ItIsNotFunny
03-05 04:07 PM
http://www.jingchenglaw.com/frontend/successstories/I_140_01.jpg
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/i-485.pdf
also in the 485 form, please take a look on the right hand side where it says uscis use only....thats where they have "country chargeable," and I guess they are right that they make the determination during adjudication.
This is confusing. In that case how do they make ROW current or PDs way ahead of India? In other words, how do they know without touching a file that PD of a ROW file is current and is eligible to get GC!
Think about the flip side. If this is true, then once they preadjuridict all cases, thousands of ROW cases will immediately become eligible to get GC and India / China will not move for year(s)!
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/i-485.pdf
also in the 485 form, please take a look on the right hand side where it says uscis use only....thats where they have "country chargeable," and I guess they are right that they make the determination during adjudication.
This is confusing. In that case how do they make ROW current or PDs way ahead of India? In other words, how do they know without touching a file that PD of a ROW file is current and is eligible to get GC!
Think about the flip side. If this is true, then once they preadjuridict all cases, thousands of ROW cases will immediately become eligible to get GC and India / China will not move for year(s)!
wallpaper Easy to remove by eye make up
amitjoey
05-19 03:35 PM
Thank you everybody that has contributed. We need to raise $50,000 in the next 15 days. That is $3334 raised every day. Now even though this looks like a big amount to raise, with a collective effort we can do this. This is our chance to make this happen for ourselves. The alternative is just staying in limbo renewing EAD/AP every two years for atleast the next 10 years. That is an average cost of $800 every two years every member.
We need 17 members everyday contributing $200 everyday or 34 members contributing $100 everyday for the next 15 days.
We need 17 members everyday contributing $200 everyday or 34 members contributing $100 everyday for the next 15 days.
pbojja
02-09 10:12 PM
Are you from different world. Yes it is necessary even to get the H1. Now I understand why the anti-immigrants are targetting us. Do you mean to say the English speaking people diminished this country. Can we replace all these guys with mullas. What are you trying to say..
Hello ... I m responding to a some one who dis-respected my fellow citizens . So what do you say English speaking guys are great IT professionals ? To work on computers you need brian and understand bits and bytes not english .
I think you got my message wrong all I m saying is you dont have to be a great english communicator to qualify for EB2 , unless you are applying as professor .
In 70s most of the towns having only local language schools and stuided in local language schools , thay may be part of reason why some of them dont communicate well ..That doesnt mean they can not work on computers ...
Hello ... I m responding to a some one who dis-respected my fellow citizens . So what do you say English speaking guys are great IT professionals ? To work on computers you need brian and understand bits and bytes not english .
I think you got my message wrong all I m saying is you dont have to be a great english communicator to qualify for EB2 , unless you are applying as professor .
In 70s most of the towns having only local language schools and stuided in local language schools , thay may be part of reason why some of them dont communicate well ..That doesnt mean they can not work on computers ...
2011 Searching: eye makeup applying
nk2
07-18 12:38 PM
IV core keeps telling us, BEC is always on their agenda. Really?
I am also stuck in BEC, but I know IV has kept BEC victims in mind.
See the following links
Pappu
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6084
It is thru expert drafting and analysis of IV core and its push with various like minded orgs that we got AC21 provisions of H1 re-instated by striking the text in "grand bargain" draft that removed it. THE ONLY PEOPLE THAT WERE HELPED AND WHOSE CAREERS AND PRIORITY DATES WERE SAVED BY THAT CHANGE ARE BACKLOG CENTER VICTIMS.
LogicLife
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=100024#post100024
I am also stuck in BEC, but I know IV has kept BEC victims in mind.
See the following links
Pappu
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6084
It is thru expert drafting and analysis of IV core and its push with various like minded orgs that we got AC21 provisions of H1 re-instated by striking the text in "grand bargain" draft that removed it. THE ONLY PEOPLE THAT WERE HELPED AND WHOSE CAREERS AND PRIORITY DATES WERE SAVED BY THAT CHANGE ARE BACKLOG CENTER VICTIMS.
LogicLife
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=100024#post100024
more...
missourian
09-18 10:24 PM
Anyone !!!
mundada
01-12 04:53 PM
Here is the history of derivative acts under 14th amendment related to employement:
14th Amendment of the United States Constitution: guarantees due process and equal protection under the laws.
The Civil Rights Act of 1866, Section 1981: covers race-based discrimination by employers. Individuals may sue to assert their rights under this Act; which, unlike Title VII, has no limitation on back-pay liability.
