vbkris77
03-10 10:39 PM
As I thought about this further, I figured out the data is even worse than I thought earlier, as this may not have any 2007 numbers. People who filed their labors in 2007 were still waiting in july of 2007. So this data is only upto late 2006. Now the figures could be
EB-3
5000 2001
20000 2002
20000 2003
20000 2004
5000 2005
5000 2006
EB-2
10000 2004
30000 2005
30000 2006
Check your Calculations, Per PDF, only 51K EB2 are pending till July 2007.
EB-3
5000 2001
20000 2002
20000 2003
20000 2004
5000 2005
5000 2006
EB-2
10000 2004
30000 2005
30000 2006
Check your Calculations, Per PDF, only 51K EB2 are pending till July 2007.
wallpaper images ible quotes on strength
pointlesswait
05-23 03:20 PM
looks like ur sunny side is up and its still raw!..;-) (2 posts)
my point is: citizens matter..not voteless aliens..
we cannot have the same game plan as numbersusa...
all i am saying is..maybe we need a newer and innovative approach to get our voices heard.. One speaking head ..not a herd!
Paskal, Nixtor and other moderators, please run a quick check on dbcd.
I suspect he is same as pointlesswait.
my point is: citizens matter..not voteless aliens..
we cannot have the same game plan as numbersusa...
all i am saying is..maybe we need a newer and innovative approach to get our voices heard.. One speaking head ..not a herd!
Paskal, Nixtor and other moderators, please run a quick check on dbcd.
I suspect he is same as pointlesswait.
lotsofspace
02-26 05:28 PM
Niether many has tried this option (entering on AP and filing H1B transfer to different employer other than GC sponsers) nor USCIS has strong history of approving/dealing with these type of cases. After entering in AP, though one can very well contine the H1B with the same employer to whom any one work on H1B before leaving US. There is a memo for this type of situation. However, there is no specific memo to address this situation (Transfer). It is all depends on the individual adjucidator's logic. If they see your latest I-94 with parolee stamp, then they may deny (or issue a RFE )the H1B transfer, by the applying the the logic of one must be in the smae status to seek extension. If the deny/issue RFE, you can not counter act as there is no secific memo or policy by USCIS in this case.
Can you please provide a link to this memo ? My attorney said, if I want to continue on H1 after reentry, I must get H1 stamped and enter in H status. If I use AP for reentry, I should change to EAD at work. This memo will help.
I know there is a memo about continuing on H1B after filing I485 (dual intent) in the context of AC21 , but I am not aware about one that deals with entering with AP and continuing on H1.
Most of the answers above talk about transferring/extending the H1 after the reentry to get a new I94. How about if you want to continue with the same employer and you already have H1 valid until 2011 ? Do you still apply for H1 extension ? If so what basis ?
Do they enter a validity date on I94 when we enter using AP ? If so what date would that be ?
What is the significance of this date on I94 when one wants to use EAD and never goes back to H1 ?
Can you please provide a link to this memo ? My attorney said, if I want to continue on H1 after reentry, I must get H1 stamped and enter in H status. If I use AP for reentry, I should change to EAD at work. This memo will help.
I know there is a memo about continuing on H1B after filing I485 (dual intent) in the context of AC21 , but I am not aware about one that deals with entering with AP and continuing on H1.
Most of the answers above talk about transferring/extending the H1 after the reentry to get a new I94. How about if you want to continue with the same employer and you already have H1 valid until 2011 ? Do you still apply for H1 extension ? If so what basis ?
Do they enter a validity date on I94 when we enter using AP ? If so what date would that be ?
What is the significance of this date on I94 when one wants to use EAD and never goes back to H1 ?
2011 Bible Quotes About Strength
gondalguru
07-18 12:02 PM
If USCIS decides to use the postmarked date as the filing date then it would be trickier for those whose PD was not current in June but have "filed" on June 29/30.
