JunRN
10-01 03:03 PM
The Greencard Crazy Club (GCC) is now planning to install a webcam near NSC parking lot....we've really gone crazy!!!
SunnySurya
09-15 11:39 AM
I am with you and willing to share the cost.
People, most of us here are just afraid that they will get red dots, be ridiculed for their beliefs. But the things is; If we don't fight for our rights, who will. We have to defend our place in the queue, which at the moment is at substantial risk.
I want everybody to get their GCs. but now interfiling/porting is hurting out position in the queue.
If you are not aware, a good bunch of EB3s are now trying to interfile & port their PDs which are between 2001 - 2005 to EB2.
This will potentially put tens of thousands of people in the EB2 queue before most people in EB2 who are waiting.
These people were not eligible for EB2 when they filed their own labor.. so they should NOT BE ALLOWED TO PORT THEIR OLD PDs. Sure EB3 can Interfile .. but you will get a new PD ... the date you interfile.
If we just keep looking... there will be a huge retrogression in EB2. And its not like these EB3 people will get through with the interfiling/porting. Most of them will be issued RFEs. Their labor apps will be audited and their primary EB3 apps will be cancelled. Infact, 85% of interfiling will never successfully make it through. And its not like it will help the EB3 brothers. That queue will still be long... because they are not going to withdraw their EB3 apps.
Also, while they will not succeed in interfiling/porting, they still will have their apps with USCIS and USCIS will sit on them before eventually issuing NOID. Sad part is they will count these when giving numbers to DOS for setting visa bulletins.
This PD porting is the last "not so ethical & legal" thing after labor substitution.. that we need to Put a cork on.
If we don't act now... then we can all expect to stay in AOS for the next 5 years. This holds for both EB2 and EB3.
I want everybody to get their GCs. I also am OK with the wait.
But anything that threatens my position in the queue is not acceptable.
People, most of us here are just afraid that they will get red dots, be ridiculed for their beliefs. But the things is; If we don't fight for our rights, who will. We have to defend our place in the queue, which at the moment is at substantial risk.
I want everybody to get their GCs. but now interfiling/porting is hurting out position in the queue.
If you are not aware, a good bunch of EB3s are now trying to interfile & port their PDs which are between 2001 - 2005 to EB2.
This will potentially put tens of thousands of people in the EB2 queue before most people in EB2 who are waiting.
These people were not eligible for EB2 when they filed their own labor.. so they should NOT BE ALLOWED TO PORT THEIR OLD PDs. Sure EB3 can Interfile .. but you will get a new PD ... the date you interfile.
If we just keep looking... there will be a huge retrogression in EB2. And its not like these EB3 people will get through with the interfiling/porting. Most of them will be issued RFEs. Their labor apps will be audited and their primary EB3 apps will be cancelled. Infact, 85% of interfiling will never successfully make it through. And its not like it will help the EB3 brothers. That queue will still be long... because they are not going to withdraw their EB3 apps.
Also, while they will not succeed in interfiling/porting, they still will have their apps with USCIS and USCIS will sit on them before eventually issuing NOID. Sad part is they will count these when giving numbers to DOS for setting visa bulletins.
This PD porting is the last "not so ethical & legal" thing after labor substitution.. that we need to Put a cork on.
If we don't act now... then we can all expect to stay in AOS for the next 5 years. This holds for both EB2 and EB3.
I want everybody to get their GCs. I also am OK with the wait.
But anything that threatens my position in the queue is not acceptable.
Green.Tech
06-11 08:36 PM
a small contribution for now I will set up recurring soon. Can't thank you guys enough for being such a great support network. Not to be preachy, are we the same people who stood an united front against the Brits?
Paypal Receipt ID: 3JA591826E386220Y
Thanks jayZinDC...Hope your contribution inspires a few others!
Paypal Receipt ID: 3JA591826E386220Y
Thanks jayZinDC...Hope your contribution inspires a few others!
makemygc
10-25 11:59 PM
I've sent the mails and strongly encourage everyone to come out and take an early action before this gets worse. Even if you are not affected right now, support the cause to make sure that you will not be affected in the future.
Also, just wanted to point out some notes that letter says that Yates memo is attached, so if you are blindly copy and pasting make sure that you attach the Memo to your email or a copy to your letter.
I would suggest OP to add the copy of yates memo and the follow up memo to the posting.
Thanks
MakeMyGC
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
Also, just wanted to point out some notes that letter says that Yates memo is attached, so if you are blindly copy and pasting make sure that you attach the Memo to your email or a copy to your letter.
I would suggest OP to add the copy of yates memo and the follow up memo to the posting.
