shivaz90
07-13 11:44 AM
Reading through this thread I find this intense debate about the value and intentions of Murthy's letter.
Let's first deal with the value part: This letter could be from any one of us or anybody else from Timbuktu. Why does this letter have any special significance except that the DHS secretary may read it because Murthy and the secretary are alumni of the same institution (see how carefully this part is added to the letter for our consumption). Now this feeds into the intention part. Even if Murthy wrote a letter to the DHS Secretary why did she have to publicize it on her website (except for the gullible among us to take notice). Generally publicized letters have value if they are from some influential policy maker or lawmaker. In this case Murthy is neither and so her letter does not add or subtract any value to this debate. So we are left with the question of who gains by publicizing this letter. Your guess is as good as mine.
Ultimately I am left wondering why this thread was started in the first place except to garner cheap publicity. Do we really have so much time on our hands?
"Why does Murthy publicize such a letter?" - well it means that she has a client base who needs to know what she is doing in her capacity as thier attorney. Second - there are thousands of Murthy.com members who are neither her client nor her well wishers - but who go to her site to find what is going on latest in the world of Immigration. Not to discredit anyone's effort in this issue - ask any immigrant or potential immigrant into this country about immigration related question, I can guarantee you that they have gained almost all thier knowledge about the process from Murthy.com site. Intended or unintended - the message to DHS is welcome, particularly at this time, be it from whoever.
Anyone who has been a regular murthy.com visitor knows that her site consists of all her interactions with all the Agency people and government officials regarding immigration. Its called the "Internet". People post stuff - period! If it is meant to garner attention, yes, people will post messages. Its far better than a bunch of goof balls posting in youtube about thier experience with coke and spearmint. Please come out of the caves - people.
Let's first deal with the value part: This letter could be from any one of us or anybody else from Timbuktu. Why does this letter have any special significance except that the DHS secretary may read it because Murthy and the secretary are alumni of the same institution (see how carefully this part is added to the letter for our consumption). Now this feeds into the intention part. Even if Murthy wrote a letter to the DHS Secretary why did she have to publicize it on her website (except for the gullible among us to take notice). Generally publicized letters have value if they are from some influential policy maker or lawmaker. In this case Murthy is neither and so her letter does not add or subtract any value to this debate. So we are left with the question of who gains by publicizing this letter. Your guess is as good as mine.
Ultimately I am left wondering why this thread was started in the first place except to garner cheap publicity. Do we really have so much time on our hands?
"Why does Murthy publicize such a letter?" - well it means that she has a client base who needs to know what she is doing in her capacity as thier attorney. Second - there are thousands of Murthy.com members who are neither her client nor her well wishers - but who go to her site to find what is going on latest in the world of Immigration. Not to discredit anyone's effort in this issue - ask any immigrant or potential immigrant into this country about immigration related question, I can guarantee you that they have gained almost all thier knowledge about the process from Murthy.com site. Intended or unintended - the message to DHS is welcome, particularly at this time, be it from whoever.
Anyone who has been a regular murthy.com visitor knows that her site consists of all her interactions with all the Agency people and government officials regarding immigration. Its called the "Internet". People post stuff - period! If it is meant to garner attention, yes, people will post messages. Its far better than a bunch of goof balls posting in youtube about thier experience with coke and spearmint. Please come out of the caves - people.
wallpaper Big Basket with pink flowers
go_gc_way
01-15 11:13 PM
Bumping /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
amitjoey
08-11 10:21 AM
Most of the Eb3's are either working for big companies who won't do GC in EB2 or not qualified for eb2 ( so called 3 year degree ) and enjoying all these years when they know clearly eb3 is not going any where ...what in the world prevent them to move up the ladder and porting their PDs ...They dont want to take any risk and just show their frustation in internet forums
As some one in the forum quoted "There is a path of joy and there is the path of pleasure. Pondering on them, the wise (eb1 ,pre-approved labor and eb2 inorder ) chooses the path of joy; the fool takes the path of pleasure."
Mr Path of Joy
I am EB3 India working for a small company in construction design industry. I have enough experience, qualifications and degrees for an EB2. But it is not as simple as you make it sound.
A major part- 8 out of my 15 year experience in this field has been with this employer and although my employer supports me, they are simply not hiring and have been having a difficult time since 2007. So, they cannot file for an EB2 Labor.
I cannot change jobs, since my qualifications and experience will put me in a different job-description and title which I cannot because of how AC21 interprets the laws.
So it is not as white and black as you make it sound. Most EB3 folks started their process way early in their careers and have moved on since. Some of us have been waiting for 10 years and have been in the country for 15 or more years.
Some started during the last recession in 2001-2002 when EB2 was in scrutiny and dates were current for all, most employers and lawyers were touting the EB3 route.
Anycase, I do not expect you to understand our situation. So continue speeding on your path of joy.
As some one in the forum quoted "There is a path of joy and there is the path of pleasure. Pondering on them, the wise (eb1 ,pre-approved labor and eb2 inorder ) chooses the path of joy; the fool takes the path of pleasure."
