loudobbs
10-22 11:46 AM
Which organization is the cause of the namecheck delay....
FBI or USCIS?
If I am not wrong, USCIS sends the data to be checked on a weekly basis to FBI on a Electronic disk or tape. More than 90 % of the cases are returned, I assume on a disk or tape back to USCIS. So only a small fraction should be stuck in name check...
Could it be that USCIS is not updating the files in a timely manner with the namecheck information?
Also looking at data, a whole bunch of people got their namwecheck claered in a couple of months...
Any thoughts???
FBI or USCIS?
If I am not wrong, USCIS sends the data to be checked on a weekly basis to FBI on a Electronic disk or tape. More than 90 % of the cases are returned, I assume on a disk or tape back to USCIS. So only a small fraction should be stuck in name check...
Could it be that USCIS is not updating the files in a timely manner with the namecheck information?
Also looking at data, a whole bunch of people got their namwecheck claered in a couple of months...
Any thoughts???
wallpaper The queen of Ramp;B, Mary J.
gc_us
09-28 03:05 AM
My lawyer tried calling USCIS to find out the details and they mentioned they are still processing the July 2nd cases and application are stored in 4 different warehouses.
According to her at this point we can do nothing but wait until they finish processing all the application.
------------------------------------------------
CADude and others... maybe your efforts are paying off. What I learned in this process is that have faith in your application filing. If everything is fine you'll definitely get the receipts. It may be either next week or in 2 weeks.
Couple of things...
1) Calling USCIS is useless...
2) Look for checks for cashed....
3) Keep in touch with our pending group. I gives you support and motivation.
santosh19-2nd july/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140-TSC/No CC/No RN
sanjayb - 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN 140 LUD - 08/05 -- CHECKS CASHED -- 09/25 --- CASE IN TSC
Ashres11 - 2nd July/ 10:28/ Fedex/ J.Barrret/ NSC/ NO CC/ NO RN
Sairam - 2nd July/10:28/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No RN - 07/28
InsKrish - 2nd July/10.25/J.Barret/NSC/I-140 approved from TSC/No CC/RN
sudhi - 2nd July/ 10:25/ Fedex/ J.Barrret/ NSC/ NO CC/ NO RN - CHECKS CASHED 09/13 -- Received receipts too.
Danu2007 - 2nd July/10:25AM/J. Barret/NSC/140-TSC/NO RN
Triviagal - 2nd July/ 10:25AM/ J. Barret/NSC/140-TSC/NO RN
rkartik78- 2nd july/10:25am/ J.Barret/ I140-TSC/ NO RN NO CC
GCFISH- 2nd july/10:25am/ J.Barret/ I140-TSC/ 485 went to NE/NO RN NOCC
rexjamla- 2ndJuly/10:25am/J.Barret/ I-140-NSC/ NO RN NO CC
kmkanth- 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN
BU007- 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN
veerufs - 2nd july/10:28am/J. BARRET/I140-TSC/NO RN/NO CC
123456mg - 2nd july/10:25am at NSC/J BARRET/I140-Approved from TSC/NO RN/NO CC
aussie731- 2ndJuly/10:25am/J.Barret/ I-140-NSC/ NO RN NO CC
nkavjs - 2nd July/ 10:25am/ Fedex/ J.Barrret/ NSC/ I-140 TSC lud on I-140 8-5-07/ NO CC/ NO RN
jsb - 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN 140 LUD - 07/27
gc_us - 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN 140 LUD - 07/28
srinitls - 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/NO RN NO CC
realraghu - 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN
vg1778 - nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN
According to her at this point we can do nothing but wait until they finish processing all the application.
------------------------------------------------
CADude and others... maybe your efforts are paying off. What I learned in this process is that have faith in your application filing. If everything is fine you'll definitely get the receipts. It may be either next week or in 2 weeks.
Couple of things...
1) Calling USCIS is useless...
2) Look for checks for cashed....
