Libra
07-11 09:02 PM
viewed 56 but only one rating so far, come on guys, rate the video on youtube..........and post some comments toooo
wallpaper Tell him to get over himself
desi3933
08-29 04:18 PM
Yes, I do have an update. See my posting the Lawsuit thread.
Note:
This Lawsuit Idea is on hold for the following reasons:
a) Not enough interest in the affected parties
b) Cost of the litigation would be upwards of around 30K
c) The counsel has recommended to hold discussions with USCIS official first and give them sufficient time to respond to our concerns.
Thanks for the update!
Good Luck.
Note:
This Lawsuit Idea is on hold for the following reasons:
a) Not enough interest in the affected parties
b) Cost of the litigation would be upwards of around 30K
c) The counsel has recommended to hold discussions with USCIS official first and give them sufficient time to respond to our concerns.
Thanks for the update!
Good Luck.
imh1b
02-04 03:48 PM
Why is everyone making a big deal about going to India?
If you want to go , then go.
Its good for the backlog. One way to reduce the backlog if there is no bill is to encourage people to leave USA for 'green grass'. If they leave, we get our green card soon and grass will become green for us.
Let everyone be green and happy.
If you want to go , then go.
Its good for the backlog. One way to reduce the backlog if there is no bill is to encourage people to leave USA for 'green grass'. If they leave, we get our green card soon and grass will become green for us.
Let everyone be green and happy.
2011 funny wallpaper. funny
raj3078
11-21 11:44 AM
Hello Mehul,
As everyone, I was lost to find words writing this email. I think, you need to consult a good lawyer to begin....Hope things work out for you.
Raj
As everyone, I was lost to find words writing this email. I think, you need to consult a good lawyer to begin....Hope things work out for you.
Raj
more...
sankap
07-10 02:00 PM
@supreet:
Desi/Sankap,
I am not planning to open a company for this. If possible, I would rather work as an independent contractor on 1099.
Please read IRS links I posted above re independent contractor vs. worker. Since you'll be filing your taxes as an independent contractor/sole proprietor on 1099, you'll be considered "self-employed." AC21 allows self-employment. You may not be formally opening a company, but you'll be self-employed.
Now, after reading the last few posts, it looks like there are three things I need to worry about in case of a RFE -
1. Job should be bona fide (without going into the definition of the word).
My project is going to be with a large Bank through a big, wellknown consulting/outsourcing company. That should take care of the 'bonafide' part.
All self-employment is legitimate--so no need to worry. Another option is o get the EVL from the staffing company in case of RFE. Your subcontract with the bank is immaterial.
2. Should have similar/same job duties/responsibilities.
I am still waiting for the contract, however I can have my job duties/responsibilities listed out in my contract with the company. I am sure I can get a letter from the client too if it comes to that.
Your self-employment under AC21 has to be same or similar job. If the contracting co can give you an EVL (in case of an RFE), good enough. If not, you can create one for your self-employed "Sole Proprietorship." I wouldn't bother the staffing company*now* for an EVL.
3. Job should be permanent - This is something I may not be able to prove. Since the project is short term, I am sure my contract will mention that. I am trying to convince the company to at least include "contract-to-hire" in the language of the contract. Since this project has potential of becoming long term, company is not averse to this idea.
Will having 'contract-to-hire' in the contract take care of this question (if a RFE comes).
All self-employment is "permanent." The staffing co may be able to write that on EVL. I wouldn't talk with the staffing co about that now: worry about that only in case of an RFE.
Thanks!!
- S
Desi/Sankap,
I am not planning to open a company for this. If possible, I would rather work as an independent contractor on 1099.
Please read IRS links I posted above re independent contractor vs. worker. Since you'll be filing your taxes as an independent contractor/sole proprietor on 1099, you'll be considered "self-employed." AC21 allows self-employment. You may not be formally opening a company, but you'll be self-employed.
Now, after reading the last few posts, it looks like there are three things I need to worry about in case of a RFE -
1. Job should be bona fide (without going into the definition of the word).
My project is going to be with a large Bank through a big, wellknown consulting/outsourcing company. That should take care of the 'bonafide' part.