Thanks
MakeMyGC
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
more...
srikondoji
08-12 01:51 PM
Buddyinus,
I know you are bit overcharged on this forum. I have already warned you politely and gently against personal attacks.
You have not heeded my advise and that of pappu.
Its time for second warning and if you continue and persist on your idiotic talk, you will really face the consequences.
I have already complained about your behavior and you still continue with your narrow and dogmatic thinking.
You really don't know the difference between assertion and assumption.
Let us move on and concentrate on the bigger issue.
I hope you will cool down and get down to basics. I don't want you to be banned from this forum as we need members and especially contributing members.
Best regards
sri
Now, the fool is trying to change the subject by asking ppl to join the rally. Why in the world wud ppl trust him? The thread is barely 10 pages and after realizing that therez no point in discussing about what this thread is all about, he has shifted subject loyalites. How lame and insane is this guy? Pappu, LogicLife where r u guyz? Why dont u ban him?
I know you are bit overcharged on this forum. I have already warned you politely and gently against personal attacks.
You have not heeded my advise and that of pappu.
Its time for second warning and if you continue and persist on your idiotic talk, you will really face the consequences.
I have already complained about your behavior and you still continue with your narrow and dogmatic thinking.
You really don't know the difference between assertion and assumption.
Let us move on and concentrate on the bigger issue.
I hope you will cool down and get down to basics. I don't want you to be banned from this forum as we need members and especially contributing members.
Best regards
sri
Now, the fool is trying to change the subject by asking ppl to join the rally. Why in the world wud ppl trust him? The thread is barely 10 pages and after realizing that therez no point in discussing about what this thread is all about, he has shifted subject loyalites. How lame and insane is this guy? Pappu, LogicLife where r u guyz? Why dont u ban him?
Bodran
06-01 01:11 PM
Hi All,
I want to know if my 19 year old son can be affected by aging out.
I have just received ALC certification and will now file I140 and I485 concurrently as my priority date NOV 22 2004 EB3 Rest of World will be current in June.
Can someone who understands the aging out rules tell me if my son may have a problem?
Thanks in advance...
I want to know if my 19 year old son can be affected by aging out.
I have just received ALC certification and will now file I140 and I485 concurrently as my priority date NOV 22 2004 EB3 Rest of World will be current in June.
Can someone who understands the aging out rules tell me if my son may have a problem?
Thanks in advance...
more...
axp817
09-14 11:45 AM
I have to agree with SC3. PD porting from one EB category to another is a provision that falls within USCIS guidelines.
Yes, if an overwhelming number of applicants from a (more) retrogressed category port to a non (or less) retrogressed category, it 'hurts' some people.
I am EB2-I 2006 by the way, and this will hurt me as well. But I can't bash someone for utilizing to their advantage an option that is provided by the system.
And who am I kidding, if I was in their place, I would be doing the same thing.
Yes, if an overwhelming number of applicants from a (more) retrogressed category port to a non (or less) retrogressed category, it 'hurts' some people.
I am EB2-I 2006 by the way, and this will hurt me as well. But I can't bash someone for utilizing to their advantage an option that is provided by the system.
And who am I kidding, if I was in their place, I would be doing the same thing.
Jimi_Hendrix
11-20 09:49 PM
Got legal immigration?
Joe Adams holds on to his coffee cup while he anxiously reads the immigration news headlines on Google. The democrats have just won control in Washington and like all immigrants; Joe is hopeful that some immigration reform will emerge.
Joe, a native of United Kingdom first came to the United States in 1998. After graduating from Harvard Business School with an MBA he got his dream job in supply chain management. It was not long after that Joe’s company filed for his permanent residency. Life moved on and soon Joe and his wife Kathy had their first child. “The year was 2003” reminisces Joe, “I was really beginning to understand the U.S. immigration process. I was getting a handle on the numerous loops that lay ahead. It was soon apparent to me that immigration was no walk in the garden”.
Of the 940,000 legal immigrants in 2004, only 16% were skilled employment-based immigrants. About 40% of these skilled immigrants had advanced degrees, or 5 or more years of experience after a baccalaureate degree. The impact of these workers’ contributions to American competitiveness belies their small number. They add to the process of scientific discovery, technology development, and innovation, which in turn leads to greater productivity growth. Current immigration policy is abetting brain drain and forcing many of these immigrants to leave for countries like Canada and United Kingdom where skilled immigrants are given priority over undocumented and family-based immigrants.
Legal Immigration, Rewarding?