3) Keep in touch with our pending group. I gives you support and motivation.
santosh19-2nd july/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140-TSC/No CC/No RN
sanjayb - 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN 140 LUD - 08/05 -- CHECKS CASHED -- 09/25 --- CASE IN TSC
Ashres11 - 2nd July/ 10:28/ Fedex/ J.Barrret/ NSC/ NO CC/ NO RN
Sairam - 2nd July/10:28/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No RN - 07/28
InsKrish - 2nd July/10.25/J.Barret/NSC/I-140 approved from TSC/No CC/RN
sudhi - 2nd July/ 10:25/ Fedex/ J.Barrret/ NSC/ NO CC/ NO RN - CHECKS CASHED 09/13 -- Received receipts too.
Danu2007 - 2nd July/10:25AM/J. Barret/NSC/140-TSC/NO RN
Triviagal - 2nd July/ 10:25AM/ J. Barret/NSC/140-TSC/NO RN
rkartik78- 2nd july/10:25am/ J.Barret/ I140-TSC/ NO RN NO CC
GCFISH- 2nd july/10:25am/ J.Barret/ I140-TSC/ 485 went to NE/NO RN NOCC
rexjamla- 2ndJuly/10:25am/J.Barret/ I-140-NSC/ NO RN NO CC
kmkanth- 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN
BU007- 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN
veerufs - 2nd july/10:28am/J. BARRET/I140-TSC/NO RN/NO CC
123456mg - 2nd july/10:25am at NSC/J BARRET/I140-Approved from TSC/NO RN/NO CC
aussie731- 2ndJuly/10:25am/J.Barret/ I-140-NSC/ NO RN NO CC
nkavjs - 2nd July/ 10:25am/ Fedex/ J.Barrret/ NSC/ I-140 TSC lud on I-140 8-5-07/ NO CC/ NO RN
jsb - 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN 140 LUD - 07/27
gc_us - 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN 140 LUD - 07/28
srinitls - 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/NO RN NO CC
realraghu - 2nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN
vg1778 - nd July/10:25/FedEx/J.Barret/NSC/140 - TSC/No CC/No RN
chanduv23
11-06 09:44 AM
I was wondering if there are any plans for a recapture campaign ? my feeling is that we should concentrate on recapture at all times ..even if it is something in preparation i.e. do some homework now itself in anticipation ..the other point is keep talking about IV and get new members ..in the last 2 days ..I came across 2 people in various stages of immigration and they did not know about IV ..and they have joined now. I guess this is the most effective way to increase membership
well - we need money for lobbying and our funding drives are not going well. As nothing has happened on the legislative front, our members are not happy. But we must not give up.
WSe will do what we can. Please help reenergizing our base. It is very essential that we see a new generation of dedicated IV members.
well - we need money for lobbying and our funding drives are not going well. As nothing has happened on the legislative front, our members are not happy. But we must not give up.
WSe will do what we can. Please help reenergizing our base. It is very essential that we see a new generation of dedicated IV members.
2011 Mary J. Blige Hairstyle
sundarpn
01-28 10:15 AM
Finally received my passport this morning. Consulate sent it to VFS on Friday and I received it today through Blue Dart.
Int Date: Dec 17, 2007 @ Chennai Consulate
PP Rec. Date: Jan 28, 2008
what was the approval date on ur h1b and what uscis center approved it? thanks
Int Date: Dec 17, 2007 @ Chennai Consulate
PP Rec. Date: Jan 28, 2008
what was the approval date on ur h1b and what uscis center approved it? thanks
more...
sumagiri
09-23 07:27 PM
All we need is just 233,816(page 2) visas(forget about country limit, EB category etc). In that case in 2 years we will have 280,000(140,000 * 2) visas. So should we all get GC in two years with that logic.
Even if we add the flow of application from 'Current' categoreis, your statement still holds true.