All self-employment is legitimate--so no need to worry. Another option is o get the EVL from the staffing company in case of RFE. Your subcontract with the bank is immaterial.
2. Should have similar/same job duties/responsibilities.
I am still waiting for the contract, however I can have my job duties/responsibilities listed out in my contract with the company. I am sure I can get a letter from the client too if it comes to that.
Your self-employment under AC21 has to be same or similar job. If the contracting co can give you an EVL (in case of an RFE), good enough. If not, you can create one for your self-employed "Sole Proprietorship." I wouldn't bother the staffing company*now* for an EVL.
3. Job should be permanent - This is something I may not be able to prove. Since the project is short term, I am sure my contract will mention that. I am trying to convince the company to at least include "contract-to-hire" in the language of the contract. Since this project has potential of becoming long term, company is not averse to this idea.
Will having 'contract-to-hire' in the contract take care of this question (if a RFE comes).
All self-employment is "permanent." The staffing co may be able to write that on EVL. I wouldn't talk with the staffing co about that now: worry about that only in case of an RFE.
Thanks!!
- S
gch
05-28 12:27 PM
emailed the house representative as well
more...
hsingh82
05-08 03:33 PM
I think we should protest in front of capitol with placards reading "End Discrimination by National Origin". "USCIS practices Racism", "End Racism in Legal Immigration" "Remove country Caps", "Country Caps = Racism", "Choose Merit, Not Race". We should set up a tent and do a huger strike.
"End Discrimination by National Origin". "USCIS practices Racism", "End Racism in Legal Immigration" "Remove country Caps", "Country Caps = Racism", "Choose Merit, Not Race".
I liked these, how about we send copies of our degrees, W-2's (-ssn) and resumes with one of these to Obama to prove the point that we actually are highly skilled people?
"End Discrimination by National Origin". "USCIS practices Racism", "End Racism in Legal Immigration" "Remove country Caps", "Country Caps = Racism", "Choose Merit, Not Race".
I liked these, how about we send copies of our degrees, W-2's (-ssn) and resumes with one of these to Obama to prove the point that we actually are highly skilled people?
2010 Funny 3D Animals Wallpapers
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.
more...
Macaca
07-08 08:09 PM
140K GCs were available on Oct 1 2005 and Oct 2006: categories were not current.
< 40K GCs were available on June 12 2007: all categories were current.
If there is a law to prevent acceptance of ALL AOS's on Oct 1 (when 140K GCs are available) then that law was violated on June 12 2007.
If there is no law to prevent acceptance of AOS's on June 12 (when < 40K GCs were available) then all categories should have been current on Oct 1 2005 and Oct 1 2006.
< 40K GCs were available on June 12 2007: all categories were current.
If there is a law to prevent acceptance of ALL AOS's on Oct 1 (when 140K GCs are available) then that law was violated on June 12 2007.
If there is no law to prevent acceptance of AOS's on June 12 (when < 40K GCs were available) then all categories should have been current on Oct 1 2005 and Oct 1 2006.
hair Funny animal wallpaper
chanduv23
07-10 03:41 PM
Folks, here is what I am able to gather by self employment
(1) One can be self employed
(2) 1099 or w2 - kinda tricky - most people I talked to do w2 and any profits they get after they take their salary are bonuses
(3) The job has to be legitimate - in the same or similar category - you must be doing duties that are similar in nature to your 140 petition
(4) What is meant by legitimate is - you must simply not be doing "nothing" - there must be income and you must be doing your duties.
Correct me if I am wrong
(1) One can be self employed
(2) 1099 or w2 - kinda tricky - most people I talked to do w2 and any profits they get after they take their salary are bonuses
(3) The job has to be legitimate - in the same or similar category - you must be doing duties that are similar in nature to your 140 petition
(4) What is meant by legitimate is - you must simply not be doing "nothing" - there must be income and you must be doing your duties.
Correct me if I am wrong
more...
GCNaseeb
09-12 09:24 AM
Please create link to main page So that everyone can access easily.
Its been noticed that the updates are not seen from the main page right from it was created. Better yet to create a new thread under members only thread and try merging these.
