me how to proceed with this?
How do I get the online status changed?
Thanks for all your help.
Regards
Abhay
Mine is EB2 Category, On May 18th 2009 USCIS sent an RFE and my case status on USCIS website changed to this
"On May 18, 2009, we mailed a notice requesting initial evidence in this case. Please follow the instructions on the notice to submit the evidence requested. Meanwhile, processing of this case is on hold until we either receive the evidence or the opportunity to submit it expires. Once you submit the evidence requested and a decision is made, you will be notified by mail. If you move while this case is pending, please use our Change of Address online tool to update your case with your new address or call our customer service center at 1-800-375-5283."
My Lawyer submitted the response for RFE with in 30 days (Sometimes in June before June 18th). My online status never changed and my lawyer assured that she has signature proof of receipt from FedEx, After 60 days, after pressure from me her paralegal sent an email to me Saying that she spoke with some one named XYZ from Texas Service center and he said that they have received the response, I waited until December and the status still not changed so I decided to call USCIS, they opened case for me on Dec 10th since it was outside processing time, and on Jan 17th 2010, I received a letter from USCIS with the reulst of investigation and it said+
"Status of this service request is:
The TSC has not received your response as of to date.
XM271"
I panicked and wrote an email to my lawyer and he said that
They just looked on the online status for your letter and Please be careful not to do separate inquiries apart from the lawyer as they now might not allow the lawyer to get case update for you. It is important to have on channel for updates since files get moved around and can get lost. If you wanted us to do the inquiries, please let us know and we can see if they will still let us. we are sure everything is fine as we have confirmation they got the response. We charge hourly at $250 per hour for time spent on the case beyond an initial inquiry."
I am going to contact my employer and express my concerns and see what they can do.
My questions are
Does the online status never get updated sometimes?
Does contacting USCIS directly creates problems for contacting USCIS on my behalf?
Any suggestion for me how to proceed with this?
How do I get the online status changed?
Thanks for all your help.
Regards
Abhay
hairstyles toyota mr2 spyder body kit.
anilkumar0902
08-26 11:59 PM
got similar RFE
for application original signature
identity documents
i efiled my 765 and on aug 3rd i got my rfe , i took print out of efiled copy signed it and wrote a cover letter and attached ead copy,ssn copy and passport copy
and sent it.
they received my response but havent updated my case yet...waiting for it..
please let me know anyone else has similar issues and what was the result..
These days...the status online remains in Reponse received for RFE...once the service center reviews your response..they usually respond back. If you are getting into a job loss risk due to the lack of EAD, then you should create an expedite SR.
Cheers
for application original signature
identity documents
i efiled my 765 and on aug 3rd i got my rfe , i took print out of efiled copy signed it and wrote a cover letter and attached ead copy,ssn copy and passport copy
and sent it.
they received my response but havent updated my case yet...waiting for it..
please let me know anyone else has similar issues and what was the result..
These days...the status online remains in Reponse received for RFE...once the service center reviews your response..they usually respond back. If you are getting into a job loss risk due to the lack of EAD, then you should create an expedite SR.
Cheers
gcwaiting17
10-04 05:36 PM
RD: July 2 nd
Transferred from NSC>CSC
Receipt Notice Aug 28
Got EAD/AP
485 Transferred from CSC>NSC
Waiting for FP notice
Transferred from NSC>CSC
Receipt Notice Aug 28
Got EAD/AP
485 Transferred from CSC>NSC
Waiting for FP notice
krishna.ahd
03-26 04:25 PM
These folks are most likely doctors...doctors salaries are in that range.
Consultant - Travelling job
Consultant - Travelling job
No comments:
Post a Comment