Even if we add the flow of application from 'Current' categoreis, your statement still holds true.
sledge_hammer
11-25 08:06 PM
I still would not put the blame on the lender. Nobody put a gun to your head and asked you to buy a home. You, out of your own volition, went to the lender after all the shopping you did for rates, then settled with one lender and signed the contract. Why is it the lender's fault for lending you money when you needed it? Why didnt you finanance the whole purchase yourself? You didn't have that kind of money, right? So what the lender did was charge you interest, as a fee for loaning you the money. So the builder/owner of the home got his money from the bank and left. Now the two parties involved are you and the lender. And it is your obligation to pay the loan whether the home appreciates or depriciates. Like Canadian_Dream already said, any investment has risk associated with it. You should have paid attention to it before signing the contract. Have you ever invested in a stocks or mutual funds? There is always a disclaimer that there is a certain amount of risk involved. The investment in real estate is just like that. It is not like putting away money in a savings account which is insured by FDIC.
If someone is dumb enough not to know these things he should not be investing in the first place!
Yup, that was my point - both are greedy :)....so no point blaming any 1 party. And agree with you that foreclosure is only an option if you 'really' can't pay your monthly dues and that too for a sustained period of time - if one has the money to pay the monthly mortgage, one should continue to pay it off even if the asset value as plummeted to rock bottom because that is what you have singed in for - the amount of loan you took out to buy that house. No excuse from that!
Foreclosing just because you can't make short term profit on it is simply in-excusable.
If someone is dumb enough not to know these things he should not be investing in the first place!
Yup, that was my point - both are greedy :)....so no point blaming any 1 party. And agree with you that foreclosure is only an option if you 'really' can't pay your monthly dues and that too for a sustained period of time - if one has the money to pay the monthly mortgage, one should continue to pay it off even if the asset value as plummeted to rock bottom because that is what you have singed in for - the amount of loan you took out to buy that house. No excuse from that!
Foreclosing just because you can't make short term profit on it is simply in-excusable.
more...
mrsr
06-27 10:33 PM
I think this what uscis says
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label
2010 Click here to cancel reply.
eb_retrogession
01-27 11:37 AM
I don't know is it right Thread or not.
But i found this information in Rajiv's website.
The Mesg says:-
New Volunteer Organization Formed
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some members of this portal and others have come together to form a new organization supporting legal mmigration with special focus on issues faced by employment-based applicants. Please visit:
www.immigrationvoice.org
DISCLAIMER: The Law Offices of Rajiv S. Khanna, PC cannot endorse or verify the activities of any organization. Please use your own judgment.
==================================
If we really not get his Endorsement, then we should remove that Information from our website.
Think about it
http://boards.immigrationportal.com/announcement.php?f=235&announcementid=84
The core-team of IV met with Mr.Khanna personally and spent several valuable hours with him. He does support our cause and appreciates the effort. The verbiage on our endorsement link is indeed from Mr.Khanna and was transmitted in the form of an email.
Everyone in the immigration community is now actively following the IV website (including the office of Mr.Khanna), and if something was completely mis-represented, they would let us know!
Nice try!
But i found this information in Rajiv's website.
The Mesg says:-
New Volunteer Organization Formed
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some members of this portal and others have come together to form a new organization supporting legal mmigration with special focus on issues faced by employment-based applicants. Please visit:
www.immigrationvoice.org
DISCLAIMER: The Law Offices of Rajiv S. Khanna, PC cannot endorse or verify the activities of any organization. Please use your own judgment.
==================================
If we really not get his Endorsement, then we should remove that Information from our website.
Think about it
http://boards.immigrationportal.com/announcement.php?f=235&announcementid=84
The core-team of IV met with Mr.Khanna personally and spent several valuable hours with him. He does support our cause and appreciates the effort. The verbiage on our endorsement link is indeed from Mr.Khanna and was transmitted in the form of an email.
Everyone in the immigration community is now actively following the IV website (including the office of Mr.Khanna), and if something was completely mis-represented, they would let us know!
Nice try!
more...
gcnirvana
06-16 12:07 PM
A# is the alien number that is given to the applicant during the GC process. It is either given at 140 approval or at 485. If you have a A# in your 140 approval then you can use that # in all your 485 forms.
To answer pranju's question, yes its only for primary applicant. You can leave that field as blank for your spouse.
What is A#?
Thanks
To answer pranju's question, yes its only for primary applicant. You can leave that field as blank for your spouse.
What is A#?
Thanks
hair mary j blige hair color.
