answers_seeker
07-09 10:54 PM
This is just a message to 2005/2006/2007 PD guys. Please don't think that some miracle will happen and dates will be current soon, it will take its own time. Mostly for EB2 & EB3June 2006- June 2007 guys, it will be like a lottery if the PD becomes current somewhere in 2007 Oct-Nov time. Right??
So life is not always easy. There are people waiting since 2002-03-04.
Don't think that life is not a FIFO always.
Why some of the guys became violent when I said, INDIA IS GREAT???
Guys.. do you know why I always feel like this???
As my parents,in laws and most of my relatives stay there. Not only mine, allmost all guys who are in the IV, they must have parents and relatives in India for sure. There is no other reason why I said India is great.
Someone asked me to pack up... YES, I will if nothing happens;however, I will be waiting to see the progress for sure. This is July. Let's have a look over OCT bulletin after 2 months and for sure dates will move atleast 4-6 months for EB2 guys and 1 year for EB3 guys. So wait, be patient, instead of doing all this.
Anyway, our turn will come sooner or later, so why to become impatient just seeing the JULY bulletin CURRENT and then "U".
Mainly this is the message for 2005-2006-2007 PD guys. Please don't take it otherwise.
In the name of thinking differently we have smitha, senthil1 , asdqwe..and these guys confusing this struggle / fight for us trying to get ahead of the line or as senthil1 keeps saying uscis/dos made an honest mistake and asdqwe..keeps saying we need to fight for legislation rather than wasting time with these efforts. What all these guys and their ilk fail to understand is most of us are pissed off about the way it was implemented and handled rather than the ability to file AOS itself. If we sit and do nothing is like asking uscis / dos to walk all over us again and again. Besides in US law whenever there is a gray area, the decisions are based on precedents. This means if they have done this now means they can do this in any bulletin hence issued. They can issue a bulletin in Oct 2007 and on Nov 2 say "oops sorry my bad wrong bulletin" . Please come out of the basement and face the sun.
So life is not always easy. There are people waiting since 2002-03-04.
Don't think that life is not a FIFO always.
Why some of the guys became violent when I said, INDIA IS GREAT???
Guys.. do you know why I always feel like this???
As my parents,in laws and most of my relatives stay there. Not only mine, allmost all guys who are in the IV, they must have parents and relatives in India for sure. There is no other reason why I said India is great.
Someone asked me to pack up... YES, I will if nothing happens;however, I will be waiting to see the progress for sure. This is July. Let's have a look over OCT bulletin after 2 months and for sure dates will move atleast 4-6 months for EB2 guys and 1 year for EB3 guys. So wait, be patient, instead of doing all this.
Anyway, our turn will come sooner or later, so why to become impatient just seeing the JULY bulletin CURRENT and then "U".
Mainly this is the message for 2005-2006-2007 PD guys. Please don't take it otherwise.
In the name of thinking differently we have smitha, senthil1 , asdqwe..and these guys confusing this struggle / fight for us trying to get ahead of the line or as senthil1 keeps saying uscis/dos made an honest mistake and asdqwe..keeps saying we need to fight for legislation rather than wasting time with these efforts. What all these guys and their ilk fail to understand is most of us are pissed off about the way it was implemented and handled rather than the ability to file AOS itself. If we sit and do nothing is like asking uscis / dos to walk all over us again and again. Besides in US law whenever there is a gray area, the decisions are based on precedents. This means if they have done this now means they can do this in any bulletin hence issued. They can issue a bulletin in Oct 2007 and on Nov 2 say "oops sorry my bad wrong bulletin" . Please come out of the basement and face the sun.
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
lazycis
09-25 08:12 AM
How to find out if you name check has been done/cleared.
Call USCIS customer service and insist that you want to speak to the immigration officer. Be persistent. IO will be able to tell you that. No need to waste time for Infopass.
Call USCIS customer service and insist that you want to speak to the immigration officer. Be persistent. IO will be able to tell you that. No need to waste time for Infopass.
ItIsNotFunny
11-12 11:46 AM
Bumping the original thread. I will try to keep this on top for today for people's attention.
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
mohican
12-31 04:44 PM
NEED HELP!!! what are my options?
I485 denied on Oct 24th 2008. I did not get the letter and realized only when I checked on the USCIS website. My attorney also did not get the letter of denial or even the NOID.