“Most importantly legal immigration has to be rewarding for legal residents and create a shining example for all other immigrants”, remarks Joe Adams. In the United States, all immigration reform for highly skilled immigrants is bundled with reform for undocumented workers. This phenomenon is representative of the apathy of U.S. immigration policy towards highly skilled legal immigrants. Many of them have advanced degrees in science and technology. They have trained and honed their skills while working in U.S. companies.
Currently permanent residency applications for skilled, employment based immigrants are backed 5-8 years. In the interim applicants are unable to change jobs, get promotions or make any major financial decisions. Highly skilled, legal immigrants need immigration reforms that will reduce massive process backlogs, improve processing by government agencies and better the quality of life while the application is pending.
Legal Immigration Myths
Extremist, anti-immigration advocacy groups have aggressively publicized myths about legal, skilled immigrants. Let us expound some of the common myths about employment based immigration.
Myth: Increasing green cards will enable more new immigrants to enter the country
Fact: Most immigrants who are caught in the employment-based immigration backlog have already spent 5-10 years in the United States. They have integrated socially and culturally. Companies have spent thousands of dollars on training these workers.
Myth: Employment based immigrants do not pay taxes and are a social burden
Fact: Employment based immigrants are required by law to file for federal and state tax returns each year. They pay social security taxes, medicare taxes, payroll taxes and all other applicable taxes. Employment based immigrants are not eligible to receive social security benefits unless their permanent residency applications are approved or unless they have worked in the U.S. for several years.
Myth: Employment based immigrants take away local jobs
Fact: Most progressive Americans realize that educated immigrant workers play a crucial role in stimulating the local economy. Highly skilled immigration fills the gaps in availability and makes the U.S. economy competitive and resilient. A recent study concludes that immigrants have fueled the US entrepreneurial economy, starting one in four venture-backed companies since 1990 and two in five in high technology. This is according to a study released by the National Venture Capital Association trade group to the U.S. Congress in November 2006.
Myth: H1B quota increase will result in more green cards
Fact: H1B has a separate quota from green card quotas. Even after an individual has approved security check, labor certification and employment eligibility; a visa number must be available for him to receive a green card. This quota is subject to annual numerical limits. Based on the current annual visa limit, applications are backlogged 6 years.
Future of Legal Immigration
It is presumed that legal immigration process works efficiently and in a clockwork fashion. However when you consider that legal applicants have to wait 5-8 years for a green card; this statement is false. In the current political environment pro and anti immigrant extremism exist side by side. A rational, middle of the road approach is largely missing. Such an approach would prioritize immigration based on the contribution of immigrants towards economic growth, the reduction of job outsourcing and most importantly rewarding those who chose to enter and continue to reside legally in USA.
Americans largely supports legal immigration. This year, the Secure Knowledge, Innovation and Leadership Bill was introduced in Senate and in the House of Representatives. This bill provides the much needed immigration reforms for highly skilled immigrants. However the democrat leadership has not yet declared immigration on their agenda for the first 100 hours of work. Unless congress collectively passes immigration relief for skilled workers, political considerations for the 2008 presidential elections will put this issue on the back burner again.
Joe Adams holds on to his coffee cup while he anxiously reads the immigration news headlines on Google. The democrats have just won control in Washington and like all immigrants; Joe is hopeful that some immigration reform will emerge.
Joe, a native of United Kingdom first came to the United States in 1998. After graduating from Harvard Business School with an MBA he got his dream job in supply chain management. It was not long after that Joe’s company filed for his permanent residency. Life moved on and soon Joe and his wife Kathy had their first child. “The year was 2003” reminisces Joe, “I was really beginning to understand the U.S. immigration process. I was getting a handle on the numerous loops that lay ahead. It was soon apparent to me that immigration was no walk in the garden”.
Of the 940,000 legal immigrants in 2004, only 16% were skilled employment-based immigrants. About 40% of these skilled immigrants had advanced degrees, or 5 or more years of experience after a baccalaureate degree. The impact of these workers’ contributions to American competitiveness belies their small number. They add to the process of scientific discovery, technology development, and innovation, which in turn leads to greater productivity growth. Current immigration policy is abetting brain drain and forcing many of these immigrants to leave for countries like Canada and United Kingdom where skilled immigrants are given priority over undocumented and family-based immigrants.
Legal Immigration, Rewarding?
“Most importantly legal immigration has to be rewarding for legal residents and create a shining example for all other immigrants”, remarks Joe Adams. In the United States, all immigration reform for highly skilled immigrants is bundled with reform for undocumented workers. This phenomenon is representative of the apathy of U.S. immigration policy towards highly skilled legal immigrants. Many of them have advanced degrees in science and technology. They have trained and honed their skills while working in U.S. companies.
