SKK2004
06-03 06:43 PM
Called all the numbers this afternoon.
wallpaper Kanye West Bear Air Force
paul
04-07 05:56 PM
There are many immigration lawyers with many clients in the same situation as us. Is there any plan to contact these lawyers in the hope that they could make their clients aware of this organization?
greencardvow
10-12 05:23 PM
If thats the case then why did they reopen my new case which is from my current employer. The old case from previous employer isnt even touched. The previous employer was a desi company. The new employer is a US corporation with just 1 H1 employee.
To Everyone...
DO NOT PANIC. These notices are usually sent when you have any H1 transfer pendings most of the time ( at least in case of H1). By law, the employer is supposed to notify USCIS whenever any employer has left the company.
The re-opening of case is a letter from USCIS to the previous employers to confirm that the employee no longer works and is usually sent to the attorney.
So chill and don't sweat.
To Everyone...
DO NOT PANIC. These notices are usually sent when you have any H1 transfer pendings most of the time ( at least in case of H1). By law, the employer is supposed to notify USCIS whenever any employer has left the company.
The re-opening of case is a letter from USCIS to the previous employers to confirm that the employee no longer works and is usually sent to the attorney.
So chill and don't sweat.
2011 kanye west bear - 145874
sobers
02-20 12:23 PM
Friends,
I'm starting a new thread where I'll post research and stats that lend more credibility and/or support skilled, legal immigration. This should also be added to our presentation material for lawmakers!
Thanks!
-----------
Starting off, here is a recent study by the influential Kauffman Foundation which clearly backs the rationale for expanding skilled, legal immigration...
http://www.kauffman.org/news.cfm?itemID=678
New Kauffman Foundation Study Identifies Key Factors Driving Offshoring of Corporate R&D
Contacts:
Wendy Guillies, Kauffman Foundation, 816-932-1046, wguillies@kauffman.org
Tom Phillips, Communication Partners, 212-935-4655, comptwp@aol.com
KANSAS CITY, MO, February 16, 2006 - Contrary to popular belief, it is intellectual capital and university collaboration, not just lower costs, that primarily attract companies to locate R&D activities in locations away from their home country, according to a new study sponsored by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation. The study of more than 200 multinational companies across 15 industries, mostly headquartered in the United States and Western Europe, finds that emerging countries such as China and India will continue to be major beneficiaries of R&D expansion over the next three years as companies seek new market opportunities, access to top scientists and engineers, and collaborative research relationships with leading universities.
The study was released at a meeting of the Government-University-Industry Research Roundtable (GUIRR) of the National Academies. It was conducted by Marie Thursby, Ph.D., Professor of Strategic Management, Georgia Tech College of Management, and Jerry Thursby, Chair of the Department of Economics, Emory University, with sponsorship by the Kauffman Foundation.
Designed to identify and rank the importance of different factors feeding into the corporate decision-making process as to where to locate R&D facilities, the study also tracked R&D work coming into the United States from abroad, as well as R&D work going in the reverse direction; addressed favored countries for locating R&D work and why; and outlined trends industry expects for R&D expansion in the future.
Among the top factors going into new R&D siting decisions in both developed and emerging countries are market growth potential, quality of R&D talent, collaboration with universities and IP protection. How these factors influence the decision, however, depend on whether the site is in a developed or emerging country. In neither emerging nor developed countries was cost consideration the most important factor, which runs contrary to what has been reported by the media (according to an analysis of media coverage over the past few years in The Wall Street Journal and New York Times on multinational R&D locations).
Among the study's more surprising findings, according to the researchers, was the role university collaboration plays in the decision-making process for locating R&D facilities. In fact, collaboration with universities was particularly prevalent as a factor for expanding to emerging countries, even though these countries provide lesser degrees of IP protection.
"The study underscores the critical role universities play in a country's national innovation system, not just in the training of new scientists and access to the best talent, but in the ease of developing and licensing technology," said Carl Schramm, president and CEO of the Kauffman Foundation.