Its been noticed that the updates are not seen from the main page right from it was created. Better yet to create a new thread under members only thread and try merging these.
hot hairstyles wallpapers funny.
tabletpc
11-21 02:10 PM
Just like everyother memeber has expressed opinion, i was shocked to read your posting.
May god give you the courage to handle the stress and resposibality you have now.
I keep trying to convince.."Did i realy read that posting or was it just a bad dream"..unfortunalty its not a dream..!!!
Do get it checked from well know doctors. Here is a youtube version of comenecement speach given by Steve Jobs. Even he was diagnized with cancer and he spent whole day thinking of his resposibality. But that evening the doctors realzied it was curable cancer and were in tears ..!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1R-jKKp3NA
be strong...
May god give you the courage to handle the stress and resposibality you have now.
I keep trying to convince.."Did i realy read that posting or was it just a bad dream"..unfortunalty its not a dream..!!!
Do get it checked from well know doctors. Here is a youtube version of comenecement speach given by Steve Jobs. Even he was diagnized with cancer and he spent whole day thinking of his resposibality. But that evening the doctors realzied it was curable cancer and were in tears ..!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D1R-jKKp3NA
be strong...
more...
house funny stuck dog
.jpg "wallpapers funny. cool")
mach1343
09-27 12:08 PM
I totally agree on EB3 to EB2 porting but the PD should be the day he qualified as EB2 not the original date of EB3 which makes sense.
This way everyone is happy.
People who have done Masters (EB2) should get the GCs first. :) ...Relax dont give me a red for this. I already had enough.
Chill out
This way everyone is happy.
People who have done Masters (EB2) should get the GCs first. :) ...Relax dont give me a red for this. I already had enough.
Chill out
tattoo Funny Wallpaper
sanjay05
02-05 01:08 PM
No FP yet for me too.July 2 filer. Application at TSC.
I received my FP 4 days after infopass,
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=16939
I received my FP 4 days after infopass,
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=16939
more...
pictures Funny South Park XP wallpaper.
felix31
09-09 07:39 PM
LOL
EB3 ROW went to June 2002
:rolleyes::rolleyes:
Since I will never get GC, this may be a good time to plan the big change for my life. :D:D
Good luck, everyone!
:D
EB3 ROW went to June 2002
:rolleyes::rolleyes:
Since I will never get GC, this may be a good time to plan the big change for my life. :D:D
Good luck, everyone!
:D
dresses Funny Wallpaper
EADplease
09-11 04:45 PM
Congratulations, mine (485 and 765 for my husband) was received by TSC on July 24th but no receipt, no checks cashed nothing yet. It seems TSC is really slow in receipting the applications. My husband needs to travel abroad soon and we're anxiously waiting for the receipt...
My applications ( I-140; I-485; I-765) were mailed on July 27th to NSC and they had acknowledged received on JULY-30th as per the mail delivery confirmation.
Today I recieved a note from my lawyer that the receipt notice has been issued for all of my applications.
Phew that was a relief as I was about to leave to India soon and was worried about travelling without the receipt number.
My applications ( I-140; I-485; I-765) were mailed on July 27th to NSC and they had acknowledged received on JULY-30th as per the mail delivery confirmation.
Today I recieved a note from my lawyer that the receipt notice has been issued for all of my applications.
Phew that was a relief as I was about to leave to India soon and was worried about travelling without the receipt number.
more...
makeup hairstyles funny wallpaper
johnamit
08-18 01:13 PM
I think we have a provable point as per the USCIS CSR msg "We approve all cases based on the order they are received". So basically it says Approval based on ND. Approving Oct'07 NDs and not approving (not even touching) Jul-Sep NDs makes a valid point.
I am not sure how to put our case based on PD because to me PD serves the purpose of passport to get in and then line is formed by ND. But sure, if anyone could put some thoughts and define the situation, I think its well worth to try something different now.
