asdfgh
08-28 07:02 PM
...that a VB re-issue is on the cards?...where the dates move back to 04 or early 05?
I just received a letter from the person who took my AOS interview
The letter reads like this,
The Priority date for your classification is not current at this time. Your case meets the requirements for abeyance until a visa number is available for your priority date. Please refrain from making status inquiries until 90 days after your priority date is available. To view priority dates go to: http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_1360.html
wow...she screwed us royally..on face she said she is going to approve our petition as it every thing and also PD is CURRENT..Now she sent a letter saying my PD is not current and adding insult to an injury she sent a link to the DOS bulletin which says I am current.
Only you can Do USCIS..Long live.
:mad::mad:
I just received a letter from the person who took my AOS interview
The letter reads like this,
The Priority date for your classification is not current at this time. Your case meets the requirements for abeyance until a visa number is available for your priority date. Please refrain from making status inquiries until 90 days after your priority date is available. To view priority dates go to: http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_1360.html
wow...she screwed us royally..on face she said she is going to approve our petition as it every thing and also PD is CURRENT..Now she sent a letter saying my PD is not current and adding insult to an injury she sent a link to the DOS bulletin which says I am current.
Only you can Do USCIS..Long live.
:mad::mad:
wallpaper Porsche Boxster 986
seekerofpeace
08-22 09:56 PM
Fatjoe,
Thanks for your response. Wow that's quite a grill. How many days of notice did u get prior to the interview? Did you get any RFE previous to this interview.
Did you ask her any questions? Like if the case stands preadjudicated or not or if they will need more info in future?
Going by the questions, it seems she asked all that she can ask for.
Best,
SoP
Thanks for your response. Wow that's quite a grill. How many days of notice did u get prior to the interview? Did you get any RFE previous to this interview.
Did you ask her any questions? Like if the case stands preadjudicated or not or if they will need more info in future?
Going by the questions, it seems she asked all that she can ask for.
Best,
SoP
akkakarla
09-08 03:39 PM
As someone said it is better to delete this thread. There is no constructive discussion here at all
2011 97-04 Porsche Boxster 986 2dr
GTGC
03-09 03:48 PM
Just contributed $50 -Transaction id = S-98L182225B618081N
Lets get to the bottom of the mess called USCIS!
Lets get to the bottom of the mess called USCIS!
more...
belmontboy
09-05 04:45 PM
All EB2 people affected, lets get organized.
This time USCIS is hiding by not making official announcements.
We need to act as we did last July.
Lets send letters to congressman like zoe lofgren.
NSC is issuing frivolous RFEs as delaying tactics.
I am not seeing similar outrage as we saw last year.
The time to act is now.
what announcements are u expecting??? :confused:
This time USCIS is hiding by not making official announcements.
We need to act as we did last July.
Lets send letters to congressman like zoe lofgren.
NSC is issuing frivolous RFEs as delaying tactics.
I am not seeing similar outrage as we saw last year.
The time to act is now.
what announcements are u expecting??? :confused:
alisa
02-04 10:48 PM
Man,
I'll just shut up after this post now. You are obviously incapable of understanding my argument.
I'll continue to assume that IV is working for the interests of all EB based applicants, and not just those belonging to one particular country, especially at the expense of EB3-ROW. And I am pretty confident that the core and the majority of the members of this forum have enough integrity to let people like me know I am mistaken in this belief.
I do not care whether you contribute to IV or not. What I am writing here is law or facts and how it is affecting oversubscribed countries becuse of wrong interpretation of law. I am not here to unite or divide any group. In my level, I am contributing to end retrogression by sending mails to law makers. Even any law passes to remove retro, this misinterpretation of law is screwing Indians and Chinese. A EB2 person from Iran/Iraq/Pakistan with PD 2007 can get GC with in 6 months (right from PERM labor to 485 approval) why should Indian with PD in 2003 has to wait for ever?