USCIS doesn't use postmark date. Don't sperad incorrect info and don't make other members anxious needlessly.
July 2nd filers are fine. Don't worry. Just wait for your receipt notices. We have been through a lot of stress in last month and its time to relax now (for those who already filed).
USCIS doesn't use postmark date. Don't sperad incorrect info and don't make other members anxious needlessly.
July 2nd filers are fine. Don't worry. Just wait for your receipt notices. We have been through a lot of stress in last month and its time to relax now (for those who already filed).
more...
Raju
07-19 04:29 PM
Guys I know a lot of us contributed, please urge your friends, tell that what IV has achieved and the efforts/time/money spent by IV core. I am sure you will be able to convince atleast one of your friends.
pansworld
12-03 10:22 PM
Cannot argue with your experience. But I still think providing a convenient automatic way to pay small amounts for a specific period of time will help. (the suggestion of $30 over 6 months or 60 dollars over 6 months etc.) Sure people can do it on their own, schedule it, remember it and have the will to do it et al.
But when I put myself in the donor's shoes, it feels like the old times when there were no automated payments for electric bills. :D
This has been discussed umpteen number of times, but I am going to share a personal experience here (shared once already on a similar thread).
For the last state chapter (Diwali Mela) event in North CA we were accepting ANY AMOUNT for a contribution, but were suggesting $25 or $50.
How many contributed? About 20 from a state chapter that boasts of 150+ members.
The fact is, people do one of the following:
1. look at the recommended amount and contribute that amount (most of our donors were $25, and a few paid $50)
2. pay a high $ amount simply because (s)he is convinced he wants to help as much as possible! (Most of the volunteers for the event paid $50 or more, and three of them paid $90/$100 each)
3. DO NOT pay, no matter what, as they are not convinced it will help reduce their waiting time
One more time... IV is not turning anyone away. If you can only contribute $10 a month, please feel free to paypal it yourself to donations at immigrationvoice.org
Like the squirrel who helped Lord Rama construct the bridge (sorry for making this a slightly "Indian" post, but can't think of a better analogy) every small bit is going to help IV, and will be most appreciated!
However, the bridge to the GC is a long one, and our Lord Rama (IV) needs thousands of hard-working and contributing monkeys to make it a reality:D
But when I put myself in the donor's shoes, it feels like the old times when there were no automated payments for electric bills. :D
This has been discussed umpteen number of times, but I am going to share a personal experience here (shared once already on a similar thread).
For the last state chapter (Diwali Mela) event in North CA we were accepting ANY AMOUNT for a contribution, but were suggesting $25 or $50.
How many contributed? About 20 from a state chapter that boasts of 150+ members.
The fact is, people do one of the following:
1. look at the recommended amount and contribute that amount (most of our donors were $25, and a few paid $50)
2. pay a high $ amount simply because (s)he is convinced he wants to help as much as possible! (Most of the volunteers for the event paid $50 or more, and three of them paid $90/$100 each)
3. DO NOT pay, no matter what, as they are not convinced it will help reduce their waiting time
One more time... IV is not turning anyone away. If you can only contribute $10 a month, please feel free to paypal it yourself to donations at immigrationvoice.org
Like the squirrel who helped Lord Rama construct the bridge (sorry for making this a slightly "Indian" post, but can't think of a better analogy) every small bit is going to help IV, and will be most appreciated!