I changed jobs in June 2006 by invoking AC21 (Priority Date - Oct 2002, I140 and I485 filed concurrently, I140 approved in Feb 2005).
The fact is that on all forums there is talk about revocation by previous employer. However please note that approved I140 could either be revoked or substituted. While those AC21 memos talk about revoked I140, the law is not clear when previous employer substitutes the approved I140. I know the substitution process is no longer legal since June 2007, however, it has been abused in the past. My questions to forum members:
1. Is any one in similar situation?
2. I have H1B only until June 2009, Can I work until then assuming MTR is resolved in 2 months (per some optimistic posts on IV)
3. if my employer were to file a PERM labor application--can I port my previous priority date?
Mohican
Ron Gotcher Latest ' ImmInfo Newsletter' states clearly 485 denial is illegal
***********
CIS issuing illegal AOS denials based on I-140 revocations
Recently, the CIS has been issuing denials ofadjustment of status applications in cases where the applicant has an approved I-140, and an AOS application pending for more than 180 days, but the petitioning employer has attempted to revoke the approved I-140.
These denials are patently illegal. They violate both CIS policy and statutory law. Both statutory law and explicit CIS policy are clear on this subject: An employer may not revoke an approved I-140 petition after an adjustment of status application has
been pending for at least 180 days. While we have not seen denials of any of our cases, we have seen a number of such denials by applicants who have contacted our office to assist them with filing motions to reconsider. It is shocking that the CIS
continues to issue denials even after the first MTRs were submitted. They are issuing these denials with full knowledge that there is no legal basis for what they are doing and that their actions violate existing law.
Anyone who receives such a denial must file a motion to reconsider immediately. The CIS has said that they are processing MTRs within 60 days. If the MTR does not result in a reversal of the denial within 60 days, the applicant should proceed in US District Court immediately to see a reversal. Immediate action is necessary to prevent the accumulation of unlawful presence following the denial.
I485 denied on Oct 24th 2008. I did not get the letter and realized only when I checked on the USCIS website. My attorney also did not get the letter of denial or even the NOID.
I changed jobs in June 2006 by invoking AC21 (Priority Date - Oct 2002, I140 and I485 filed concurrently, I140 approved in Feb 2005).
The fact is that on all forums there is talk about revocation by previous employer. However please note that approved I140 could either be revoked or substituted. While those AC21 memos talk about revoked I140, the law is not clear when previous employer substitutes the approved I140. I know the substitution process is no longer legal since June 2007, however, it has been abused in the past. My questions to forum members:
1. Is any one in similar situation?
2. I have H1B only until June 2009, Can I work until then assuming MTR is resolved in 2 months (per some optimistic posts on IV)
3. if my employer were to file a PERM labor application--can I port my previous priority date?
Mohican
Ron Gotcher Latest ' ImmInfo Newsletter' states clearly 485 denial is illegal
***********
CIS issuing illegal AOS denials based on I-140 revocations
Recently, the CIS has been issuing denials ofadjustment of status applications in cases where the applicant has an approved I-140, and an AOS application pending for more than 180 days, but the petitioning employer has attempted to revoke the approved I-140.
These denials are patently illegal. They violate both CIS policy and statutory law. Both statutory law and explicit CIS policy are clear on this subject: An employer may not revoke an approved I-140 petition after an adjustment of status application has
been pending for at least 180 days. While we have not seen denials of any of our cases, we have seen a number of such denials by applicants who have contacted our office to assist them with filing motions to reconsider. It is shocking that the CIS
continues to issue denials even after the first MTRs were submitted. They are issuing these denials with full knowledge that there is no legal basis for what they are doing and that their actions violate existing law.
Anyone who receives such a denial must file a motion to reconsider immediately. The CIS has said that they are processing MTRs within 60 days. If the MTR does not result in a reversal of the denial within 60 days, the applicant should proceed in US District Court immediately to see a reversal. Immediate action is necessary to prevent the accumulation of unlawful presence following the denial.
more...
simple1
06-14 02:54 PM
One of my friend (H1b) got into a job ( after passing labor market test - LCA - that no USC/GC could be found). in fortune 500 as direct employee after the job was vacant for more than a year.
However the same job was sent offshore after 8 months his tenure in that job. He was ok as he retained shares, signon bonus and severance.
All we see here is Indians competing against Indians in one form or other.
This is not affecting USC/GC.