More than half of the corporate respondents who identify the United States as their home country report that they have either recently expanded or planned to locate R&D facilities in China and India vs. other developed countries. Of 63 Western European companies responding, 13 plan on expanding or locating new R&D facilities to the United States. The issue of collaborative research between universities and corporations has been a growing concern within the United States, with some observers saying legal wrangling over intellectual property rights is not only slowing the pace of innovation but also prompting companies to seek university research partners in other countries.
The study indicates, however, that while the trend toward R&D offshoring to Asia will continue despite concerns over IP protection, companies are keeping their most cutting-edge research in developed countries where IP protection is the strongest. According to the study, only 22 percent of the R&D effort in emerging countries is for new science.
"The United States would seem to have a comparative advantage in maintaining its innovative leadership through the high caliber of its scientists and its strong protection of IP," said Lesa Mitchell, vice president of Advancing Innovation at the Kauffman Foundation. "Industry and universities must be alert to removing obstacles to joint research, or emerging countries will overtake us in innovation breakthroughs, and the burst of discovery that has been driving our economy for the past half-century will be over."
Another public policy implication of the findings, say the researches, is that the United States must focus on highly skilled worker immigration.
"We are educating the best and the brightest, but make it impossible for them to stay in America and immigrate. We need major immigration reform that welcomes, instead of pushes out, highly skilled workers," said Dr. Marie Thursby.
The Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation of Kansas City is a private, nonpartisan foundation that works with partners to advance entrepreneurship in America and improve the education of children and youth. The Kauffman Foundation was established in the mid-1960s by the late entrepreneur and philanthropist Ewing Marion
I'm starting a new thread where I'll post research and stats that lend more credibility and/or support skilled, legal immigration. This should also be added to our presentation material for lawmakers!
Thanks!
-----------
Starting off, here is a recent study by the influential Kauffman Foundation which clearly backs the rationale for expanding skilled, legal immigration...
http://www.kauffman.org/news.cfm?itemID=678
New Kauffman Foundation Study Identifies Key Factors Driving Offshoring of Corporate R&D
Contacts:
Wendy Guillies, Kauffman Foundation, 816-932-1046, wguillies@kauffman.org
Tom Phillips, Communication Partners, 212-935-4655, comptwp@aol.com
KANSAS CITY, MO, February 16, 2006 - Contrary to popular belief, it is intellectual capital and university collaboration, not just lower costs, that primarily attract companies to locate R&D activities in locations away from their home country, according to a new study sponsored by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation. The study of more than 200 multinational companies across 15 industries, mostly headquartered in the United States and Western Europe, finds that emerging countries such as China and India will continue to be major beneficiaries of R&D expansion over the next three years as companies seek new market opportunities, access to top scientists and engineers, and collaborative research relationships with leading universities.
The study was released at a meeting of the Government-University-Industry Research Roundtable (GUIRR) of the National Academies. It was conducted by Marie Thursby, Ph.D., Professor of Strategic Management, Georgia Tech College of Management, and Jerry Thursby, Chair of the Department of Economics, Emory University, with sponsorship by the Kauffman Foundation.
Designed to identify and rank the importance of different factors feeding into the corporate decision-making process as to where to locate R&D facilities, the study also tracked R&D work coming into the United States from abroad, as well as R&D work going in the reverse direction; addressed favored countries for locating R&D work and why; and outlined trends industry expects for R&D expansion in the future.
Among the top factors going into new R&D siting decisions in both developed and emerging countries are market growth potential, quality of R&D talent, collaboration with universities and IP protection. How these factors influence the decision, however, depend on whether the site is in a developed or emerging country. In neither emerging nor developed countries was cost consideration the most important factor, which runs contrary to what has been reported by the media (according to an analysis of media coverage over the past few years in The Wall Street Journal and New York Times on multinational R&D locations).