However, the bridge to the GC is a long one, and our Lord Rama (IV) needs thousands of hard-working and contributing monkeys to make it a reality:D
more...
deletedUser459
06-11 10:55 PM
you should have called it the motherPod
2010 Tattoo quotes about strength.
Illegalx17
06-20 12:36 AM
Hey, this is a great idea for a battle. Sign me up, i'll enter :D. I wish we could enter two entries though. . .pleeeez?
more...
vikki76
10-27 11:50 AM
First. congrats alterego- 4 yrs after 485 filing is a long long time to go.:eek:
Not that I know of. There are two 140 but both have AOS option - Is it normal that 140 application goes back to USCIS office ? AFAIK, there is nothing wrong with my 140 application . It is st. B.Tech+ MS+2 yrs type of case with permanent job (no consulting)
Not that I know of. There are two 140 but both have AOS option - Is it normal that 140 application goes back to USCIS office ? AFAIK, there is nothing wrong with my 140 application . It is st. B.Tech+ MS+2 yrs type of case with permanent job (no consulting)
hair bible quotes on strength
gaz
09-17 02:22 PM
Seems like Zoe is loosing patience. She is starting to accept a lot of amendments and is some how trying get it wrapped up.
an amendment to respect religious freedom by King
and agreed to
Be happy Mr King..please be nice to Zoe and us now
an amendment to respect religious freedom by King
and agreed to
Be happy Mr King..please be nice to Zoe and us now
more...
sobers
02-22 12:31 PM
Whether it is logical or not, whether we like it or not, the issues of illegal and legal immigration are intrinsically tied up (to the disadvantage of skilled workers, of course:-()
Anyhow, this appeared in today's Wall Street Journal...it may forbode a taste of things to come..or not come..this one focusses on the DREAM Act which is geared to provide in-state tuition to illegal immigrants..
---------------
Should Illegal Immigrants Get Tuition Help?
States' Varying Stances on College-Education Benefit Illustrate Congress's Overhaul Task
By JUNE KRONHOLZ
February 22, 2006; Page A4
WASHINGTON -- An emotional state-level dispute over college tuition shows how tough it will be for Congress to overhaul immigration laws and extend citizenship benefits to the country's estimated 11 million illegal immigrants.
Four years ago, California passed a law granting in-state tuition to students who were in the U.S. illegally but had graduated from a California high school. Eight other states followed, allowing illegal immigrants to attend public colleges for in-state student fees -- usually less than half what out-of-state students pay.
DiAnna Schimek, a Democrat who heads the Nebraska Senate's education committee, says she has pushed for an in-state tuition bill for illegal immigrants as a matter of compassion and economic calculation. "These children didn't bring themselves" but were brought by their parents, she says. "It's only a good investment on our part to make certain they are productive citizens."
But attitudes have been hardening as an estimated 400,000 illegal immigrants flood in yearly. "That's an alarm to the people here ... it's a drain on the economy," says Rep. Glenn Donnelson, a Utah Republican who heads an education committee in his state.
So while some legislators want to extend tuition benefits to illegal immigrants in their states, others are calling for laws to deny the benefit -- or take it back.
Lawmakers in Utah, Kansas and New Mexico -- which passed in-state tuition benefits only two or three years ago -- now are waging uphill fights to repeal them. Massachusetts legislators last month rejected a bill to offer in-state tuition benefits to illegal immigrants.
Six states are considering measures that would deny in-state tuition, tuition waivers or state scholarships to illegal immigrants. In New York, which offers in-state tuition to illegal immigrants, and Virginia, which recently passed a law offering benefits to some, bills have been introduced to bar illegal immigrants from attending public colleges.
Meanwhile, lawsuits challenging in-state tuition for illegal immigrants have been filed in California and in Kansas. "There's something wrong with giving a benefit to an illegal that we don't even give to citizens of other states," says state Rep. Becky Hutchins, a Kansas Republican leading a repeal effort there.
The tuition laws generally require illegal immigrants to have attended a local high school for three years, to have graduated or earned a high-school equivalency and to sign an affidavit promising to legalize their immigration status as soon as they are eligible.
Promoters expect few students to actually take up the benefit. Dropout rates are high and academic scores generally are low among Hispanics, who account for the majority of illegal aliens. And even in-state tuition, which averages about $5,500 this year, may be out of reach for children whose parents typically hold minimum-wage jobs.