My employer hired me not based on citizenship. They hired me based on their requirement for the job and my skills. They do not care, if I am male or female or Indian or Chinese or Iranian or Iraqi or Pakistani or European. I am penalized for just I am Indian not able to adjust LPR even I have priority date in 2003 after a long wait for Labor certification and 140 approvals. However, if I am from other than India and China I would have got GC with in six months even if my PD in late 2006. If a person with a Priority Date 2007 can become LPR immediately in EB2 category even if he is from a state sponsoring terrorism (provided if his background check is cleared). However a person from India having priority date in 2003 can not become LPR and sitting in dark to hope to see the light at the end of tunnel. How fare it is? Is it not the discrimination by country of birth?
I'll just shut up after this post now. You are obviously incapable of understanding my argument.
I'll continue to assume that IV is working for the interests of all EB based applicants, and not just those belonging to one particular country, especially at the expense of EB3-ROW. And I am pretty confident that the core and the majority of the members of this forum have enough integrity to let people like me know I am mistaken in this belief.
I do not care whether you contribute to IV or not. What I am writing here is law or facts and how it is affecting oversubscribed countries becuse of wrong interpretation of law. I am not here to unite or divide any group. In my level, I am contributing to end retrogression by sending mails to law makers. Even any law passes to remove retro, this misinterpretation of law is screwing Indians and Chinese. A EB2 person from Iran/Iraq/Pakistan with PD 2007 can get GC with in 6 months (right from PERM labor to 485 approval) why should Indian with PD in 2003 has to wait for ever?
My employer hired me not based on citizenship. They hired me based on their requirement for the job and my skills. They do not care, if I am male or female or Indian or Chinese or Iranian or Iraqi or Pakistani or European. I am penalized for just I am Indian not able to adjust LPR even I have priority date in 2003 after a long wait for Labor certification and 140 approvals. However, if I am from other than India and China I would have got GC with in six months even if my PD in late 2006. If a person with a Priority Date 2007 can become LPR immediately in EB2 category even if he is from a state sponsoring terrorism (provided if his background check is cleared). However a person from India having priority date in 2003 can not become LPR and sitting in dark to hope to see the light at the end of tunnel. How fare it is? Is it not the discrimination by country of birth?
more...
santb1975
11-17 01:19 AM
you are awesome
2010 2000 - PORSCHE BOXSTER 2.7
vxg
11-11 04:45 PM
I really feel sorry to read this post and the Nanny must be punished for this however as everyone else said you may get into legal trouble if you do report it. My own son is now 5 years old and we use day care services and one of the reason i hate the Nanny concept legal or illegal is because of this abuse and qualifications of the nanny. I strongly suggest find a day care which is reputed has a structured curriculum. Go visit the place and check for cleanliness, talk to the staff etc. Remember some of the day care also bad in terms of hygiene etc. but almost none of them would risk their license by abusing a child. Agreed the child get sick a lot but as immune system develops they get over it and my son really enjoyed all the activities at day care. Nanny at home cannot provide activities needed to keep a child busy thus abuse can happen.
Again i am really sorry to hear. I still think you can anonymously report to DHS or police that the nanny is working illegally if you can do it that way she will get deported and may never get a visa to US.
Hello guys,
Sorry for this non-immigration related post. We have this sudden, tragic situation that I wanted all of your advice on. Thank you for your time in reading this long post.
We had hired an Indian nanny in NJ who, we learnt after hiring her, is here on a tourist visa. We were paying her $350 per week cash, which is the standard rate around here for nannies (incl. citizens and people on GC). We had liked her when we met her in response to an ad on Sulekha, and we thought an Indian nanny would be good for our first child. She has been with us for about 3 months, and we were intermittently not getting a good feeling with her for some reason. We finally bought a small security camera and installed it yesterday. On the very first day with the camera, we came home and saw the recorded video to find that she is violently hitting the baby on two separate occasions. Needless to say, it has shocked, angered and extremely saddened us. I showed the video to a couple of friends and even they say it is unbearable to watch. This was just the first day of recording and it pains us tremendously to think what all may have happened previously.