How many times in this thread I have mentioned that I am getting replaced by one of these L-1B resource, I am a poor Oracle/DB developer who fortunately cannot be replaced by L-1B visa resources (as my skills is a common technical one). So once these violations impact your day to day life you look around for ways to stop this fraud. Its true that if I was a Nuero Surgeon in Phily or a Astro Scientist in Houston I wouldn't be interested in this violation :-) .... tomorrow let this scenario happen to you ... you would be first one to raise the alert.
Regarding 'getting burnt', I don't think there is bigger burn than loosing our jobs (which already is happening) and hope you know that there is something called 'anonymity'... ya lets see whos going to get 'burnt' here. We'll definetly keep you updated regarding the outcome.
However the same job was sent offshore after 8 months his tenure in that job. He was ok as he retained shares, signon bonus and severance.
All we see here is Indians competing against Indians in one form or other.
This is not affecting USC/GC.
How many times in this thread I have mentioned that I am getting replaced by one of these L-1B resource, I am a poor Oracle/DB developer who fortunately cannot be replaced by L-1B visa resources (as my skills is a common technical one). So once these violations impact your day to day life you look around for ways to stop this fraud. Its true that if I was a Nuero Surgeon in Phily or a Astro Scientist in Houston I wouldn't be interested in this violation :-) .... tomorrow let this scenario happen to you ... you would be first one to raise the alert.
Regarding 'getting burnt', I don't think there is bigger burn than loosing our jobs (which already is happening) and hope you know that there is something called 'anonymity'... ya lets see whos going to get 'burnt' here. We'll definetly keep you updated regarding the outcome.
FrankZulu
08-17 01:11 PM
I got email for decision/post decision about a week back but no CPO email yet.
Sorry for my Ignorance on this, but what is CPO? Is it status changed to "CARD / DOCUMENT PRODUCTION"?
Sorry for my Ignorance on this, but what is CPO? Is it status changed to "CARD / DOCUMENT PRODUCTION"?
more...
brahmam
09-24 12:09 AM
Super news for every body. Assuming 0 approvals in September :p
only 4000 EB1 pending; even if all of them are approved, and with 1000 more in 2010, we have 30,000 EB1 rolling over to EB2. ROW EB2 quota ~ 25,000. pending eb2 row = 7150. even if we have 15,000 more approved in 2010, eb2 row consumes 22,000 and the remaining supply = 33,000 which can go to china, india, mexico and philippines.
mexico and philippines, eb2 is minimal .. maybe 700. so all of 32,000 needs to go to India and china. I dont know how the split will be here. if it is equal and china gets 16,000 they move to mid 2007 easily and India moves to Apr 2006.
However, we know the calculations wont be this precise and cut-off will move to 2007 in Aug 2010 which is when all the lucky bums will get approvals left and right.
QED :D
only 4000 EB1 pending; even if all of them are approved, and with 1000 more in 2010, we have 30,000 EB1 rolling over to EB2. ROW EB2 quota ~ 25,000. pending eb2 row = 7150. even if we have 15,000 more approved in 2010, eb2 row consumes 22,000 and the remaining supply = 33,000 which can go to china, india, mexico and philippines.
mexico and philippines, eb2 is minimal .. maybe 700. so all of 32,000 needs to go to India and china. I dont know how the split will be here. if it is equal and china gets 16,000 they move to mid 2007 easily and India moves to Apr 2006.
However, we know the calculations wont be this precise and cut-off will move to 2007 in Aug 2010 which is when all the lucky bums will get approvals left and right.
QED :D
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
krishmunn
03-29 12:14 PM
Not sure i agree with that statement. The way the spillover trickle is reaching EB2 there is no way EB2 will become current for atleast 5 years so impact on EB3 within a year or two is a incorrect statement
If the momentum continues, EB2 will be current in about 2 - 3 years. There are roughly 15 - 18K EB2 I applicants per year and around 5 K for EB 2 C. the number will defnitely be less during later part of 2008 to mid 2010 due to Economic downturn.
The current queue for EB I + EB C till Aug 2007 ~ 36 K
People here are talking about 38 K SOFAD whcih means by August this year it will catch up August 2007, by late next year it should reach Aug 2009 and by late 2013 it will be current.
Again, all these based on assumption that the current momentum continues and the assumed 38 K SOFAD are available every year.