Kris Kobach, a University of Missouri law professor who brought a federal suit against the Kansas program, says 221 illegal immigrants are enrolled in Kansas public colleges this year, and that even when the benefit becomes widely known, the number probably wouldn't exceed 2,700.
Even so, in-state tuition laws have become flashpoint among some voters who feel they haven't any other way to protest illegal immigration. Federal laws allow illegal immigrants to use emergency medical services, and a 1982 Supreme Court decision entitles their children to public education through high school.
Rod Adair, a New Mexico state senator who introduced unsuccessful legislation to repeal his state's immigrant-tuition benefit, says he was acting "in response to my constituents. They're frustrated."
Prof. Kobach's suit contends Kansas's in-state tuition benefit violates a federal law that prohibits states from giving any benefit to an illegal alien that they don't also extend to all U.S. citizens.
Among his plaintiffs, Heidi Hydeman, an Iowa native, says she was charged out-of-state tuition by the University of Kansas, though she lived in Kansas for six years and paid Kansas income tax for three years while attending the school. "I thought it was unfair," says Ms. Hydeman.
Mr. Donnelson, the Utah legislator, says Utah would face a $34 million bill if a similar suit were filed there, and current out-of-state students were refunded the difference between in-state tuition and the nonresident tuition they pay.
But legislators' doubts go beyond that. Although illegal immigrants who get the tuition benefit pledge to legalize their status, there is almost no way they can do that under current laws. And even with a college degree, there is almost no way for illegal immigrants to legally get a job.
For years, congressional supporters have promoted a measure, called the Dream Act, that would clear up those problems. States would be allowed to offer in-state tuition to illegal-immigrant students who, in turn, could become citizens.
In 2003, almost half the Senate cosponsored the Dream Act. But the Dream Act's prospects have faded, and this year its pivotal supporter, Utah Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch, withdrew as a sponsor. "Realistically, the Dream Act will not pass" and should be included in an overhaul of immigration laws, he said.
But the tensions fueling opposition to in-state tuition laws are the same ones making it hard for Congress to pass immigration overhaul. A coalition of pro-business Republicans, Democrats, immigrant-rights groups and labor unions wants new federal laws that would let illegal immigrants eventually become citizens.
They are being stymied, however, by social conservatives, who worry about being culturally overwhelmed by immigrants, and by Republican national-security hawks, who are demanding that Washington cut off illegal immigration first. The tension prevented the U.S. House from taking up immigration overhaul last year, and is complicating the Senate's efforts to pass it this year.
Write to June Kronholz at june.kronholz@wsj.com
Anyhow, this appeared in today's Wall Street Journal...it may forbode a taste of things to come..or not come..this one focusses on the DREAM Act which is geared to provide in-state tuition to illegal immigrants..
---------------
Should Illegal Immigrants Get Tuition Help?
States' Varying Stances on College-Education Benefit Illustrate Congress's Overhaul Task
By JUNE KRONHOLZ
February 22, 2006; Page A4
WASHINGTON -- An emotional state-level dispute over college tuition shows how tough it will be for Congress to overhaul immigration laws and extend citizenship benefits to the country's estimated 11 million illegal immigrants.
Four years ago, California passed a law granting in-state tuition to students who were in the U.S. illegally but had graduated from a California high school. Eight other states followed, allowing illegal immigrants to attend public colleges for in-state student fees -- usually less than half what out-of-state students pay.
DiAnna Schimek, a Democrat who heads the Nebraska Senate's education committee, says she has pushed for an in-state tuition bill for illegal immigrants as a matter of compassion and economic calculation. "These children didn't bring themselves" but were brought by their parents, she says. "It's only a good investment on our part to make certain they are productive citizens."
But attitudes have been hardening as an estimated 400,000 illegal immigrants flood in yearly. "That's an alarm to the people here ... it's a drain on the economy," says Rep. Glenn Donnelson, a Utah Republican who heads an education committee in his state.