She is of course not going to stay with the baby alone anymore, but I want to know what legal options I have to penalize her to the fullest extent, so that she does not do this to anybody else�s small babies. She it seems had come here last year and taken care of someone else�s baby in Hoboken, and I can imagine that their baby also went through this. (This woman and her husband are a ~ 35 year old couple, who have a multiple entry ten year tourist visa; both come here for 6 months every year and work odd jobs like this. They apparently got a (unsponsored) tourist visa after showing a lot of landed property in India).
I specifically want to know if I will have potential problems if I go to law enforcement about this- regarding have employed her (both of us are on H1B visas). I know we have made mistakes and should have done better due diligence in this, and there cannot be any more punishment for us than seeing our 8 month old � who cannot tell us about it when we come home- being beaten on the tapes. We saw this yesterday and have not told her yet. We want to weigh all options before we proceed, but from today onwards one of us is home all the time till Friday. Any advice or opinion is sincerely appreciated. Thanks for reading this long post. And, to all who are thinking of nannies or have one, please learn from our mistakes and closely monitor your child�s safety every day.
Again i am really sorry to hear. I still think you can anonymously report to DHS or police that the nanny is working illegally if you can do it that way she will get deported and may never get a visa to US.
Hello guys,
Sorry for this non-immigration related post. We have this sudden, tragic situation that I wanted all of your advice on. Thank you for your time in reading this long post.
We had hired an Indian nanny in NJ who, we learnt after hiring her, is here on a tourist visa. We were paying her $350 per week cash, which is the standard rate around here for nannies (incl. citizens and people on GC). We had liked her when we met her in response to an ad on Sulekha, and we thought an Indian nanny would be good for our first child. She has been with us for about 3 months, and we were intermittently not getting a good feeling with her for some reason. We finally bought a small security camera and installed it yesterday. On the very first day with the camera, we came home and saw the recorded video to find that she is violently hitting the baby on two separate occasions. Needless to say, it has shocked, angered and extremely saddened us. I showed the video to a couple of friends and even they say it is unbearable to watch. This was just the first day of recording and it pains us tremendously to think what all may have happened previously.
She is of course not going to stay with the baby alone anymore, but I want to know what legal options I have to penalize her to the fullest extent, so that she does not do this to anybody else�s small babies. She it seems had come here last year and taken care of someone else�s baby in Hoboken, and I can imagine that their baby also went through this. (This woman and her husband are a ~ 35 year old couple, who have a multiple entry ten year tourist visa; both come here for 6 months every year and work odd jobs like this. They apparently got a (unsponsored) tourist visa after showing a lot of landed property in India).
I specifically want to know if I will have potential problems if I go to law enforcement about this- regarding have employed her (both of us are on H1B visas). I know we have made mistakes and should have done better due diligence in this, and there cannot be any more punishment for us than seeing our 8 month old � who cannot tell us about it when we come home- being beaten on the tapes. We saw this yesterday and have not told her yet. We want to weigh all options before we proceed, but from today onwards one of us is home all the time till Friday. Any advice or opinion is sincerely appreciated. Thanks for reading this long post. And, to all who are thinking of nannies or have one, please learn from our mistakes and closely monitor your child�s safety every day.
more...
eb3_nepa
02-05 11:27 AM
Everyone in this forum knows that I am a complete moron: I did not even know ROW and Schedule A. So it does not make sense in paying attention to my advice. I still have the audacity to request everyone to pay more attention to the following.
Both sides have very valid points. A healthy debate on the topic is insightfull specially to morons like me. However, it is sad to see contributing members fighting over an issue that we may NOT have to resolve. I wish we had such a vigorous debate on generating contributions which will serve some purpose.
I agree Macaca. It never ceases to amaze me, how willing and ready everyone on here is to start a rousing argument over the smallest things instead of focussing on the main goal!
Both sides have very valid points. A healthy debate on the topic is insightfull specially to morons like me. However, it is sad to see contributing members fighting over an issue that we may NOT have to resolve. I wish we had such a vigorous debate on generating contributions which will serve some purpose.