Currently permanent residency applications for skilled, employment based immigrants are backed 5-8 years. In the interim applicants are unable to change jobs, get promotions or make any major financial decisions. Highly skilled, legal immigrants need immigration reforms that will reduce massive process backlogs, improve processing by government agencies and better the quality of life while the application is pending.
Legal Immigration Myths
Extremist, anti-immigration advocacy groups have aggressively publicized myths about legal, skilled immigrants. Let us expound some of the common myths about employment based immigration.
Myth: Increasing green cards will enable more new immigrants to enter the country
Fact: Most immigrants who are caught in the employment-based immigration backlog have already spent 5-10 years in the United States. They have integrated socially and culturally. Companies have spent thousands of dollars on training these workers.
Myth: Employment based immigrants do not pay taxes and are a social burden
Fact: Employment based immigrants are required by law to file for federal and state tax returns each year. They pay social security taxes, medicare taxes, payroll taxes and all other applicable taxes. Employment based immigrants are not eligible to receive social security benefits unless their permanent residency applications are approved or unless they have worked in the U.S. for several years.
Myth: Employment based immigrants take away local jobs
Fact: Most progressive Americans realize that educated immigrant workers play a crucial role in stimulating the local economy. Highly skilled immigration fills the gaps in availability and makes the U.S. economy competitive and resilient. A recent study concludes that immigrants have fueled the US entrepreneurial economy, starting one in four venture-backed companies since 1990 and two in five in high technology. This is according to a study released by the National Venture Capital Association trade group to the U.S. Congress in November 2006.
Myth: H1B quota increase will result in more green cards
Fact: H1B has a separate quota from green card quotas. Even after an individual has approved security check, labor certification and employment eligibility; a visa number must be available for him to receive a green card. This quota is subject to annual numerical limits. Based on the current annual visa limit, applications are backlogged 6 years.
Future of Legal Immigration
It is presumed that legal immigration process works efficiently and in a clockwork fashion. However when you consider that legal applicants have to wait 5-8 years for a green card; this statement is false. In the current political environment pro and anti immigrant extremism exist side by side. A rational, middle of the road approach is largely missing. Such an approach would prioritize immigration based on the contribution of immigrants towards economic growth, the reduction of job outsourcing and most importantly rewarding those who chose to enter and continue to reside legally in USA.
Americans largely supports legal immigration. This year, the Secure Knowledge, Innovation and Leadership Bill was introduced in Senate and in the House of Representatives. This bill provides the much needed immigration reforms for highly skilled immigrants. However the democrat leadership has not yet declared immigration on their agenda for the first 100 hours of work. Unless congress collectively passes immigration relief for skilled workers, political considerations for the 2008 presidential elections will put this issue on the back burner again.
more...
yabadaba
01-02 11:48 AM
looks like some other orgs are referencing my oped for general information purposes
http://www.americas.org/item_30295
"This article was originally published by the sources above and is copyrighted by the sources above. We offer it here as an educational tool to increase understanding of global economics and social justice issues. We believe this is 'fair use' of copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. AMERICAS.ORG is a nonprofit Web site with the goal of educating and informing."
http://www.americas.org/item_30295
"This article was originally published by the sources above and is copyrighted by the sources above. We offer it here as an educational tool to increase understanding of global economics and social justice issues. We believe this is 'fair use' of copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. AMERICAS.ORG is a nonprofit Web site with the goal of educating and informing."
srikondoji
08-02 03:42 PM
I have talked to a representative and he very patiently explained me about the mess.
He clearly and very clearly told me that they have a deadline to send all receipts for June end and July 2nd filers by friday (tomorrow) or worst case monday.
He mentioned that they are working hard to meet this deadline.
Hope this clears the anxiety.
This is true for NSC only.
He clearly and very clearly told me that they have a deadline to send all receipts for June end and July 2nd filers by friday (tomorrow) or worst case monday.
He mentioned that they are working hard to meet this deadline.
Hope this clears the anxiety.
This is true for NSC only.
more...
srinivas_o
09-02 01:40 PM
Landed in August 2000.
Company A filed Eb2 labor in Aug 2003, went to backlog center, got an intent to deny letter, replied to that letter, eventually got denied.
Company B filed EB3 labr in Sep 2004, luckily filed I-485 in July 2007, got EAD.
Now working for Company C on EAD as an FTE using AC21 memo feature.
Company A filed Eb2 labor in Aug 2003, went to backlog center, got an intent to deny letter, replied to that letter, eventually got denied.
Company B filed EB3 labr in Sep 2004, luckily filed I-485 in July 2007, got EAD.
Now working for Company C on EAD as an FTE using AC21 memo feature.