Among the study's more surprising findings, according to the researchers, was the role university collaboration plays in the decision-making process for locating R&D facilities. In fact, collaboration with universities was particularly prevalent as a factor for expanding to emerging countries, even though these countries provide lesser degrees of IP protection.
"The study underscores the critical role universities play in a country's national innovation system, not just in the training of new scientists and access to the best talent, but in the ease of developing and licensing technology," said Carl Schramm, president and CEO of the Kauffman Foundation.
More than half of the corporate respondents who identify the United States as their home country report that they have either recently expanded or planned to locate R&D facilities in China and India vs. other developed countries. Of 63 Western European companies responding, 13 plan on expanding or locating new R&D facilities to the United States. The issue of collaborative research between universities and corporations has been a growing concern within the United States, with some observers saying legal wrangling over intellectual property rights is not only slowing the pace of innovation but also prompting companies to seek university research partners in other countries.
The study indicates, however, that while the trend toward R&D offshoring to Asia will continue despite concerns over IP protection, companies are keeping their most cutting-edge research in developed countries where IP protection is the strongest. According to the study, only 22 percent of the R&D effort in emerging countries is for new science.
"The United States would seem to have a comparative advantage in maintaining its innovative leadership through the high caliber of its scientists and its strong protection of IP," said Lesa Mitchell, vice president of Advancing Innovation at the Kauffman Foundation. "Industry and universities must be alert to removing obstacles to joint research, or emerging countries will overtake us in innovation breakthroughs, and the burst of discovery that has been driving our economy for the past half-century will be over."
Another public policy implication of the findings, say the researches, is that the United States must focus on highly skilled worker immigration.
"We are educating the best and the brightest, but make it impossible for them to stay in America and immigrate. We need major immigration reform that welcomes, instead of pushes out, highly skilled workers," said Dr. Marie Thursby.
The Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation of Kansas City is a private, nonpartisan foundation that works with partners to advance entrepreneurship in America and improve the education of children and youth. The Kauffman Foundation was established in the mid-1960s by the late entrepreneur and philanthropist Ewing Marion
more...
chicago60607
09-17 11:45 AM
Smith supports the amendment but opposes the bill (HR6020)
gc_lover
07-18 03:52 PM
service cntr lady said that they sent the applications back. They do not use overnight Fedex like you and me,they use regular mail.and it could take 4 wks too ..so will have to wait again for this? rejection and then refiling the same stuff?
She just said that to get rid of you over the phone. Lot of people have called USCIS and no one heard of any rejection notice being generated. I think we should be okay!
She just said that to get rid of you over the phone. Lot of people have called USCIS and no one heard of any rejection notice being generated. I think we should be okay!
more...
gcnirvana
01-31 01:05 AM
Same here. Good job OP on finding this.
I just voted 9:56pm PST. question no is now 22 and 27
I just voted 9:56pm PST. question no is now 22 and 27
2010 Kanye West Bear Head Racerback
gc_maine2
03-14 09:39 AM
I pray your wish come true ....
Yeah I agree. We should lobby to merge EB2 and EB3. J
Yeah I agree. We should lobby to merge EB2 and EB3. J
more...
chanduv23
04-28 08:49 PM
AC21 is a law. However, USCIS not yet published the regulation since year 2000, that binds everyone. All these memos since 2000, are internal to USCIS and not binding. They are very clear in the memo that revokation (except on fraud) of an already approved 140 by the petitioner, after 180 days of pending of 485, will not stop the approval of 485, if employee changes to similar occupation. This is just a non bining internal standard of USCIS. It does not have teeth, as it is not a public regulation. However, this internal standard can be changed by any time with/without public notice or through a regulation. Also, one should remember that, they mentioned in one of their memos that, regulation will be much tougher than memo.
Therefore, as some one is mentioned that, an approved immigrant visa pettion should be always available at the time of issuing GC. That is also a law. This law also need to be met at the time of approval of 485. Therfore AC21 and requirement for availability of approved 140 is two different and counteracting issues.