DallasBlue
09-27 02:18 PM
http://www.ailf.org/lac/lac_pa_chrono.shtml
http://www.ailf.org/lac/mandamus-jurisdiction9-24-07%20PA.pdf
1. What are the general arguments that the government makes to dismiss a mandamus/APA case for lack of jurisdiction?
The government�s motions to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction are filed pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP). The government generally makes some combination of the following four arguments, all of which center on alleged agency discretion with respect to adjudication of adjustment applications:
� That USCIS does not have a duty to adjudicate an adjustment application and therefore an essential element of the mandamus claim is missing;
� That the pace of adjudication of an adjustment application is discretionary and therefore not subject to mandamus relief;
� That adjudication of adjustment applications is committed to agency discretion by law and not subject to APA relief; and
� That 8 U.S.C. � 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii), which limits judicial review over certain discretionary issues in immigration cases, bars review of these mandamus and APA cases.
2. In responding to a motion to dismiss, can I argue that at least some of the issues raised by the government are not jurisdictional?
Yes. An initial response to a government motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction is to question whether, in fact, the government has raised a jurisdictional challenge. The Supreme Court has distinguished between jurisdiction � which is the court�s power to hear the case � and the sufficiency of a valid cause of action. See, e.g., Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment, 523 U.S. 83, 89 (1988); see also Ahmed v. DHS, 328 F.3d 383, 386-87 (7th Cir. 2003) (distinguishing between the court�s power to adjudicate the case, which is jurisdictional, and the court�s power to grant relief, which is not jurisdictional).
The failure to state a valid cause of action calls for a judgment on the merits and not for dismissal for want of jurisdiction. Bell v. Hood, 327 U.S. 678, 682 (1946). The Supreme Court has made clear that:
�jurisdiction � is not defeated � by the possibility that the averments might fail to state a cause of action on which petitioners could actually recover.� Rather, the district court has jurisdiction if �the right of the petitioners to recover under their complaint will be sustained if the [ ] laws of the United States are given one construction and will be defeated if they are given another ��
Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment, 523 U.S. at 89 (quoting Bell, 327 U.S. at 682, 685). Thus, one court has held that in resolving whether mandamus jurisdiction is present in an immigration case, the allegations of the complaint are taken as true (unless patently frivolous) to avoid �tackling the merits under the ruse of assessing jurisdiction.� Ahmed, 328 F.3d at 386-387.
Applying these principles, the Seventh Circuit held in Ahmed that the question of whether a statute imposed a �duty� on the government for purposes of mandamus relief was not a jurisdictional question. As the court explained:
[T]he district court has jurisdiction under � 1361 [the mandamus statute] to determine whether the prerequisites for mandamus relief have been satisfied: does the plaintiff have a clear right to the relief sought; does the defendant have a duty to perform the act in question; and is there no other adequate remedy available. � A conclusion that any one of those prerequisites is missing should lead the district court to deny the petition, not [for lack of jurisdiction], but because the plaintiff has not demonstrated an entitlement to this form of extraordinary relief.
Ahmed, 328 F.3d at 386-87.
Thus, where the government claims that jurisdiction is lacking because a prerequisite to mandamus is missing, the plaintiff can respond by arguing that this is not a jurisdictional question and cannot lead to dismissal under Rule 12(b)(1). Most likely, you also will want to address the substance of the challenge, also, as an alternative way to dispute the government�s motion. See, e.g., � 3, below.
http://www.ailf.org/lac/mandamus-jurisdiction9-24-07%20PA.pdf
1. What are the general arguments that the government makes to dismiss a mandamus/APA case for lack of jurisdiction?
The government�s motions to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction are filed pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP). The government generally makes some combination of the following four arguments, all of which center on alleged agency discretion with respect to adjudication of adjustment applications:
� That USCIS does not have a duty to adjudicate an adjustment application and therefore an essential element of the mandamus claim is missing;
� That the pace of adjudication of an adjustment application is discretionary and therefore not subject to mandamus relief;
� That adjudication of adjustment applications is committed to agency discretion by law and not subject to APA relief; and
� That 8 U.S.C. � 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii), which limits judicial review over certain discretionary issues in immigration cases, bars review of these mandamus and APA cases.