The Civil rights Act of 1871, Section 1983: provides persons who believe they have been deprived of rights, privileges or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws to redress and holds those responsible for the deprivation liable to the person injured.
Equal Pay Act of 1963: forbids pay differentials based on sex. It covers all employees who come under the Fair Labor Standards Act, plus executive, administrative, professional employees and outside sales people. Investigation and compliance responsibilities were transferred from the Labor Department to the EEOC on July 1, 1979.
Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act: bans discrimination in employment because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. It covers all terms and conditions of employment; and, it holds employers responsible for any discrimination that goes on within the employer's organization. Title VII is administered by the EEOC and covers employers with 15 or more employees.
Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA): bans employment discrimination because of age against anyone 40 years of age and older, (also know as ADEA). Investigation and compliance responsibilities were transferred from the Labor Department to the EEOC on July 1, 1979.
Executive Order 11246: requires Federal contractors to include a nondiscrimination clause in all contracts and subcontracts in excess of $110.000 and all construction projects financed, even in part, with Federal funds. Revised Order No. 4 requires a written affirmative action program from contractors with 50 or more employees and contracts of $50,000 or more. This order is enforced by the U.S. Department of Labor.
Rehabilitation Act of 1973: Section 503 requires employers with government contracts and subcontracts of $2,500 or more to take affirmative action for qualified handicapped individuals. The regulations implementing the Act require "reasonable accommodation" to the physical and mental limitations of handicapped employees and applicants. Section 504 covers the employment practices of all recipients of Federal financial assistance, a broad spectrum of agencies and institutions from private employers operating under a Federal grant, to public schools, colleges and universities. Both Sections 503 and 504 are enforced by the OFCCP.
Pregnancy Discrimination Act: amends Title VII and states that employment discrimination based on pregnancy, childbirth, and related medical conditions is prohibited under Title VII. According to EEOC, the amendment, which affects those employers under the jurisdiction of Title VII, requires that "persons affected by pregnancy, childbirth, and related medical conditions be treated the same as persons affected by other temporary disabilities."
South Carolina Human Affairs Law: prohibits discrimination based on race, religion, color, age, sex, disability and national origin.
Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA): gives protections to qualified individuals with disabilities that are like those provided under Title VII. It also guarantees equal opportunity in employment, public accommodations, transportation, state/local government services and telecommunication. ADA is enforced by EEOC.
1991 Civl Rights Act of 1991: allows employees to seek compensatory and punitive damages and for trial-by-jury. (this amends Title VII.)
=====
Now the way I interpret it, the requirement to not discriminate based on place of birth is protected by constitution under 14th amendment.
The Equal Protection Clause, part of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, provides that "no state shall ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws". The Equal Protection Clause can be seen as an attempt to secure the promise of the United States' professed commitment to the proposition that "all men are created equal" by empowering the judiciary to enforce that principle against the states.
Furthermore, the precedent rulings related to The Civil Rights Act of 1964 indicate how strictly this is interpreted and enforced. For example, in 1974, the Supreme Court ruled that the San Francisco school district was violating non-English speaking students' rights under the 1964 act by placing them in regular classes rather than providing some sort of accommodation for them.
I therefore believe there is a good chance at the Supreme Court ruling that because of long wait times of more than 3 years for a Green Card plus requirement of same or similar job during that long wait until the green card is received plus country quota affecting people born only in few countries leads to disadvantage for people of these few countries at work.
And yes, even I took law course and gave a seminar during my MBA. But even you would concur that this course at best is basic and does not make a person authority of the US legal system.
Finally, forget me or you, even a lawyer cannot say for sure what the final ruling will be in any case. And hence the best a person can do is give an educated opinion. In addition by human nature, the way I would interpret laws would be to my advantage while the way you would interpret them would be to your advantage. And hence I can understand your biases (and mine as well) because in case the country quota is found illegal by the US Supreme Court, it is the ROW that is going to be affected the most.
Don't want to pick on anyone one or anything.. just case-in-point to what I posted earlier.. here we have intense legal debates, and legal opinions with people who can not distinguish between Title VII and EEO which are legislative laws and between the constitution. These laws are not part of the constitution and they include provisions for federal and local governments and their agencies to override parts of rules if they deem necessary.
14th Amendment of the United States Constitution: guarantees due process and equal protection under the laws.