I am not sure how to put our case based on PD because to me PD serves the purpose of passport to get in and then line is formed by ND. But sure, if anyone could put some thoughts and define the situation, I think its well worth to try something different now.
girlfriend desktop wallpaper funny. funny
dingudi
11-06 02:48 PM
dingudi,
I tend to disagree from you on your comment regarding a possible link between name check and FP. I think they are seperate processes and run in parallel - one does not depend on another. I've read somewhere that a guy's name check was initiated like a month before he went for his FP. He got that info from infopass appointment. Also, wouldn't the IOs mention about the pending name check if it was related to FP notice?
Regarding reaching a non TSC IO, I think is impossible since the call gets directed to TSC or NSC based on the receipt number that you key in when you call.
I agree with you that we'll end up getting the same damn letter as our friend about no appointment availabality at local ASC for our SR response. It seems to me that we have to try either the Infopass or just wait it out.
Has anyone thought about writing to ombdusman (if I spelled it correctly) about this FP notice issue or will that be not worth it?
Maybe we should mention to IOs next time we call that others who applied weeks after us have gotten their FP notices from our local ASC. I am not sure if it will help but worth giving it a try. There is another way I thought we can bypass the TSC IO. I am not sure if this will work but I am thinking of giving it a try if I do not get FP in the next couple of weeks.
I tend to disagree from you on your comment regarding a possible link between name check and FP. I think they are seperate processes and run in parallel - one does not depend on another. I've read somewhere that a guy's name check was initiated like a month before he went for his FP. He got that info from infopass appointment. Also, wouldn't the IOs mention about the pending name check if it was related to FP notice?
Regarding reaching a non TSC IO, I think is impossible since the call gets directed to TSC or NSC based on the receipt number that you key in when you call.
I agree with you that we'll end up getting the same damn letter as our friend about no appointment availabality at local ASC for our SR response. It seems to me that we have to try either the Infopass or just wait it out.
Has anyone thought about writing to ombdusman (if I spelled it correctly) about this FP notice issue or will that be not worth it?
Maybe we should mention to IOs next time we call that others who applied weeks after us have gotten their FP notices from our local ASC. I am not sure if it will help but worth giving it a try. There is another way I thought we can bypass the TSC IO. I am not sure if this will work but I am thinking of giving it a try if I do not get FP in the next couple of weeks.
hairstyles funny wallpapers, funny
tampacoolie
07-08 12:57 PM
USCIS can't consume or approve more than 10% of annual limit which is 14,000 per quarter. However this is not applicable for last fiscal quarter. DOS intention is good to make the current in July so that no visa goes in vain. Evil USCIS woke up and approved in two weeks so that rest of the ppl can file next year with higher fees.
pitha
07-07 08:43 PM
she said "But we're prepared to talk to people about what happened here."
hope that means they are willing to talk about giving EAD. If we get EAD all the lawsuits will be withdrawn. The law does not say AOS applications should not be accepted when there are no visa numbers available, the law only says AOS cannot be approved when visa numbers are not available. USCIS internal regulations says they will not accept AOS applications when priority date is not current. by now its quite apparent that USCIS has broken a lot of there own internal regulations just to make sure the visa numbers are used up before july 2 2007. Then can easily accomodate the EAD for july filers. It all depends upon the pressure exerted on USCIS and DOS
hope that means they are willing to talk about giving EAD. If we get EAD all the lawsuits will be withdrawn. The law does not say AOS applications should not be accepted when there are no visa numbers available, the law only says AOS cannot be approved when visa numbers are not available. USCIS internal regulations says they will not accept AOS applications when priority date is not current. by now its quite apparent that USCIS has broken a lot of there own internal regulations just to make sure the visa numbers are used up before july 2 2007. Then can easily accomodate the EAD for july filers. It all depends upon the pressure exerted on USCIS and DOS
another_wei
08-24 08:45 PM
Mailed I-485 on July 19th
RD is July 20th
ND is August 17th
Did not file AP or EAD because I was think it may slow down my application, but I was just guess on this beside I don't need to change job or travel.
Guru people, on my notice it says above my Name A094 XXX XXX is this number my GC number?
Thank you
RD is July 20th
ND is August 17th
Did not file AP or EAD because I was think it may slow down my application, but I was just guess on this beside I don't need to change job or travel.
Guru people, on my notice it says above my Name A094 XXX XXX is this number my GC number?
Thank you
No comments:
Post a Comment