2. In responding to a motion to dismiss, can I argue that at least some of the issues raised by the government are not jurisdictional?
Yes. An initial response to a government motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction is to question whether, in fact, the government has raised a jurisdictional challenge. The Supreme Court has distinguished between jurisdiction � which is the court�s power to hear the case � and the sufficiency of a valid cause of action. See, e.g., Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment, 523 U.S. 83, 89 (1988); see also Ahmed v. DHS, 328 F.3d 383, 386-87 (7th Cir. 2003) (distinguishing between the court�s power to adjudicate the case, which is jurisdictional, and the court�s power to grant relief, which is not jurisdictional).
The failure to state a valid cause of action calls for a judgment on the merits and not for dismissal for want of jurisdiction. Bell v. Hood, 327 U.S. 678, 682 (1946). The Supreme Court has made clear that:
�jurisdiction � is not defeated � by the possibility that the averments might fail to state a cause of action on which petitioners could actually recover.� Rather, the district court has jurisdiction if �the right of the petitioners to recover under their complaint will be sustained if the [ ] laws of the United States are given one construction and will be defeated if they are given another ��
Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment, 523 U.S. at 89 (quoting Bell, 327 U.S. at 682, 685). Thus, one court has held that in resolving whether mandamus jurisdiction is present in an immigration case, the allegations of the complaint are taken as true (unless patently frivolous) to avoid �tackling the merits under the ruse of assessing jurisdiction.� Ahmed, 328 F.3d at 386-387.
Applying these principles, the Seventh Circuit held in Ahmed that the question of whether a statute imposed a �duty� on the government for purposes of mandamus relief was not a jurisdictional question. As the court explained:
[T]he district court has jurisdiction under � 1361 [the mandamus statute] to determine whether the prerequisites for mandamus relief have been satisfied: does the plaintiff have a clear right to the relief sought; does the defendant have a duty to perform the act in question; and is there no other adequate remedy available. � A conclusion that any one of those prerequisites is missing should lead the district court to deny the petition, not [for lack of jurisdiction], but because the plaintiff has not demonstrated an entitlement to this form of extraordinary relief.
Ahmed, 328 F.3d at 386-87.
Thus, where the government claims that jurisdiction is lacking because a prerequisite to mandamus is missing, the plaintiff can respond by arguing that this is not a jurisdictional question and cannot lead to dismissal under Rule 12(b)(1). Most likely, you also will want to address the substance of the challenge, also, as an alternative way to dispute the government�s motion. See, e.g., � 3, below.
more...
McLuvin
04-24 03:40 PM
So Guys...
This is something really cheap of you people to think.....
I read a lot of posts where they mentioned that chuck should proceed with the bill.... so that small desi companies dont perish and that will stop abusing the H1B program...
I really dont understand that no one condemed that remark.. Guys who work in big companies are safe by this rule... So what happens to the one sustaining the so called abuses and remaining intact to get their GC's
No wonder we are not able to make progress as much as those illegal immi's do...
Way to go guys... This kind of spirit will take us to great highs
BR,
Karthik
This is something really cheap of you people to think.....
I read a lot of posts where they mentioned that chuck should proceed with the bill.... so that small desi companies dont perish and that will stop abusing the H1B program...
I really dont understand that no one condemed that remark.. Guys who work in big companies are safe by this rule... So what happens to the one sustaining the so called abuses and remaining intact to get their GC's
No wonder we are not able to make progress as much as those illegal immi's do...
Way to go guys... This kind of spirit will take us to great highs
BR,
Karthik
hot Mary J. Blige in Big
GC_newbee
11-06 10:06 PM
how do i check if my name is stuck in fbi namecheck or cleared? Just callin USCIS will provide the info or is there anythin to be done.
I had applied for 485 on July 2 nd.
I had applied for 485 on July 2 nd.
more...
house Mary J. Blige- Her hair is
Sri_1975
06-18 03:35 PM
Thinking about it instead of everyone filing individual complaints with ICE is there a way we can collectively file a lawsuit against companies ( atleast 2 to 3) on L1 misuse? Would this get some attention?
tattoo mary j blige hair
MeraNaamJoker
08-16 10:08 AM
i got my 'decision' email on 10th. But after that nothing. No CPO email/No welcome email/ No LUD.