The Civil Rights Act of 1866, Section 1981: covers race-based discrimination by employers. Individuals may sue to assert their rights under this Act; which, unlike Title VII, has no limitation on back-pay liability.
The Civil rights Act of 1871, Section 1983: provides persons who believe they have been deprived of rights, privileges or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws to redress and holds those responsible for the deprivation liable to the person injured.
Equal Pay Act of 1963: forbids pay differentials based on sex. It covers all employees who come under the Fair Labor Standards Act, plus executive, administrative, professional employees and outside sales people. Investigation and compliance responsibilities were transferred from the Labor Department to the EEOC on July 1, 1979.
Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act: bans discrimination in employment because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. It covers all terms and conditions of employment; and, it holds employers responsible for any discrimination that goes on within the employer's organization. Title VII is administered by the EEOC and covers employers with 15 or more employees.
Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA): bans employment discrimination because of age against anyone 40 years of age and older, (also know as ADEA). Investigation and compliance responsibilities were transferred from the Labor Department to the EEOC on July 1, 1979.
Executive Order 11246: requires Federal contractors to include a nondiscrimination clause in all contracts and subcontracts in excess of $110.000 and all construction projects financed, even in part, with Federal funds. Revised Order No. 4 requires a written affirmative action program from contractors with 50 or more employees and contracts of $50,000 or more. This order is enforced by the U.S. Department of Labor.
Rehabilitation Act of 1973: Section 503 requires employers with government contracts and subcontracts of $2,500 or more to take affirmative action for qualified handicapped individuals. The regulations implementing the Act require "reasonable accommodation" to the physical and mental limitations of handicapped employees and applicants. Section 504 covers the employment practices of all recipients of Federal financial assistance, a broad spectrum of agencies and institutions from private employers operating under a Federal grant, to public schools, colleges and universities. Both Sections 503 and 504 are enforced by the OFCCP.
Pregnancy Discrimination Act: amends Title VII and states that employment discrimination based on pregnancy, childbirth, and related medical conditions is prohibited under Title VII. According to EEOC, the amendment, which affects those employers under the jurisdiction of Title VII, requires that "persons affected by pregnancy, childbirth, and related medical conditions be treated the same as persons affected by other temporary disabilities."
South Carolina Human Affairs Law: prohibits discrimination based on race, religion, color, age, sex, disability and national origin.
Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA): gives protections to qualified individuals with disabilities that are like those provided under Title VII. It also guarantees equal opportunity in employment, public accommodations, transportation, state/local government services and telecommunication. ADA is enforced by EEOC.
1991 Civl Rights Act of 1991: allows employees to seek compensatory and punitive damages and for trial-by-jury. (this amends Title VII.)
=====
Now the way I interpret it, the requirement to not discriminate based on place of birth is protected by constitution under 14th amendment.
The Equal Protection Clause, part of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, provides that "no state shall ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws". The Equal Protection Clause can be seen as an attempt to secure the promise of the United States' professed commitment to the proposition that "all men are created equal" by empowering the judiciary to enforce that principle against the states.
Furthermore, the precedent rulings related to The Civil Rights Act of 1964 indicate how strictly this is interpreted and enforced. For example, in 1974, the Supreme Court ruled that the San Francisco school district was violating non-English speaking students' rights under the 1964 act by placing them in regular classes rather than providing some sort of accommodation for them.
I therefore believe there is a good chance at the Supreme Court ruling that because of long wait times of more than 3 years for a Green Card plus requirement of same or similar job during that long wait until the green card is received plus country quota affecting people born only in few countries leads to disadvantage for people of these few countries at work.
And yes, even I took law course and gave a seminar during my MBA. But even you would concur that this course at best is basic and does not make a person authority of the US legal system.
Finally, forget me or you, even a lawyer cannot say for sure what the final ruling will be in any case. And hence the best a person can do is give an educated opinion. In addition by human nature, the way I would interpret laws would be to my advantage while the way you would interpret them would be to your advantage. And hence I can understand your biases (and mine as well) because in case the country quota is found illegal by the US Supreme Court, it is the ROW that is going to be affected the most.
Don't want to pick on anyone one or anything.. just case-in-point to what I posted earlier.. here we have intense legal debates, and legal opinions with people who can not distinguish between Title VII and EEO which are legislative laws and between the constitution. These laws are not part of the constitution and they include provisions for federal and local governments and their agencies to override parts of rules if they deem necessary.
more...
techdev
07-31 08:17 PM
Hi,
I am working with a consulting comp since 6 months. Now, I got a permenant offer from other comp and they have applied for transfer ( i have fedex receipt).