So while some legislators want to extend tuition benefits to illegal immigrants in their states, others are calling for laws to deny the benefit -- or take it back.
Lawmakers in Utah, Kansas and New Mexico -- which passed in-state tuition benefits only two or three years ago -- now are waging uphill fights to repeal them. Massachusetts legislators last month rejected a bill to offer in-state tuition benefits to illegal immigrants.
Six states are considering measures that would deny in-state tuition, tuition waivers or state scholarships to illegal immigrants. In New York, which offers in-state tuition to illegal immigrants, and Virginia, which recently passed a law offering benefits to some, bills have been introduced to bar illegal immigrants from attending public colleges.
Meanwhile, lawsuits challenging in-state tuition for illegal immigrants have been filed in California and in Kansas. "There's something wrong with giving a benefit to an illegal that we don't even give to citizens of other states," says state Rep. Becky Hutchins, a Kansas Republican leading a repeal effort there.
The tuition laws generally require illegal immigrants to have attended a local high school for three years, to have graduated or earned a high-school equivalency and to sign an affidavit promising to legalize their immigration status as soon as they are eligible.
Promoters expect few students to actually take up the benefit. Dropout rates are high and academic scores generally are low among Hispanics, who account for the majority of illegal aliens. And even in-state tuition, which averages about $5,500 this year, may be out of reach for children whose parents typically hold minimum-wage jobs.
Kris Kobach, a University of Missouri law professor who brought a federal suit against the Kansas program, says 221 illegal immigrants are enrolled in Kansas public colleges this year, and that even when the benefit becomes widely known, the number probably wouldn't exceed 2,700.
Even so, in-state tuition laws have become flashpoint among some voters who feel they haven't any other way to protest illegal immigration. Federal laws allow illegal immigrants to use emergency medical services, and a 1982 Supreme Court decision entitles their children to public education through high school.
Rod Adair, a New Mexico state senator who introduced unsuccessful legislation to repeal his state's immigrant-tuition benefit, says he was acting "in response to my constituents. They're frustrated."
Prof. Kobach's suit contends Kansas's in-state tuition benefit violates a federal law that prohibits states from giving any benefit to an illegal alien that they don't also extend to all U.S. citizens.
Among his plaintiffs, Heidi Hydeman, an Iowa native, says she was charged out-of-state tuition by the University of Kansas, though she lived in Kansas for six years and paid Kansas income tax for three years while attending the school. "I thought it was unfair," says Ms. Hydeman.
Mr. Donnelson, the Utah legislator, says Utah would face a $34 million bill if a similar suit were filed there, and current out-of-state students were refunded the difference between in-state tuition and the nonresident tuition they pay.
But legislators' doubts go beyond that. Although illegal immigrants who get the tuition benefit pledge to legalize their status, there is almost no way they can do that under current laws. And even with a college degree, there is almost no way for illegal immigrants to legally get a job.
For years, congressional supporters have promoted a measure, called the Dream Act, that would clear up those problems. States would be allowed to offer in-state tuition to illegal-immigrant students who, in turn, could become citizens.
In 2003, almost half the Senate cosponsored the Dream Act. But the Dream Act's prospects have faded, and this year its pivotal supporter, Utah Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch, withdrew as a sponsor. "Realistically, the Dream Act will not pass" and should be included in an overhaul of immigration laws, he said.
But the tensions fueling opposition to in-state tuition laws are the same ones making it hard for Congress to pass immigration overhaul. A coalition of pro-business Republicans, Democrats, immigrant-rights groups and labor unions wants new federal laws that would let illegal immigrants eventually become citizens.
They are being stymied, however, by social conservatives, who worry about being culturally overwhelmed by immigrants, and by Republican national-security hawks, who are demanding that Washington cut off illegal immigration first. The tension prevented the U.S. House from taking up immigration overhaul last year, and is complicating the Senate's efforts to pass it this year.