I agree Macaca. It never ceases to amaze me, how willing and ready everyone on here is to start a rousing argument over the smallest things instead of focussing on the main goal!
hair BOXSTER REAR
GCNirvana007
08-11 01:04 PM
Dear Lord please listen to dwhuser. I have the same concern
dwhuser, did you see any LUD in recent month or any RFE
I am EB2 Dec 2004
I saw an LUD in June this yr
dwhuser, did you see any LUD in recent month or any RFE
I am EB2 Dec 2004
I saw an LUD in June this yr
more...
needGCcool
08-14 02:16 PM
Congrats. I have a question, which I posted to another member. Did you get the receipt first or your attorney or you both at the same time.
Note: Checks got cashed after 2 days of Receipts.
I-140 Approved (NSC) 11/2006
485 -- July 2nd 11:30a.m
Receipt rcvd -- Aug 10th (Rcvd copy of receipts Aug 13th).
LUD Not updated.
I have seen some one else like me had the same process. Checks got cashed after 2 days of receipts.
Thanks
Note: Checks got cashed after 2 days of Receipts.
I-140 Approved (NSC) 11/2006
485 -- July 2nd 11:30a.m
Receipt rcvd -- Aug 10th (Rcvd copy of receipts Aug 13th).
LUD Not updated.
I have seen some one else like me had the same process. Checks got cashed after 2 days of receipts.
Thanks
hot Porsche Boxster 986 S Facelift
potatoeater
04-11 10:21 AM
I reiterate what I said in my earlier post. The purpose of the post was not to start an argument. It was just an explanation of a baffling retrogression of dates.
Many people in these forums were asking bewilderingly, how can dates which were already retrogressed by eight years can go further back? Are there people around who are waiting for 8 years just to get their labors cleared? If their labors were already done, then what were they doing for 8 years before filing AOS petitions? I explained that no, nobody was waiting for all these years at the labor stage. These are new candidates utilizing old pre-approved labors. Thats all.
In fact, I predict retrogression to U level in EB2-I also. Many of these same people will now jump the queue again and switch to EB2 category.
Again, this is no judgment passing. Just an explanation of things as they stand. It is what it is.
Peace.
your immagination/calculation might be true.....so what?? Havnt we seen a lot of posting about what mischief is being done by a handful?? why do we spend our time on analysing that? IV shouldn't be a website where I log in in the morning and find what all mischief is happening or happened or will happen. There are mischief makers and let the law deal with them. we are a group of straightforward individuals who wish to concenterate on fighting the injustice of the extreme delays. If there was a mischief the USCIS is supposed to catch them and fix it. it is not allowed to delay yours/ mine just because a few others did something wrong. Please concentrate on today and tomorrow. Plan for a new line of action and we will join.
Many people in these forums were asking bewilderingly, how can dates which were already retrogressed by eight years can go further back? Are there people around who are waiting for 8 years just to get their labors cleared? If their labors were already done, then what were they doing for 8 years before filing AOS petitions? I explained that no, nobody was waiting for all these years at the labor stage. These are new candidates utilizing old pre-approved labors. Thats all.
In fact, I predict retrogression to U level in EB2-I also. Many of these same people will now jump the queue again and switch to EB2 category.
Again, this is no judgment passing. Just an explanation of things as they stand. It is what it is.
Peace.
your immagination/calculation might be true.....so what?? Havnt we seen a lot of posting about what mischief is being done by a handful?? why do we spend our time on analysing that? IV shouldn't be a website where I log in in the morning and find what all mischief is happening or happened or will happen. There are mischief makers and let the law deal with them. we are a group of straightforward individuals who wish to concenterate on fighting the injustice of the extreme delays. If there was a mischief the USCIS is supposed to catch them and fix it. it is not allowed to delay yours/ mine just because a few others did something wrong. Please concentrate on today and tomorrow. Plan for a new line of action and we will join.
more...
house WJS 25 - Porsche Boxster 986
guyfromsg
09-07 11:48 PM
In that case make it 10,000 + 11,724 , as we all will be directly or indirectly watching you.
I didn' want to reply to your arrogant posts but you really got me fired up. Can't take any more of your BS. Why don't you come back and post on 19th with a due apology on how you underestimated our strength.