Now, I have a employment agreement with my company A which says I need to work with them for 12 months or need to pay 9500$. I can give 2 weeks of notice along with this. Contract is not on there letterhead but It has stamp with there address ( no company name on stamp). Contract says there name. Also signed is done by a marketing person of that comp.
Is that valid contract? Can they ask me to pay 9500$ or sue me on that basis?
Please reply me urgently as I need to decide what to do.
Thanks in advance
Parag
I am working with a consulting comp since 6 months. Now, I got a permenant offer from other comp and they have applied for transfer ( i have fedex receipt).
Now, I have a employment agreement with my company A which says I need to work with them for 12 months or need to pay 9500$. I can give 2 weeks of notice along with this. Contract is not on there letterhead but It has stamp with there address ( no company name on stamp). Contract says there name. Also signed is done by a marketing person of that comp.
Is that valid contract? Can they ask me to pay 9500$ or sue me on that basis?
Please reply me urgently as I need to decide what to do.
Thanks in advance
Parag
2010 my finished eye makeup
s_r_e_e
08-17 11:19 AM
Emails and online statuses were the standard Welcome Notice.
"we mailed you a notice that we had registered this customer's new permanent resident status. Please follow any instructions on the notice. Your new permanent resident card should be mailed within 60 days "
another email
"we mailed you a notice that we have approved this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS"
The statuses went back and forth a couple of times between "Decision" , "Post Decition" and "Card production"
"we mailed you a notice that we had registered this customer's new permanent resident status. Please follow any instructions on the notice. Your new permanent resident card should be mailed within 60 days "
another email
"we mailed you a notice that we have approved this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS"
The statuses went back and forth a couple of times between "Decision" , "Post Decition" and "Card production"
more...
senthil1
05-31 02:35 PM
Yes that is true. They are lobbying strongly for H1b though they are supporting GC increases. Actually with H1b you can stay unlimited years if you apply gc. So there is no urgency for corporations to resolve the issue. They do not have fear of losing you as you are going to stay in USA until you get green card
I don't think the tech companies are lobbying (strongly enough, if at all) for EB GCs. They are happy as long as H1 quota is increased which I think they will get in one form or the other.
I don't think the tech companies are lobbying (strongly enough, if at all) for EB GCs. They are happy as long as H1 quota is increased which I think they will get in one form or the other.
hair Examples of Eye Make-Up
sam_hoosier
12-10 09:43 AM
Can you pls post their names/IV handles, so that everyone know who those cowards are ? I am sure a lot of them masquerade as experts on this website, but dont bother to move their butts when needed :mad:
more...
pushkarw
11-15 05:06 PM
Is there anyway we could go about pushing our story in the media? I am sure all of us combined have a a few thousand bachelor's, master's and ph.d. degrees. We are a group of people with highly advanced skill sets and this needs to be advertised. Maybe convincing a few journalists to take up our cause could be an option. Local newspapers, political blogs, radio stations etc. etc.
hot this quot;kissablequot; feather
phxhyd
09-29 02:17 PM
I�m working for company A and company B has sponsored my GC as future employee and also did a H1 transfer from A but got a big RFE. Now company C is ready to do H1 transfer. Is it a good idea to do so or would get into problems as GC is in process through B? We did I-140 & I-485 concurrent filing and got our EAD�s approved but I-140 is still in pending status. I heard that using EAD is not a good idea when I-140 is pending.
My Attorney is sending a response to RFE but I�m not sure whether it gets approved or not. What happens if B transfer gets approved and would choose to work with B and not use C at all (if it gets approved)?
In the other way, If C gets approved and choose to work with them as the H1 with A expires pretty soon (got to move out) can I comeback to B with a fresh (another) H1 transfer. Please suggest what is the best to do at this time?
My Attorney is sending a response to RFE but I�m not sure whether it gets approved or not. What happens if B transfer gets approved and would choose to work with B and not use C at all (if it gets approved)?