If the momentum continues, EB2 will be current in about 2 - 3 years. There are roughly 15 - 18K EB2 I applicants per year and around 5 K for EB 2 C. the number will defnitely be less during later part of 2008 to mid 2010 due to Economic downturn.
The current queue for EB I + EB C till Aug 2007 ~ 36 K
People here are talking about 38 K SOFAD whcih means by August this year it will catch up August 2007, by late next year it should reach Aug 2009 and by late 2013 it will be current.
Again, all these based on assumption that the current momentum continues and the assumed 38 K SOFAD are available every year.
more...
PlainSpeak
03-29 05:29 PM
Thanks to IV for getting this done
Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha
:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D
Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha
:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
Saralayar
04-22 04:50 PM
In response to Saralayar's idea, I strongly believe it is a great idea but I have some details I don't understand. Would Saralayar tell me more about that????????
From the quote "Core team and every one, please consider this and try to lobby for getting the citizenship without further wait if the persons satisfy the folowing conditions:
1. If they are legally here for 10 years (With approved I-140 and waiting for Adjustment of Status without current date).
2. If they have earned full 40 points in Social Security
3. If they have paid the tax continuously for 10 years
4. If they own a house and paying Mortgage (adding weightage to the Economy boost)
and
5. If they do not have any criminal records in these 10 years."
From the above quote in Saralayar's previous message, I wonder
1) whether citizenship is granted to people who have met all 5 conditions or any 2-3
conditions out of 5???????
2) I do believe the last 2 conditions can be met by most of the foreign students but for
#3) condition "if they have paid the tax continously for 10 years", I wonder how can this
happen unless the foreign student who has worked in US for 10 years. I heard H-1b
workers maximum have 6 years plus 1 year extra for extension total add up to 7 years.
So how can have 10 years tax paid????
3) For #1) condition," If they are legally here for 10 years (With approved I-140 and
waiting for Adjustment of Status without current date)",
I wonder whether only students with years of US working experience (which means
years in full time study plus years of working experience) up to 10 years is counted
towards this legal stay for 10 years.
So how about students who have years of working experience (which means years in full time study plus years of working experience up
to 10 years but
without GC waiting due to lack of employers' file for GC sponsorship due to some
unknown reasons??????
or some foreign students who have stayed in US for 10 years for full time study such
as 4-yr bachelor degree plus 6-yr Ph.D or two Master degree (MS & MBA) or other
degree combinations but they have both social security card and drivers' license as US
ID but without employers' sponsorship due to certain reasons?????
Would you please tell me more details about your idea????? Thanks a lot for your attention and help!!
Look around you will see.... not everybody is the same.
I personally know many who had been "working in H1B" for more than 14 years.
Not everybody gives more weightage for their "immigration plan" than some personal and career interests. If you are really truthful to USCIS about your intentions, and you keep doing what you want to do with your career and life, it is in-fact very possible that you will be found without a GC even after 10 years working in USA, if your are from India.
An approved I-140 doesnt make you "automatically" qualified for an I-485. You dont file 485, if you dont "intent" to continue with that specific employment, even after I-140 approval.
7Years???? No..... you can extend your H1 beyond 6 years as many times as you want if you meet some conditions as per AC21. So it is possible for you to be in H1B for 100 years.
10years tax payed???? Yes because of the other reasons I mentioned. Also I know many who are still in que after 14 years paying taxes.
abcabcla,
Morchu is correct. We are just putting the period as a decade (10 years), which is pretty decent part of the human life.
From the quote "Core team and every one, please consider this and try to lobby for getting the citizenship without further wait if the persons satisfy the folowing conditions:
1. If they are legally here for 10 years (With approved I-140 and waiting for Adjustment of Status without current date).
2. If they have earned full 40 points in Social Security
3. If they have paid the tax continuously for 10 years
4. If they own a house and paying Mortgage (adding weightage to the Economy boost)
and
5. If they do not have any criminal records in these 10 years."
From the above quote in Saralayar's previous message, I wonder
1) whether citizenship is granted to people who have met all 5 conditions or any 2-3
conditions out of 5???????
2) I do believe the last 2 conditions can be met by most of the foreign students but for
#3) condition "if they have paid the tax continously for 10 years", I wonder how can this
happen unless the foreign student who has worked in US for 10 years. I heard H-1b
workers maximum have 6 years plus 1 year extra for extension total add up to 7 years.
So how can have 10 years tax paid????