Mr Path of Joy
I am EB3 India working for a small company in construction design industry. I have enough experience, qualifications and degrees for an EB2. But it is not as simple as you make it sound.
A major part- 8 out of my 15 year experience in this field has been with this employer and although my employer supports me, they are simply not hiring and have been having a difficult time since 2007. So, they cannot file for an EB2 Labor.
I cannot change jobs, since my qualifications and experience will put me in a different job-description and title which I cannot because of how AC21 interprets the laws.
So it is not as white and black as you make it sound. Most EB3 folks started their process way early in their careers and have moved on since. Some of us have been waiting for 10 years and have been in the country for 15 or more years.
Some started during the last recession in 2001-2002 when EB2 was in scrutiny and dates were current for all, most employers and lawyers were touting the EB3 route.
Anycase, I do not expect you to understand our situation. So continue speeding on your path of joy.
2011 simple – pink roses massed
ItIsNotFunny
10-15 02:28 PM
I have a doubt about what can be accomplished by the flower campaign. I am totally for it if it would help but just think - it is not in USCIS hands to assign more visas to EB3 or EB2. The number of visas is limited and the number of people waiting for the visas is huge. That is the whole cause of retrogression . If there were as many visas as the people everything would be current.
This is a simple matter of demand and supply . The thing that can help is visa recapture but that again USCIS can't do and only the Congress . What we need to do is point our efforts in the right direction .
Think how the supply is controlled?
Just as a hypothetical example, if USCIS makes a spill over policy that ROW can not lead any other country by more than 3 years.
If we try we can achieve something, atleast we can see some avenues. If we sit silent - Nope, then we are loosers not fighters.
This is a simple matter of demand and supply . The thing that can help is visa recapture but that again USCIS can't do and only the Congress . What we need to do is point our efforts in the right direction .
Think how the supply is controlled?
Just as a hypothetical example, if USCIS makes a spill over policy that ROW can not lead any other country by more than 3 years.
If we try we can achieve something, atleast we can see some avenues. If we sit silent - Nope, then we are loosers not fighters.
more...
indio0617
02-15 01:06 PM
Berkeleybee,
Just so that you know, I am caught in the name check too. This is a bigger blackhole than even labor processing. Becos atleast labor processing your Immigration Attorneys can write to BECs (You may or may not get a reply, that is a different issue, but atleast it is allowed). In case of FBI name check, you just cant do much. It is a much dreaded process in the whole game and needs to get enough focus. Eventually, it is going to be everybodys problem.
Thanks.
You are probably aware of these and have already tried it.
1. Heard the attorney / employer can file for some extra paperwork to expedite name check. I am not sure what it is... Have you checked into it.
2. Request your Senator / Congress staff to look ibto your case. I heard that often hastens the process. Some of my friends have had success with that approach.
FYI: My employer (Healthcare) has had phenomenal success with I-485 approvals. Average processing time has been 6 months.
Just so that you know, I am caught in the name check too. This is a bigger blackhole than even labor processing. Becos atleast labor processing your Immigration Attorneys can write to BECs (You may or may not get a reply, that is a different issue, but atleast it is allowed). In case of FBI name check, you just cant do much. It is a much dreaded process in the whole game and needs to get enough focus. Eventually, it is going to be everybodys problem.
Thanks.
You are probably aware of these and have already tried it.
1. Heard the attorney / employer can file for some extra paperwork to expedite name check. I am not sure what it is... Have you checked into it.
2. Request your Senator / Congress staff to look ibto your case. I heard that often hastens the process. Some of my friends have had success with that approach.
FYI: My employer (Healthcare) has had phenomenal success with I-485 approvals. Average processing time has been 6 months.
nojoke
02-27 09:11 PM
I am tired of listening to depressing economic news and beating dead horse on this forum. I know you are also tired, but trust me this doesn't help anyone. I can say this because I come from area dependent on free-falling auto-industry ... yeah I am from Detroit.
Times may be tough, but we are making tougher for ourselves by re-hashing these bleak developments. Remember misery attracts misery!
Easy solution - Please don't be forced to read them.
misery didn't attrach misery -housing bubble attracts misery.
Times may be tough, but we are making tougher for ourselves by re-hashing these bleak developments. Remember misery attracts misery!
Easy solution - Please don't be forced to read them.
misery didn't attrach misery -housing bubble attracts misery.
more...
ita
09-10 11:09 AM
I'm not able to figure out how to post a mssg in chat..is it 'coz I'm restricted or something? At the bottom of the page I see my name as logged in members though..I've over 150 posts and 4 dots..not enough for access to chat or is it that I'm not able to figure out how to post mssgs? Appreciate it if someone can explain it to me.
Thank you.
Thank you.
2010 flowers, roses, pink,
paskal
01-21 02:21 AM
i like the way you did this
i wonder though if it's better to adjust it for depnedents
per USCIS figures the average is 2.5 individuals in a family for each approval
The timeline is stunninh when you put that in.