I am hoping that they didn't let my case 'drop through cracks'. Considering USCIS's way of working I wouldn't be surprised. Will give a week or two more.
You got it right.
They have thier own of operation. My CPO status was registered on Aug 5th. I got CPO email the next day. Then on August 12 it went back to post decision activity. I got the approval or welcome mail (snail) on August 12th itself. After that there is not change or update. All we can do is to sit back and wait for little bit more.
I am hoping that they didn't let my case 'drop through cracks'. Considering USCIS's way of working I wouldn't be surprised. Will give a week or two more.
You got it right.
They have thier own of operation. My CPO status was registered on Aug 5th. I got CPO email the next day. Then on August 12 it went back to post decision activity. I got the approval or welcome mail (snail) on August 12th itself. After that there is not change or update. All we can do is to sit back and wait for little bit more.
more...
pictures Mary J Blige
gc28262
09-09 02:50 PM
Called all except Steve King.
called my local congressman too.
called my local congressman too.
dresses Mary J. Blige wearing a sleek
pappu
10-17 05:29 PM
If you get different A#s then definitely there is a possibility of delays in the application.
I am not sure what happens with namechecks. Need to research further. My guess is you will have double chances of getting stuck in namechecks! This assumption is based on the fact that multiple filers need to undergo fingerprinting and background checks multiple times and thus chances of getting stuck in namechecks must also increase for them.
I am not sure what happens with namechecks. Need to research further. My guess is you will have double chances of getting stuck in namechecks! This assumption is based on the fact that multiple filers need to undergo fingerprinting and background checks multiple times and thus chances of getting stuck in namechecks must also increase for them.
more...
makeup Mary J was also getting her
thecipher5
10-05 09:35 AM
I'm also in a similar situation...
Our priority date is April 2006 and we'd received a RFE in 2009 which we'd responded in June 2009, however, still no update on our case status.
I'd opened a SR, send an email to Nebraska service center and also approached my local senator/congressman, but no update as of yet and just the standard reply.
What to do to expediate? We've been current for more than a month now! :(
thank you!
thecipher5
Our priority date is April 2006 and we'd received a RFE in 2009 which we'd responded in June 2009, however, still no update on our case status.
I'd opened a SR, send an email to Nebraska service center and also approached my local senator/congressman, but no update as of yet and just the standard reply.
What to do to expediate? We've been current for more than a month now! :(
thank you!
thecipher5
girlfriend Mary+J+Blige
brshankar
08-07 11:47 AM
Ok guys, I got a bunch of red dots.. what more can you expect from people whose comments are as below...
********************
bitch, wtf "Rolling_Flood"
stop making dumb arguments. if you don't like this thread stay away from it.
you have no clue who gives you reds and greens, don't presume. plenty of people quietly read and can spot out the rubbish. and no one can give two reds in a row, so i'm another person. Glad to see acceptance finally that PhDs are being disadvantaged
****************************
1. Rolling_Flood, with this temper I am sure you are going to piss off your lawyer with whom you would be working (if at all you do..) on getting portability removed.
2. �if you don't like this thread stay away from it. Lots of people disagree, that does not mean that only people who agree with you can post here. Also, how will I know if I am going to like the thread or not without visiting it?.
NKR Dude,
I give you a green.
Some guys dont have the guts to come out openly in the forum to accuse us because they know that they will be banned by moderators. They just give us red dots and call us all sorts of names like moron and ....... in private.
Everybody has the right to disapprove a post but they have no right to use bad language.
Hope these guys understand this is a forum for good cause and they are misusing it.
Thanks
********************
bitch, wtf "Rolling_Flood"
stop making dumb arguments. if you don't like this thread stay away from it.
you have no clue who gives you reds and greens, don't presume. plenty of people quietly read and can spot out the rubbish. and no one can give two reds in a row, so i'm another person. Glad to see acceptance finally that PhDs are being disadvantaged
****************************
1. Rolling_Flood, with this temper I am sure you are going to piss off your lawyer with whom you would be working (if at all you do..) on getting portability removed.