3) For #1) condition," If they are legally here for 10 years (With approved I-140 and
waiting for Adjustment of Status without current date)",
I wonder whether only students with years of US working experience (which means
years in full time study plus years of working experience) up to 10 years is counted
towards this legal stay for 10 years.
So how about students who have years of working experience (which means years in full time study plus years of working experience up
to 10 years but
without GC waiting due to lack of employers' file for GC sponsorship due to some
unknown reasons??????
or some foreign students who have stayed in US for 10 years for full time study such
as 4-yr bachelor degree plus 6-yr Ph.D or two Master degree (MS & MBA) or other
degree combinations but they have both social security card and drivers' license as US
ID but without employers' sponsorship due to certain reasons?????
Would you please tell me more details about your idea????? Thanks a lot for your attention and help!!
Look around you will see.... not everybody is the same.
I personally know many who had been "working in H1B" for more than 14 years.
Not everybody gives more weightage for their "immigration plan" than some personal and career interests. If you are really truthful to USCIS about your intentions, and you keep doing what you want to do with your career and life, it is in-fact very possible that you will be found without a GC even after 10 years working in USA, if your are from India.
An approved I-140 doesnt make you "automatically" qualified for an I-485. You dont file 485, if you dont "intent" to continue with that specific employment, even after I-140 approval.
7Years???? No..... you can extend your H1 beyond 6 years as many times as you want if you meet some conditions as per AC21. So it is possible for you to be in H1B for 100 years.
10years tax payed???? Yes because of the other reasons I mentioned. Also I know many who are still in que after 14 years paying taxes.
abcabcla,
Morchu is correct. We are just putting the period as a decade (10 years), which is pretty decent part of the human life.
more...
contactkpatel@yahoo.com
08-13 02:34 PM
I noticed a soft LUD today on my wife's case but no update on mine. Does this mean anything...
PD - Oct 2005 - still waitin.........
PD - Oct 2005 - still waitin.........
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
gene77
06-19 09:42 AM
Everyone seems to indicate that the checks for fees payment to the INS need to be made out to USCIS, however, all the forms that I've downloaded from their website instruct that the payments be made out to Department of Homeland Security - which one is correct?
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
abhijitp
07-31 03:21 PM
question: can I file without employer letter
For an employment-based petition, in order to proceed and be valid,
they
need to still INTEND to be employed by the sponsoring employer if and
when
they get their green card. The employer however, does not need to sign
any
forms per se with relation to the adjustment petition. If the alien is
currently working for the sponsoring employer (on H-1B or other) he or
she
can port or transfer employers without penalty or without losing the
green
card process 180 days after they file the I-485 petition. At that
point,
they can change employers and work for whomever they wish (provided
they
have a valid work permit)
The forms which need to be filed with the I-485 include;
Form I-485 for EACH applicant with $325 filing fee ($225 if under age
14)
Proof of approved I-140
Form G-325A for each applicant
G-28, if attorney involved
Form I765 Work Permit (optional) (filing fee of $180)
Form I-131 Travel Permit (optional) (filing fee of $170)
Fingerprint fee of $70 for each
Medical examination by INS approved doctor
Passport, visa, approval notices and I-94 card showing all years in the
US
in valid status and maintenance of status
Marriage certificate, birth certificates of children.
Form I-134 Affidavit of Support (notarized) or I-864, with tax returns
(1
year must be attached, but income for three years must be listed); job
letter from the alien's current employer; and pay-stubs.
If the alien is NOT yet working for the sponsoring employer, I like to
include a letter from the employer stating that if and when the alien
gets
his residency, they still intend to hire him or her.
Hope this answers the questions.
Is it possible for us to ask, what are the chances of rejection solely based on the lack of the Employment Verification Letter? If too high, it is a better idea to re-submit. If not a high risk, might as well wait for the A# and then send out this document.
I was present on the conf call on Sunday and wanted to ask this question in the end, but we ran out of time, I have sent her a follow up email with this question (no response yet).