I didn' want to reply to your arrogant posts but you really got me fired up. Can't take any more of your BS. Why don't you come back and post on 19th with a due apology on how you underestimated our strength.
tattoo Porsche Boxster 986 User
gjoe
09-24 06:42 AM
If you are a network admin you will know that this is not enough evidence for what you are claiming. But you have started off on the right path in investigating.
GCStatus & MadhuVJ,
192.168.xx.xx is private IP address. Your service provider is Comcast and your IP is 71.61.241.65. We would not post your IP if you do not stop making things up. We know that its the same person, you cannot convince otherwise. Look, I am not telling you to mend your ways, do what you feel helps your objective. But when we find something in competition with our objective, we will have to let you know. And as you suggested, please do send us your phone number. We sure would like to get a chance to speak with you.
Thanks,
GCStatus & MadhuVJ,
192.168.xx.xx is private IP address. Your service provider is Comcast and your IP is 71.61.241.65. We would not post your IP if you do not stop making things up. We know that its the same person, you cannot convince otherwise. Look, I am not telling you to mend your ways, do what you feel helps your objective. But when we find something in competition with our objective, we will have to let you know. And as you suggested, please do send us your phone number. We sure would like to get a chance to speak with you.
Thanks,
more...
pictures PORSCHE Boxster (986)
missourian
07-17 10:08 PM
You guys done a great work, Special thanks to core IV
dresses Porsche 986 Boxster
test101
07-17 07:06 PM
awsome job. This is a well done job. This is the first group i know that it's member do not lie and go straight to the point. Thanks to the iV core and to all members. keep up the good work.
more...
makeup 2006 Z-Art Porsche Boxster
cableching
08-21 06:44 PM
Which USCIS Center did you go to. The best thing here would be that someone else also go to the same USCIS Center and can hopefully talk to the same IO officer. If she shows the memo again then we can get more information out of it.
This is the reason I would not want to give the ASC info. People will start bombarding the office, like they misuse the POJ method calling for nothing.
This is the reason I would not want to give the ASC info. People will start bombarding the office, like they misuse the POJ method calling for nothing.
girlfriend The original 986 Boxster
sabhayk
06-02 02:24 PM
The letter actually does not mention all degree requirements have been fulfilled. This left me really upset (I asked the dept to fax it directly to company, so I had not seen it).
It says "XYZ completed all coursework requirements for his PhD in EE at the University ABC, and deposited his thesis on April 11 2007. His degree should then be officially conferred in May 13 2007"
Obviously course + thesis = all degree requirements for PhD, but I wonder if USCIS might question it. The company's attorney (a highly reputable company) okayed the letter and he said denial is unlikely and that they will either approve it or issue an RFE; but based on my readings of other posts I think there is a fair chance that it might be denied.
The irony is that I got a letter from the registrar on April 16, but by that time the attorney had already filed with the weaker letter. I asked him to send the other one when quota was still available but he said it was unnecessary.
Please anyone with similar experience comment.
Well I don't know how it works. If the letter actually goes as a proof to USCIS or it simply stays with the lawyer. I would say, just wait and watch now. USCIS might ask you for more evidence. They would not simply reject it. SO don't lose hope.
It says "XYZ completed all coursework requirements for his PhD in EE at the University ABC, and deposited his thesis on April 11 2007. His degree should then be officially conferred in May 13 2007"
Obviously course + thesis = all degree requirements for PhD, but I wonder if USCIS might question it. The company's attorney (a highly reputable company) okayed the letter and he said denial is unlikely and that they will either approve it or issue an RFE; but based on my readings of other posts I think there is a fair chance that it might be denied.
The irony is that I got a letter from the registrar on April 16, but by that time the attorney had already filed with the weaker letter. I asked him to send the other one when quota was still available but he said it was unnecessary.
Please anyone with similar experience comment.
Well I don't know how it works. If the letter actually goes as a proof to USCIS or it simply stays with the lawyer. I would say, just wait and watch now. USCIS might ask you for more evidence. They would not simply reject it. SO don't lose hope.
hairstyles 987 BOXSTER : 19quot; iFORGED
uka
05-14 03:27 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gurus,
I received notice of decision for my wife's H-4 application and I am worried whether my case has been denied.