Write to June Kronholz at june.kronholz@wsj.com
hot tattoo quotes about strength.
vgayalu
02-01 01:21 PM
Here are the few main reasons for retrogression to India and China etc are
1) When H1B quota is 65, 000 the GC visa number is 140, 000 . But when they increased H1B from 65,000 to 195,000 the did not incresed GC visa numbers.
2) There is no country quota in H1B ( other than Chile and one more country for 7,000) visas. So most of the H1b's are issued to few countries like India,China and Philippines. But when we come to GC visa there is country quota.
3) We all know about that ilegal immigrants used some GC numbers which are meant for EB people.
We need to educate the USCIS why and how we are suffering in getting GC.
there is no need and use of blaming Desi companies. I do not support any illegal activities like sale of Labour certifications .
We all know about supply and demand theory which causes black marketing.
Selling of approved labour ( which has old PD ) is also same thing.
1) When H1B quota is 65, 000 the GC visa number is 140, 000 . But when they increased H1B from 65,000 to 195,000 the did not incresed GC visa numbers.
2) There is no country quota in H1B ( other than Chile and one more country for 7,000) visas. So most of the H1b's are issued to few countries like India,China and Philippines. But when we come to GC visa there is country quota.
3) We all know about that ilegal immigrants used some GC numbers which are meant for EB people.
We need to educate the USCIS why and how we are suffering in getting GC.
there is no need and use of blaming Desi companies. I do not support any illegal activities like sale of Labour certifications .
We all know about supply and demand theory which causes black marketing.
Selling of approved labour ( which has old PD ) is also same thing.
more...
house bible quotes on strength
eswaraprasad73
02-07 03:04 PM
I have valid H1B visa in my passport. Can I travel via london to india.
Can you please tell me what restrictions we have when we travel thru london.
Do we need to take Transit visa inorder to travel via london?
Can you please tell me what restrictions we have when we travel thru london.
Do we need to take Transit visa inorder to travel via london?
tattoo quotes on strength. tattoo
wikipedia_fan
03-30 03:40 PM
I never got any LUDs but got a denial on my 485 after going through the AC21/NOID stuff way back in August, 2008.
There could be some background processing going on.
Is there are pattern to these LUDs?
There could be some background processing going on.
Is there are pattern to these LUDs?
more...
pictures 2011 quotes for strength. god
go_guy123
05-07 03:02 PM
First of all Congratulations desi#### and thanks for continuing to support IV.
Interesting discussion going on. Yes, I agree that most of us here are waiting for our GC and some of them go on to become US Citizens.
I believe that becoming a citizen of any country is a person's choice, so let us not give desi### a hard time here.:o
But I certainly do not think it is an 'achievement' to get a US citizenship, just because it implies indirectly it is an 'achievement' to let go off Indian citizenship. Nothing meant to offend you desi#### but it hurts when one reads such a statement somewhere deep inside the mind. But hey, as I said earlier, to each his own and noone should be judging others in their decisions.
And it is not only Indians becoming US citizens every year. There are others too.
Personally, even with all the advantages as stated above of being a US citizen, I will never let go of my Indian passport. Even if the authorities give it to me tomorrow in a lottery;) Never.
Why? Because my identity, my rich heritage, my family roots, my parents, my culture everything is Indian and am proud of it. There are lot of sentimental and emotional attachments. I was going through the OCI articles today after reading this discussion.
It is not exactly a dual citizenship. Some clauses are no voting rights! No Indian Passport!
Getting a GC is another thing, but when I decide to go back after a couple of years, I would definitely want to retain my voting rights. ! I rest my case.
US citizenship is a final stop for most/many immigrants. Post Sep 11, there has been a surge in nationalization applications because technically GC is like a long term visa to stay permanently. Therefore there is always a risk of losing GC because of DUI or other trivial or accidental issues etc.