In the other way, If C gets approved and choose to work with them as the H1 with A expires pretty soon (got to move out) can I comeback to B with a fresh (another) H1 transfer. Please suggest what is the best to do at this time?
more...
house With Strong Eye Makeup
kumar_77
04-27 10:27 PM
Just sent 50$ through pay pal
Transaction ID #9WE74494MT5323737
Transaction ID #9WE74494MT5323737
tattoo The #39;kohl#39; in the eye make-up
yabadaba
03-20 03:53 PM
i dont think its a controversy. mr. Gotcher does not agree with the interpretation. Maybe its a way to generate some additional revenues for his firm by increased traffic to the blog and potentially a class action lawsuit on behalf of the ROW people.
more...
pictures feather, black eye makeup,
whatagcmess
06-04 08:15 AM
I am wondering your logic for using "desi lawyers". They graduated through the same system as any other "book smart" attorney in the "smart" fragomen system. I think it is always a negative to go through a large law firm. An association with a large firm must not be confused with efficiency. Who knows...might be freebies which they provide to HR grp of the large firms keeps them in the picture.......................
I agree with you. Even we have Fragomen attorneys and I did not find them any great. So far I have not had any bad experience with them but they screwed up one of my friends GC and now that person has to leave US.
I agree with you. Even we have Fragomen attorneys and I did not find them any great. So far I have not had any bad experience with them but they screwed up one of my friends GC and now that person has to leave US.
dresses Eye Candy |Makeup|
bfadlia
01-14 06:27 PM
So what? Just because they came and skewed the lines doesn't mean you can choose where you're born or when. the rule is unfair wihtout any reason. there is no graceful solution short of removing the quotas. anyway I doubt fairness is the reason you're so fond of this quota.
Here's a one step way to quit.
1. Accept that the reason you're defending this useless rule is that it benefits you.
Sure.. if you say so.. y didn't u say that earlier.. jeez
It's official guys, we ROWs only argue for the sake of our self servient morality or lack thereof, while all others are on a Utopian conquest of fairness..
Never mind, good luck to everyone and sorry for time wasted thinking we were having a conversation
Good bye :)
Here's a one step way to quit.
1. Accept that the reason you're defending this useless rule is that it benefits you.
Sure.. if you say so.. y didn't u say that earlier.. jeez
It's official guys, we ROWs only argue for the sake of our self servient morality or lack thereof, while all others are on a Utopian conquest of fairness..
Never mind, good luck to everyone and sorry for time wasted thinking we were having a conversation
Good bye :)
more...
makeup eye makeup with feathers. in
NolaIndian32
06-24 01:07 PM
Called and left message today.
girlfriend peacock eye makeup.
rajsand
09-20 11:33 AM
Another rally simultaneously in many states will have good effect provided we have min 500 numbers in individual states.
And yes since we had the DC rally on a weekday (for a geniune reason)
it would be better to make this one a weekend rally just to push things and keep the momentum going. Sure a weekend will fetch 10* more crowd than on a weekday. Sunday would be much preferred as the next day is a working day and things will hot up..!
It can be one rally per neighbouring states.. eg > tristates -- NJ, NY & PA can have one rally . MD , DC & VA can have one ..
Seems like a good thought..
And yes since we had the DC rally on a weekday (for a geniune reason)
it would be better to make this one a weekend rally just to push things and keep the momentum going. Sure a weekend will fetch 10* more crowd than on a weekday. Sunday would be much preferred as the next day is a working day and things will hot up..!
It can be one rally per neighbouring states.. eg > tristates -- NJ, NY & PA can have one rally . MD , DC & VA can have one ..
Seems like a good thought..
hairstyles and Goth eye makeup.
WhoKnows?
12-29 12:08 PM
Since stay in India need to be very short and also my travel is very near, I need to know whether it is safe to travel on an approved I 797 from my current employer?
I already have a H1 B VISA stamped on my passport with previous employer's name that expires on 30 Nov 2009.
Also, I would like to know whether I should select yes/no to the following question?
Are you applying for the same class of visa which is currently valid or has expired within the past 12 months?*
Is H1B Transfer = H1B Renewal?
Thanks in advance.
I already have a H1 B VISA stamped on my passport with previous employer's name that expires on 30 Nov 2009.
Also, I would like to know whether I should select yes/no to the following question?
Are you applying for the same class of visa which is currently valid or has expired within the past 12 months?*
Is H1B Transfer = H1B Renewal?
Thanks in advance.
cnag
03-17 03:12 PM
Does the Frist Bill refers to advanced degree from the US or advanced degree
from Indian Universities also ? I mean MCA/MS/Msc/MTech etc? Can anyone
please clarify ?
from Indian Universities also ? I mean MCA/MS/Msc/MTech etc? Can anyone
please clarify ?
skynet2500
06-13 07:13 PM
Can IV Core confirm this is not an error from USCIS?
No comments:
Post a Comment