In practical situation, the employee has no control over 140 in any stage as it is employer's petition. Therefore, if employee leaves the job as per the AC21 law, employer verywell withdraw the 140 even after 180 days of 485 pending and create a situation of unavailability of approved immigrat visa petion for the employee. Therefore, in the final regulation they will make a rule that favours the employee, if everything was bonafide. It is like a aboundened spouse in family catagory.
I think, USCIS is currently taking the tough standard to weed out the consulting compaines (to put a leash on GC factories/body shoppers), as they are the one mostly abusing the EB system. Only those people working in GC factories need to worry. It may be mainly due the current economic situation. I feel thats why they are delaying the regulation. Others need not worry.
Well, 485 denials on ac21 where 140 was revoked has always been happening.
Your interpretation might be right about consulting companies but these denials not necessarily happening to people in consulting companies, they happen to anyone whose 140 was revoked.
Therefore, as some one is mentioned that, an approved immigrant visa pettion should be always available at the time of issuing GC. That is also a law. This law also need to be met at the time of approval of 485. Therfore AC21 and requirement for availability of approved 140 is two different and counteracting issues.
In practical situation, the employee has no control over 140 in any stage as it is employer's petition. Therefore, if employee leaves the job as per the AC21 law, employer verywell withdraw the 140 even after 180 days of 485 pending and create a situation of unavailability of approved immigrat visa petion for the employee. Therefore, in the final regulation they will make a rule that favours the employee, if everything was bonafide. It is like a aboundened spouse in family catagory.
I think, USCIS is currently taking the tough standard to weed out the consulting compaines (to put a leash on GC factories/body shoppers), as they are the one mostly abusing the EB system. Only those people working in GC factories need to worry. It may be mainly due the current economic situation. I feel thats why they are delaying the regulation. Others need not worry.
Well, 485 denials on ac21 where 140 was revoked has always been happening.
Your interpretation might be right about consulting companies but these denials not necessarily happening to people in consulting companies, they happen to anyone whose 140 was revoked.
hair Kanye West Bear on Grey iPhone
nat23
02-13 02:50 PM
What really baffles me is the attitude of some members in this forum. They contribute $20 a month (some dont even do that) and want to be treated as a Congressman , with updates & news flashes.
Get real people. First of all your contribution of $20 is nothing compared to what we are up against. We want to push for a change in law in a foreign country, which will impact generations of this country with a small contribution of $20.
The point being: If you cant run the show then shut up and watch it. Give your advise when asked for and dont pretend to own it.
Get real people. First of all your contribution of $20 is nothing compared to what we are up against. We want to push for a change in law in a foreign country, which will impact generations of this country with a small contribution of $20.
The point being: If you cant run the show then shut up and watch it. Give your advise when asked for and dont pretend to own it.
more...
add78
04-28 09:37 AM
It's not just 180 daysd before the application, it also includes 180 days AFTER the application.
This is the current section on 90 days period
(E)(i) In the case of an application described in clause (ii),
the employer did not displace and will not displace a United States
worker (as defined in paragraph (4)) employed by the employer within
the period beginning 90 days before and ending 90 days after the
date of filing of any visa petition supported by the application.
And the ammendment in the new bill
(1) NONDISPLACEMENT.--Subparagraph (E) of such section 212(n)(1) is amended--
(A) in clause (i)--
(i) by striking ``90 days'' both places it appears and inserting ``180 days'';
Yes, I got that already, I did not specify in my message as it is a "after the fact" requirement, i.e. I am not undermining its potential disastrous ramifications of having to force the layoff of already hired H1B if any other layoffs occur post the H1B hire, I was simply trying to focus my analysis on the impact BEFORE the H1B employee even be hired by employer or placed at client site. But yes, this applies AFTER 180 days as well.