ChalapathiChitturi
12-27 03:27 AM
My case is not yet approved, I Filed on Aug 01 st, Vermont Service Center.
Can you really go for H1 stamping when you are coming back on AP.
As far as I know, you should not use H1 at port of entry while coming back, if you do that your green card will be aboundend. Gurus please currect.
If you are not coming back on H1, then why are you going for stamping?
Can you really go for H1 stamping when you are coming back on AP.
As far as I know, you should not use H1 at port of entry while coming back, if you do that your green card will be aboundend. Gurus please currect.
If you are not coming back on H1, then why are you going for stamping?
more...
Milind123
09-12 05:35 PM
Thanks IV...way to go.
Just made a modest contribution of $200.
Order Details - Sep 12, 2007 11:28 AM PDT
Google Order #313190031134013
Not at all modest, I would say it is really nice contribution. Thanks
Just made a modest contribution of $200.
Order Details - Sep 12, 2007 11:28 AM PDT
Google Order #313190031134013
Not at all modest, I would say it is really nice contribution. Thanks
saileshdude
07-11 11:51 AM
I am not sure if I should be happy or sad with this news. I was laidoff recently and had applied for I-485 on July 17,2007 i.e. current processing date for TSC. Also with this bulletin I will be current (EB2 2006). I have not found a new job yet and my company has told me that they will be revoking my I-140 after 30 days. My company lawyers are not advising me much citing conflict of interest.
What options do I have? Will sending a new G-28 form at this time raise any issues that I do not have job with original employer as my PD is current and it is quite possible that my case maybe adjudicated. In the meantime if I do not sent new G-28 form I am not sure how much my company attorney will co-operate
What options do I have? Will sending a new G-28 form at this time raise any issues that I do not have job with original employer as my PD is current and it is quite possible that my case maybe adjudicated. In the meantime if I do not sent new G-28 form I am not sure how much my company attorney will co-operate
more...
arc
07-15 07:48 PM
10$ - Good work guys BABY STEPS...:)
....IV EB3 NEEDS HELP....
....IV EB3 NEEDS HELP....
Blessing&Lifeisbeautiful
10-23 12:34 AM
Something's going on in the Senate....recapture of unused visa is proposed as an amendment to labor and healthcare appopriations bill.....let's see what happens tomorrow...expect that it will be tackled tomorrow!
They are proposing to recapture 61,000 unused visa for Schedule A. Keep praying everyone!
They are proposing to recapture 61,000 unused visa for Schedule A. Keep praying everyone!
more...
little_willy
09-11 04:56 PM
Thats the only thing hadn't happened so far......and now we have it...People are blaming IV now...I hope this is not true.
http://www..com/discussion-forums/i485-1/124475663/last-page/
Ignore these kind of posts. If you check his profile, he just joined yesterday and this is his only post. Many ppl who were banned from IV paint this false image of the core, but we all know better than that. Ignore and move on.
http://www..com/discussion-forums/i485-1/124475663/last-page/
Ignore these kind of posts. If you check his profile, he just joined yesterday and this is his only post. Many ppl who were banned from IV paint this false image of the core, but we all know better than that. Ignore and move on.
vdlrao
06-10 11:23 AM
DUI(Drive Under Influence)
Imigrait
01-29 07:33 PM
Applied for AP - Aug.16 with NSC
The funny thing is,that as with EAD card,in a day after I subscribed for e-mail update with USCIS they send me e-mail that my AP and family members have been mailed.
LUD on AP Jan 23. AP on hand Jan.28.
Hi NeoKlaus,
Do you know what your Notice Date was?
Thanks.
The funny thing is,that as with EAD card,in a day after I subscribed for e-mail update with USCIS they send me e-mail that my AP and family members have been mailed.
LUD on AP Jan 23. AP on hand Jan.28.
Hi NeoKlaus,
Do you know what your Notice Date was?
Thanks.
kak1978
08-25 11:17 PM
Try IDBI, they have good rates.
gonecrazyonh4
04-25 12:54 PM
Maybe highly intelligent people make irrational decisions.:)
Many of the H1B's are so involved in their work , they really donot follow their green card procedure and pressure their employers for better deal on filing their papers even when they have the chance.
New H1B's coming into the country should be given some guidance on the permanent residency process so that they donot end up like many of us in the forum waiting for years to get their residency.
Many of the H1B's are so involved in their work , they really donot follow their green card procedure and pressure their employers for better deal on filing their papers even when they have the chance.
New H1B's coming into the country should be given some guidance on the permanent residency process so that they donot end up like many of us in the forum waiting for years to get their residency.
No comments:
Post a Comment