For an employment-based petition, in order to proceed and be valid,
they
need to still INTEND to be employed by the sponsoring employer if and
when
they get their green card. The employer however, does not need to sign
any
forms per se with relation to the adjustment petition. If the alien is
currently working for the sponsoring employer (on H-1B or other) he or
she
can port or transfer employers without penalty or without losing the
green
card process 180 days after they file the I-485 petition. At that
point,
they can change employers and work for whomever they wish (provided
they
have a valid work permit)
The forms which need to be filed with the I-485 include;
Form I-485 for EACH applicant with $325 filing fee ($225 if under age
14)
Proof of approved I-140
Form G-325A for each applicant
G-28, if attorney involved
Form I765 Work Permit (optional) (filing fee of $180)
Form I-131 Travel Permit (optional) (filing fee of $170)
Fingerprint fee of $70 for each
Medical examination by INS approved doctor
Passport, visa, approval notices and I-94 card showing all years in the
US
in valid status and maintenance of status
Marriage certificate, birth certificates of children.
Form I-134 Affidavit of Support (notarized) or I-864, with tax returns
(1
year must be attached, but income for three years must be listed); job
letter from the alien's current employer; and pay-stubs.
If the alien is NOT yet working for the sponsoring employer, I like to
include a letter from the employer stating that if and when the alien
gets
his residency, they still intend to hire him or her.
Hope this answers the questions.
Is it possible for us to ask, what are the chances of rejection solely based on the lack of the Employment Verification Letter? If too high, it is a better idea to re-submit. If not a high risk, might as well wait for the A# and then send out this document.
I was present on the conf call on Sunday and wanted to ask this question in the end, but we ran out of time, I have sent her a follow up email with this question (no response yet).
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
vine93
09-09 04:59 PM
I started from below and tried twice which went to VM . All of them took message and Thanks. Since they are getting many calles, Most of them not transferring to other person, Front desk person itself taking message.
Took 45 minutes to cover all of them but time well spent. GO IV GO...
_______________
House Judiciary Committee Members
Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) 202- 225-2906 - took the message
Howard L. Berman (D-Calif.) 202-225-4695 - took the message
Rick Boucher (D-Va.) 202-225-3861 - took the message
Chris Cannon (R-Utah)202- 225-7751 - took the message
Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) 202-225-2216 - My congressman, wanted me to leave a VM but I will try again. Called again and it went great.
Howard Coble (R-N.C.) 202-225-3065 - took the message but said we cannot give a response as I am not from his constituency.
Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.)202- 225-3265 - left a VM
John Conyers (D-Mich.), Chairman 202-225-5126 - called and spoke to a lady, she took the message but still tranferred to judiciary committe number, which no one picked.
Artur Davis (D-Ala.) 202-225-2665 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
William D. Delahunt (D-Mass.)202- 225-3111 - left a VM
Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) 202-225-4755 - took the message
Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) 202-225-2706 - took the message
J. Randy Forbes (R-Va.)202- 225-6365 - took the message
Trent Franks (R-Ariz.)202- 225-4576 - took the message
Elton Gallegly (R-Calif.)202- 225-5811 - VM
Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) 202-225-3035 - took the message with the zipcode
Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.)202- 225-5431 - took the message
Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.)202- 225-8203 - took the message
Darrell Issa (R-Calif.)202- 225-3906 - took the message
Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-Texas)202- 225-3816 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) 202-225-1605 - VM
Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) 202-225-2676 - Took the address and details.
Ric Keller (R-Fla.)202- 225-2176 - took the message (said the bill is under judiciary and under review)
Steve King (R-Iowa)202- 225-4426 - DIDNT CALL HIM
Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.)202- 225-3072 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Dan Lungren (R-Calif.)202- 225-5716 - took the message
Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) 202-225-5635 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Mike Pence (R-Ind.) 202-225-3021 - took the message
Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.) 202-225-6676 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.)202- 225-4176 - VM
Robert C. Scott (D-Va.) (202) 225-8351 - took the message
Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) 202-225-5101 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) 202-225-5911 - took the message
Lamar S. Smith (R-Texas), Ranking Member 202- 225-4236 - took the message
Betty Sutton (D-Ohio) 202-225-3401 - took the message (didnt ask for anyting although I am from her state)
Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) 202-225-7931 - took the message with address
Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) 202-225-2201 - took the message, very nice lady asked about the bill in detail.
Melvin L. Watt (D-N.C.)202- 225-1510 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Anthony D. Weiner (D-N.Y.) 202-225-6616 - took the message, very nice guy asked in detail what the bill is about.
Robert Wexler (D-Fla.) 202-225-3001 - took the message, asked about the bill in detail.
WOOOHOO, my first time making all the calls. My confidence was sky high after the first 5 calls. Very much worth it.
..................................................
$470 till date
Took 45 minutes to cover all of them but time well spent. GO IV GO...