This is the current section on 90 days period
(E)(i) In the case of an application described in clause (ii),
the employer did not displace and will not displace a United States
worker (as defined in paragraph (4)) employed by the employer within
the period beginning 90 days before and ending 90 days after the
date of filing of any visa petition supported by the application.
And the ammendment in the new bill
(1) NONDISPLACEMENT.--Subparagraph (E) of such section 212(n)(1) is amended--
(A) in clause (i)--
(i) by striking ``90 days'' both places it appears and inserting ``180 days'';
Yes, I got that already, I did not specify in my message as it is a "after the fact" requirement, i.e. I am not undermining its potential disastrous ramifications of having to force the layoff of already hired H1B if any other layoffs occur post the H1B hire, I was simply trying to focus my analysis on the impact BEFORE the H1B employee even be hired by employer or placed at client site. But yes, this applies AFTER 180 days as well.
hot Kanye west bear!
syzygy
01-31 01:18 PM
And I am sure Members of Staff of Presidential Candidates must be looking at top questions right now.
The questions have moved to 5 and 16 now, under most popular.
The questions have moved to 5 and 16 now, under most popular.
more...
house Kanye West x Takashi Murakami
funny
10-08 12:51 PM
http://www.bestsyndication.com/?q=tough-days-ahead-indian-real-estate-market
tattoo hot kanye west bear tattoos.
franklin
07-11 05:05 PM
Is anyone make PDF about this rally? So, that we can circulate this by mail.
Please use the email that was sent by the core team to every member to circulate to your friends.
This is an ideal time to remind people to update their personal information in the profile.
Please use the email that was sent by the core team to every member to circulate to your friends.
This is an ideal time to remind people to update their personal information in the profile.
more...
pictures Kanye West: Teddy Bear Glasses
skumar9
08-26 11:01 AM
Yes, ICICI is not a good bank, if you pay attention on the things they do you will surely realize this fact. They cheat a lot on all Loans and all kinds of deposits and transfers. I hate this bank. SBI is the best for evrything.
dresses Takashi Murakami x Kanye West
gjoe
11-01 03:52 PM
If we can understand why most of us want a GC we can understand the poll better.
In my opinion most of us here want the GC because we want to change jobs for better pay, better professional growth, to live in a better place, better work environment, etc, the list can be endless. ( I guess if you don't have all these then you don't have freedom)
If we can get our GC's no matter with which employer we work as long as we do our job ( as mentioned in our LC) we will not be bothered too much about our GC process ( We are dependent on our employer sponsoriing our GC so we are not independent)
I can say atleast half of us who are waiting for the GC don't have any ambitions as of now to take active role in building this society, if we really had such we can do that at our home countries too.
Like someone said in this thread " Reverse Brain Drain " is an empty slogan if we use ourselves call ourselves the brain which America needs to keep it going.
In my opinion most of us here want the GC because we want to change jobs for better pay, better professional growth, to live in a better place, better work environment, etc, the list can be endless. ( I guess if you don't have all these then you don't have freedom)
If we can get our GC's no matter with which employer we work as long as we do our job ( as mentioned in our LC) we will not be bothered too much about our GC process ( We are dependent on our employer sponsoriing our GC so we are not independent)
I can say atleast half of us who are waiting for the GC don't have any ambitions as of now to take active role in building this society, if we really had such we can do that at our home countries too.
Like someone said in this thread " Reverse Brain Drain " is an empty slogan if we use ourselves call ourselves the brain which America needs to keep it going.
more...
makeup kanye.gif kanye west
Lollerskater
09-17 12:17 PM
amendment failed
Edit: sheesh u guys are fast!
Edit: sheesh u guys are fast!
girlfriend Kanye West Bear iPhone
geve
02-06 02:37 PM
Dear Core team,
Thanks for your efforts and initiative. Those who or not part of Core team has no right to question thier ability, or asking for updates every hour. This is purely a volunteer organisation founded and managed by Core team.
PAPPU and logicfile have every valid point. How many of us are really trying to help either work or financially? However we visit the site 10 times a day.