2. �if you don't like this thread stay away from it. Lots of people disagree, that does not mean that only people who agree with you can post here. Also, how will I know if I am going to like the thread or not without visiting it?.
NKR Dude,
I give you a green.
Some guys dont have the guts to come out openly in the forum to accuse us because they know that they will be banned by moderators. They just give us red dots and call us all sorts of names like moron and ....... in private.
Everybody has the right to disapprove a post but they have no right to use bad language.
Hope these guys understand this is a forum for good cause and they are misusing it.
Thanks
hairstyles mary j blige hair color. hot
sjkumar
03-29 02:11 PM
Thats.. Good News..
Bpositive
02-12 09:43 AM
i am glad it got resolved...
old_hat
05-11 12:14 AM
See the url below.
http://www.informationweek.com/news/global-cio/training/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=215900774&subSection=H1B
"The Computing Research Association's annual Taulbee Survey of 192 U.S. universities with doctoral programs found that total enrollment by majors and pre-majors in computer science increased 6.2% last year. If only declared majors are considered, the figure jumps to an 8.1% increase, the first boost in computer science majors in six years. "
Are you happy now? Since H1-B quota is reduced, more students are considering computer science as a viable option. If H1-B is limited only for genuine requirements by american companies for the best and brightest and not used as displacing american companies by indian crooks from TCS/INFY etc., even more americans will go for those degrees.
Are you satisfied? Now get lost!!
Go f*** urself. It was your fellow country-men (a jerk desparately trying to immigrate to US) who was making nonsense incest allegations first in this forum about americans. Do you get it,IDIOT, before lecturing me?
I don't give a damn what your epics say or what you practice in India. All I pointed out was teh corruption in India pointed out by international agencies compared to western democracies.
dude, not a meaningful response. I asked you to give me the break up of foreign students. the report just talks about total number of students increasing. And again it nowhere gives data to suggest that responder thinks that reduction of h1 visa numbers is the reason. I will give you a very simple reason. It took tech sector a good 3-4 years to get out of the dot com mess!
Dude it seems you are not doing too well in IT but you should thank your stars that you did not consider the alternative career of law. you would have been massacred. your points are vague. you make utterances that tie yourself in knots and you throw words you know very little about. Start with naimg two indian epics.. next step find brahma there.
btw "f** u" does not qualify as an argument. you can thrust it where you are speaking from.
http://www.informationweek.com/news/global-cio/training/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=215900774&subSection=H1B
"The Computing Research Association's annual Taulbee Survey of 192 U.S. universities with doctoral programs found that total enrollment by majors and pre-majors in computer science increased 6.2% last year. If only declared majors are considered, the figure jumps to an 8.1% increase, the first boost in computer science majors in six years. "
Are you happy now? Since H1-B quota is reduced, more students are considering computer science as a viable option. If H1-B is limited only for genuine requirements by american companies for the best and brightest and not used as displacing american companies by indian crooks from TCS/INFY etc., even more americans will go for those degrees.
Are you satisfied? Now get lost!!
Go f*** urself. It was your fellow country-men (a jerk desparately trying to immigrate to US) who was making nonsense incest allegations first in this forum about americans. Do you get it,IDIOT, before lecturing me?
I don't give a damn what your epics say or what you practice in India. All I pointed out was teh corruption in India pointed out by international agencies compared to western democracies.
dude, not a meaningful response. I asked you to give me the break up of foreign students. the report just talks about total number of students increasing. And again it nowhere gives data to suggest that responder thinks that reduction of h1 visa numbers is the reason. I will give you a very simple reason. It took tech sector a good 3-4 years to get out of the dot com mess!
Dude it seems you are not doing too well in IT but you should thank your stars that you did not consider the alternative career of law. you would have been massacred. your points are vague. you make utterances that tie yourself in knots and you throw words you know very little about. Start with naimg two indian epics.. next step find brahma there.
btw "f** u" does not qualify as an argument. you can thrust it where you are speaking from.
No comments:
Post a Comment