_______________
House Judiciary Committee Members
Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) 202- 225-2906 - took the message
Howard L. Berman (D-Calif.) 202-225-4695 - took the message
Rick Boucher (D-Va.) 202-225-3861 - took the message
Chris Cannon (R-Utah)202- 225-7751 - took the message
Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) 202-225-2216 - My congressman, wanted me to leave a VM but I will try again. Called again and it went great.
Howard Coble (R-N.C.) 202-225-3065 - took the message but said we cannot give a response as I am not from his constituency.
Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.)202- 225-3265 - left a VM
John Conyers (D-Mich.), Chairman 202-225-5126 - called and spoke to a lady, she took the message but still tranferred to judiciary committe number, which no one picked.
Artur Davis (D-Ala.) 202-225-2665 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
William D. Delahunt (D-Mass.)202- 225-3111 - left a VM
Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) 202-225-4755 - took the message
Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) 202-225-2706 - took the message
J. Randy Forbes (R-Va.)202- 225-6365 - took the message
Trent Franks (R-Ariz.)202- 225-4576 - took the message
Elton Gallegly (R-Calif.)202- 225-5811 - VM
Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) 202-225-3035 - took the message with the zipcode
Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.)202- 225-5431 - took the message
Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.)202- 225-8203 - took the message
Darrell Issa (R-Calif.)202- 225-3906 - took the message
Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-Texas)202- 225-3816 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) 202-225-1605 - VM
Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) 202-225-2676 - Took the address and details.
Ric Keller (R-Fla.)202- 225-2176 - took the message (said the bill is under judiciary and under review)
Steve King (R-Iowa)202- 225-4426 - DIDNT CALL HIM
Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.)202- 225-3072 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Dan Lungren (R-Calif.)202- 225-5716 - took the message
Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) 202-225-5635 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Mike Pence (R-Ind.) 202-225-3021 - took the message
Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.) 202-225-6676 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.)202- 225-4176 - VM
Robert C. Scott (D-Va.) (202) 225-8351 - took the message
Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) 202-225-5101 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) 202-225-5911 - took the message
Lamar S. Smith (R-Texas), Ranking Member 202- 225-4236 - took the message
Betty Sutton (D-Ohio) 202-225-3401 - took the message (didnt ask for anyting although I am from her state)
Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) 202-225-7931 - took the message with address
Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) 202-225-2201 - took the message, very nice lady asked about the bill in detail.
Melvin L. Watt (D-N.C.)202- 225-1510 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Anthony D. Weiner (D-N.Y.) 202-225-6616 - took the message, very nice guy asked in detail what the bill is about.
Robert Wexler (D-Fla.) 202-225-3001 - took the message, asked about the bill in detail.
WOOOHOO, my first time making all the calls. My confidence was sky high after the first 5 calls. Very much worth it.
..................................................
$470 till date
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
SunnySurya
11-03 04:00 PM
I agree with you this thread should be closed. Please see my original message. I accomplished, which I set to accomplish. In the face of everyone who doubted or questioned my committment.
No point in lingering on this issue. We have some bigger fish to fry now.
Guys,
I sincerely want this thread to be closed. This is killing our unity to fight common cause.
No point in lingering on this issue. We have some bigger fish to fry now.
Guys,
I sincerely want this thread to be closed. This is killing our unity to fight common cause.
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
spaceguy
08-25 12:24 PM
I heard some one telling me that there is a max limit of 5000 mts per month which includes local, long distance and international.
Is it true or just a rumor ?
Is it true or just a rumor ?
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
singhsa3
08-20 09:29 PM
So what are the alternatives?
Yes true but passing of Vise arecapture bill is like waiting for 'Kumbhkaran' to wake up, they've been sleeping for 4-5 years what is the gurantee that they'll not sleep for another 5 years on the immigration bills ?
Yes true but passing of Vise arecapture bill is like waiting for 'Kumbhkaran' to wake up, they've been sleeping for 4-5 years what is the gurantee that they'll not sleep for another 5 years on the immigration bills ?
girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14%
TeddyKoochu
04-01 04:46 PM
This is a very simple calculation. Following are the numbers before Oct -2006. These total to ~ 12K.
EB2-C - 3521
EB2-I - 9345
The dates will move further if more than 12K numbers are infused into the system. I would say that the dates should be in Oct - Nov 2006 range with these 12K numbers, having Nov as buffer as they may issue RFE's to folks.