Well I request the CORE to kindly ignore and try to achieve our goals. No doubt in this aspect you are the leaders who took initiative. we try to follow and support our best.
Please ignore the people "who knows not and knows not that they knows not". Shun them.
PD 2003
I-140 Apr 2006
Contributed :$120
signed up for recuring $20
Thanks for your efforts and initiative. Those who or not part of Core team has no right to question thier ability, or asking for updates every hour. This is purely a volunteer organisation founded and managed by Core team.
PAPPU and logicfile have every valid point. How many of us are really trying to help either work or financially? However we visit the site 10 times a day.
Well I request the CORE to kindly ignore and try to achieve our goals. No doubt in this aspect you are the leaders who took initiative. we try to follow and support our best.
Please ignore the people "who knows not and knows not that they knows not". Shun them.
PD 2003
I-140 Apr 2006
Contributed :$120
signed up for recuring $20
hairstyles kanye west bear
pappu
10-11 10:28 AM
Namechecks:
IV will be soon posting some updates on this. We have done some ground work on this issue in the recent past and have got positive response. Stronger support from our members, will definitely help us push this agenda item. IV feels that this issue is going to be a big roadblock for a lot of us now, after people have filed their I485s. It is possible to get a much wider bi-partisan support on this issue by us and we are already pursuing it.
Pls. stay tuned on this issue.
================
Update
Oct 22. 2007
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=81&Itemid=61
IV will be soon posting some updates on this. We have done some ground work on this issue in the recent past and have got positive response. Stronger support from our members, will definitely help us push this agenda item. IV feels that this issue is going to be a big roadblock for a lot of us now, after people have filed their I485s. It is possible to get a much wider bi-partisan support on this issue by us and we are already pursuing it.
Pls. stay tuned on this issue.
================
Update
Oct 22. 2007
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=81&Itemid=61
polapragada
04-26 06:45 PM
We dont have to fight on H1B vs L1B. But the fact is employees with L1 are suffering more then H1Bs.
YES santhan...
BTW I am H1B :D
YES santhan...
BTW I am H1B :D
guesswho
05-20 04:45 PM
Did you consider using "atlas america" and other bunch of travel insurance that advertise themselves as PPO? I am wondering if anyone has expericence dealing with them regarding claims. I purchased that recently for my parents since it had 100/0 or 90/10 coverage.
Anyone has experience going to hospital using these insurance?
Hi I am a physician in Oregon and my parents are visiting too in July. I called Kaiser regarding this, and this is what I was told.
1. they can get insurance since Kaiser does not need an SSN for the application.
2. Every Plan has a deductible $, an out of pocket maximum $, and a co-insurance $ amount.
So,
Plan A: Deductible 2500, Co-insurance 22% of all inpatient cost upto max of $22,000.
Plan B: Deductible 6000, Co-insurance 50% of all inpatient cost upto max of $50,000.
Essentially none of these plans are a 'good deal'. But remember its easier to pay back a loan of 22k - 50k than to pay back 100-200k.
Also since Kaiser is an HMO, and has its own facilities in the west coast and Hawaii, 'accepting insurance' is not a problem.
Anyone has experience going to hospital using these insurance?
Hi I am a physician in Oregon and my parents are visiting too in July. I called Kaiser regarding this, and this is what I was told.
1. they can get insurance since Kaiser does not need an SSN for the application.
2. Every Plan has a deductible $, an out of pocket maximum $, and a co-insurance $ amount.
So,
Plan A: Deductible 2500, Co-insurance 22% of all inpatient cost upto max of $22,000.
Plan B: Deductible 6000, Co-insurance 50% of all inpatient cost upto max of $50,000.
Essentially none of these plans are a 'good deal'. But remember its easier to pay back a loan of 22k - 50k than to pay back 100-200k.
Also since Kaiser is an HMO, and has its own facilities in the west coast and Hawaii, 'accepting insurance' is not a problem.