This is the content of the case received from CA with WACxxxxxxxxxxx.
NOTICE OF DECISION
This notice is in reference to form 1-539, application for Extend/Change of Nonimmigrant Status, requesting a change of status to that of a dependent of a specialty occupation worker under section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of the Immigrantion and Nationality Act.
It is ordered by the Director of the California service center, United States Citizenship and Immigration Sevices that the applicant's request for change of status be denied for the following reasons:
As a dependent, the applicant's classification is subject to the principal alien's status. The nonimmigrant visa petition filed in behalf of the principal alien, seeking a concurrent change of status to a specialty occupation worker classification under 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of the Act, has been processed as a consulate notification because the principal alien's request for a change of nonimmigrant status has been den ied.
Since the principal will not be classified as a temporary nonimmgrant worker until she/he obtains the HI-B visa abroad at a United States Embassy or consulate, and has been lawfully admitted into the United States in the nonimmigrant status, the applicant does not qualify for the requested change of status.
I have not received any information about mine. Does it mean that my application will be processed at a consulate office outside the state? I am confused. I do not really understand it well. Please help explain it to me.
Gurus,
I received notice of decision for my wife's H-4 application and I am worried whether my case has been denied.
This is the content of the case received from CA with WACxxxxxxxxxxx.
NOTICE OF DECISION
This notice is in reference to form 1-539, application for Extend/Change of Nonimmigrant Status, requesting a change of status to that of a dependent of a specialty occupation worker under section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of the Immigrantion and Nationality Act.
It is ordered by the Director of the California service center, United States Citizenship and Immigration Sevices that the applicant's request for change of status be denied for the following reasons:
As a dependent, the applicant's classification is subject to the principal alien's status. The nonimmigrant visa petition filed in behalf of the principal alien, seeking a concurrent change of status to a specialty occupation worker classification under 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of the Act, has been processed as a consulate notification because the principal alien's request for a change of nonimmigrant status has been den ied.
Since the principal will not be classified as a temporary nonimmgrant worker until she/he obtains the HI-B visa abroad at a United States Embassy or consulate, and has been lawfully admitted into the United States in the nonimmigrant status, the applicant does not qualify for the requested change of status.
I have not received any information about mine. Does it mean that my application will be processed at a consulate office outside the state? I am confused. I do not really understand it well. Please help explain it to me.
mjdup
12-18 05:03 PM
I was discussing with another member about contribution.
We have around 7K + members and there are more joining so if we all go on a contribution of $20/member marathon with the target date as Jan 2, imagine the financial support core team would have to approach QGA for lobbying efforts. Congress's decision in Januray or February seems to be our best shot for relief with all problems.
So, let's do it, its just $20 before Jan.2 ! Please contribute,
thanks,
paskal> can you please change the thread title to "contribute just $20" or something catchy :)
We have around 7K + members and there are more joining so if we all go on a contribution of $20/member marathon with the target date as Jan 2, imagine the financial support core team would have to approach QGA for lobbying efforts. Congress's decision in Januray or February seems to be our best shot for relief with all problems.
So, let's do it, its just $20 before Jan.2 ! Please contribute,
thanks,
paskal> can you please change the thread title to "contribute just $20" or something catchy :)
pmb76
08-21 10:02 PM
I agree with WendyZhu. I don't think that the IOs would share such sensitive information. They very well know that this information could spur up huge debates on blogs like it already has. At the same time the IO could be tracked down and could lose his job because of this. There is certainly something fishy here.
Relax guys and gals , don't stress over these rumors. We already have sleepless nights because of the erratic processing by USCIS and these rumor-mills just increase our stress level.
Just think of this - what's the worse that could happen ? It's already happening - people with 2006 PDs and Aug '07 RDs are getting approvals while 2004 PDs and July 2 RDs are still waiting.
Relax guys and gals , don't stress over these rumors. We already have sleepless nights because of the erratic processing by USCIS and these rumor-mills just increase our stress level.
Just think of this - what's the worse that could happen ? It's already happening - people with 2006 PDs and Aug '07 RDs are getting approvals while 2004 PDs and July 2 RDs are still waiting.