EB2-C - 3521
EB2-I - 9345
The dates will move further if more than 12K numbers are infused into the system. I would say that the dates should be in Oct - Nov 2006 range with these 12K numbers, having Nov as buffer as they may issue RFE's to folks.
hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11%
pappu
01-07 01:03 PM
Counting time after I140 approval towards citizenship proposal is already on our table for things to consider as a campaign. For Campaigns like this, we will need massive support than what we currently have. Even recent greencard holders can benefit from it.
So the first step before we undertake any big project is to get more membership base.
So let us first figure out ways in which we can get more people involved on IV. Without massive participation no campaign, letter/lobby/phonecall etc will work. We need to really go out of our way and spread the word around so that everyone that is stuck in this immigration mess can join this movement.
So the first step before we undertake any big project is to get more membership base.
So let us first figure out ways in which we can get more people involved on IV. Without massive participation no campaign, letter/lobby/phonecall etc will work. We need to really go out of our way and spread the word around so that everyone that is stuck in this immigration mess can join this movement.
sareesh
09-24 08:26 PM
Two of my friends successfully ported to EB2.
PD nov04 &
PD dec04
I requested my lawyer about my options?
TX
SG
PD nov04 &
PD dec04
I requested my lawyer about my options?
TX
SG
gc28262
06-14 12:00 AM
I would like to point out the differences between H1B and L1
1. There is a yearly limit for H1B (65k + 20K) but L1s are limitless.
2. A minimum wage need clause is there for H1B but minimum wage is not required to be paid for L1s. There are people in L1A visas who are supposed to be Senior Managers are sometimes paid less than 60K per annum by these offshore companies. As although they are brough in L1A visa they are in fact developers.
3. Almost 99% of the L1s are from offshore companies whose main intention is to send the project/job to offshore, most of the H1Bs do not have this intention.
4. L1s cannot change their employer, so they are bound to follow what their offshore employer ask them to do i.e try to take the job offshore, H1Bs can change employers, they will not try to send the job to offshore as they will then eventually have tomove back to offshore.
So if we clearify these points even to the antis, I hope they will understand who is the real culprint for the employment scarcity. Each of these companies are moving thousands of jobs out of this country making the problems for Citizens/Green Card holders/H1Bs.
99.99% of all the L1s are not used as they were intended when the law was signed.
All these may be true. No matter how you convince antis, they won't support any foriegn worker here. They want all of us out.
Even if authorities bans all these L1s, outsourcing will not stop. On the contrary it will intensify.
Before the 2001 recession, many companies were reluctant to outsource their work to India or other countries. When recession hit in 2001, many companies overcame this inhibition and started outsourcing jobs in large scale.
If companies find more stumbling blocks to operate their business, they will find even more innovative ways to overcome those. Remember India is no longer a back office for a low end work now. Many companies have even moved their R&D to India.
1. There is a yearly limit for H1B (65k + 20K) but L1s are limitless.
2. A minimum wage need clause is there for H1B but minimum wage is not required to be paid for L1s. There are people in L1A visas who are supposed to be Senior Managers are sometimes paid less than 60K per annum by these offshore companies. As although they are brough in L1A visa they are in fact developers.
3. Almost 99% of the L1s are from offshore companies whose main intention is to send the project/job to offshore, most of the H1Bs do not have this intention.
4. L1s cannot change their employer, so they are bound to follow what their offshore employer ask them to do i.e try to take the job offshore, H1Bs can change employers, they will not try to send the job to offshore as they will then eventually have tomove back to offshore.
So if we clearify these points even to the antis, I hope they will understand who is the real culprint for the employment scarcity. Each of these companies are moving thousands of jobs out of this country making the problems for Citizens/Green Card holders/H1Bs.
99.99% of all the L1s are not used as they were intended when the law was signed.
All these may be true. No matter how you convince antis, they won't support any foriegn worker here. They want all of us out.
Even if authorities bans all these L1s, outsourcing will not stop. On the contrary it will intensify.
Before the 2001 recession, many companies were reluctant to outsource their work to India or other countries. When recession hit in 2001, many companies overcame this inhibition and started outsourcing jobs in large scale.
If companies find more stumbling blocks to operate their business, they will find even more innovative ways to overcome those. Remember India is no longer a back office for a low end work now. Many companies have even moved their R&D to India.
No comments:
Post a Comment