Also post Sep 11, a lot of govt/sensitive projects that were available for GC only have been restricted to US Citizens. You lose a significant chunk of the available jobs market if you are a GC holder in the Maryland/DC/North Virgina area. In fact I know a lot of GC who kept their old passports but because of these hassles eventually decided for Naturalization.
Interesting discussion going on. Yes, I agree that most of us here are waiting for our GC and some of them go on to become US Citizens.
I believe that becoming a citizen of any country is a person's choice, so let us not give desi### a hard time here.:o
But I certainly do not think it is an 'achievement' to get a US citizenship, just because it implies indirectly it is an 'achievement' to let go off Indian citizenship. Nothing meant to offend you desi#### but it hurts when one reads such a statement somewhere deep inside the mind. But hey, as I said earlier, to each his own and noone should be judging others in their decisions.
And it is not only Indians becoming US citizens every year. There are others too.
Personally, even with all the advantages as stated above of being a US citizen, I will never let go of my Indian passport. Even if the authorities give it to me tomorrow in a lottery;) Never.
Why? Because my identity, my rich heritage, my family roots, my parents, my culture everything is Indian and am proud of it. There are lot of sentimental and emotional attachments. I was going through the OCI articles today after reading this discussion.
It is not exactly a dual citizenship. Some clauses are no voting rights! No Indian Passport!
Getting a GC is another thing, but when I decide to go back after a couple of years, I would definitely want to retain my voting rights. ! I rest my case.
US citizenship is a final stop for most/many immigrants. Post Sep 11, there has been a surge in nationalization applications because technically GC is like a long term visa to stay permanently. Therefore there is always a risk of losing GC because of DUI or other trivial or accidental issues etc.
Also post Sep 11, a lot of govt/sensitive projects that were available for GC only have been restricted to US Citizens. You lose a significant chunk of the available jobs market if you are a GC holder in the Maryland/DC/North Virgina area. In fact I know a lot of GC who kept their old passports but because of these hassles eventually decided for Naturalization.
dresses quotes about strength.
bkarnik
09-17 11:35 AM
they are mentioning abt bill 6020???
Wants case by case power for judges..especially for Armed force personnel.\
Wants case by case power for judges..especially for Armed force personnel.\
more...
makeup quotes about strength. quotes
vsrinir
09-17 11:53 AM
It seems there is now lunch recess at this time
girlfriend 2011 ible quotes on strength
krishna.ahd
11-10 01:41 PM
My suggestion - You can not play safe your whole life.
100% Agree
100% Agree
hairstyles bible quotes on strength and
ElectricGrandpa
06-21 07:11 AM
cool :)
getgreensoon1
04-19 11:26 AM
Just a 3 years in USA, getting a GC by porting into EB2 with a B.Com and some online degree!!!!!! What a pathetic situation for us!!!!!!!!!. Wake up USCIS!!!!!!!!!!!!
Fully agree with each word you said. Many people with legit US education (not TVU kind that many not so educated people on this forum are taking shelter under the umbra of) who have been in the US for more than 10 years are still lawfully waiting in the line. And this idiot with a BCOM and MCA ( correspondence course from IGNOU) is dreaming of porting into EB2 and screw us up. Shame on USCIS and Shame on DOL. I am really concerned that if legit EB2 applicants don't talk to lawmakers and send emails to USCIS, we will be stuck here for years due to these fradulent porting.
Fully agree with each word you said. Many people with legit US education (not TVU kind that many not so educated people on this forum are taking shelter under the umbra of) who have been in the US for more than 10 years are still lawfully waiting in the line. And this idiot with a BCOM and MCA ( correspondence course from IGNOU) is dreaming of porting into EB2 and screw us up. Shame on USCIS and Shame on DOL. I am really concerned that if legit EB2 applicants don't talk to lawmakers and send emails to USCIS, we will be stuck here for years due to these fradulent porting.
va_12_2004
04-21 10:49 PM
I have just contributed $100. More later. Please keep up the good effort. I am trying to talk with guys in our company to join and contribute.