I will retire or die before a GC......!
i wonder though if it's better to adjust it for depnedents
per USCIS figures the average is 2.5 individuals in a family for each approval
The timeline is stunninh when you put that in.
I will retire or die before a GC......!
more...
serg
07-16 09:25 PM
As someone told, webfaxes/emails do not have big influence/impact, why we can't just send regular mails? Guys, we spent $20-$40 each on flower campaign, why we can't spend 39c to send a letter?
hair 30 yellow and pink roses
BlueSunD
02-27 09:33 PM
If it ain�t too late... here... http://www.jozvex.com/tutorials/fg.html :)
more...
gc_lover
07-18 09:54 AM
I checked with somebody who has hired Rajiv Khanna as his lawyer. He said that those who had filed in July are fine and there is no need to re-file it.
I am still waiting to hear from my lawyer though.
I am still waiting to hear from my lawyer though.
hot 12 Pink Roses Basket
gc28262
06-10 01:01 PM
svr_76,
Your arguments are baseless. No company will ever hire an H1B to replace an equally qualified Citizen/Green card holder. Company has to spend a lot on H1B employees on lawyer fees and other complications.
Anti-immigrant lawmakers are using the excuse of economy to push through their legislations.
Your arguments are baseless. No company will ever hire an H1B to replace an equally qualified Citizen/Green card holder. Company has to spend a lot on H1B employees on lawyer fees and other complications.
Anti-immigrant lawmakers are using the excuse of economy to push through their legislations.
more...
house 12 Pink Roses GBP 34.99
natrajs
08-16 03:38 PM
Participate in the Rally
Make sure our voices are heard
Support IV
Make sure our voices are heard
Support IV
tattoo pink flowers roses in her
NKR
10-16 05:04 PM
I think you know pretty well what I am talking about. USCIS has not "reacted" in any malicious way against the immigrant community wrt. to July 07 actions. If you find they have done so they will be severely answerable to various laws in the country. Do you think the lawyers will keep quite when they sense blood in the water? There has been no "reaction" by USCIS, except as a figment of imagination in the minds of this community.
What happened to your sense of judgment, whoever said that USCIS is doing it maliciously? They reacted for sure but within legal boundaries. I do not understand why you keep twisted people�s answers.
USCIS has always gone by RD, not PD to a large extent (there have been deviations here and there, but none of them are due to policy issues).
That is exactly I am saying, I am asking why should it be this way, this is totally wrong. They should go by PD. Even if my application was not moved to another centre mine still would not have gotten approved because I applied in Aug and not July. I mentioned that to tell you that I have to wait even more now.
Now if you ask me why I applied in Aug and not in Jul, it is because my family was not in US at that time. If you had told me beforehand about the impending fiasco I wouldn�t have sent them in the first place. I had to call them back and cancel my trip spending hundreds of $s.
PD based processing is not sustainable as I had highlighted before. If you applied for 485 before someone else, you should be approved first. Now I am saying applied for 485, not Labor/Perm. Now dont come back with a post saying I applied July 2 00:01, but someone with July 3rd 23:55 is getting approved before I am. Afford some granularity of a week or so.
Why is it not sustainable, now you are defending something that is wrong, why should I have to wait though my GC was started ages before?
I did not say USCIS is "doodh ka dula", but DoL and USCIS are two different entities. You cant blame one for the problems of the other. USCIS has its share of blames, but to blame everything on USCIS just shows that you have lost your objectivity. You don't want to be blamed for the actions of your colleague, so why do you blame USCIS for things which are not their doing??
Just because I said USCIS is doing something wrong (not following processing order..) doesn�t mean I said that DOS did something right.. you keep assuming things..
If you keep blaming USCIS for everything (I am sure some of you want to blame the economic crisis, the Darfur issue etc. on USCIS too, come on!, you know you wanted to ;) ), the community's credibility comes into question.
Again you are running your imagination wild, who blamed all the other things on USCIS?..
End of the day, you (and/or others) are distracting the OP's idea with FUD. If you have constructive ideas to channel OPs enthusiasm you should suggest alternatives. Not make her/him fearful with untenable accusations of retribution from USCIS.
Dude, show me one post of mine which said anything against the idea. I even gave a green for what he is trying to do, at least he is doing something while the rest of us are watching�.
What happened to your sense of judgment, whoever said that USCIS is doing it maliciously? They reacted for sure but within legal boundaries. I do not understand why you keep twisted people�s answers.
USCIS has always gone by RD, not PD to a large extent (there have been deviations here and there, but none of them are due to policy issues).
That is exactly I am saying, I am asking why should it be this way, this is totally wrong. They should go by PD. Even if my application was not moved to another centre mine still would not have gotten approved because I applied in Aug and not July. I mentioned that to tell you that I have to wait even more now.
Now if you ask me why I applied in Aug and not in Jul, it is because my family was not in US at that time. If you had told me beforehand about the impending fiasco I wouldn�t have sent them in the first place. I had to call them back and cancel my trip spending hundreds of $s.
PD based processing is not sustainable as I had highlighted before. If you applied for 485 before someone else, you should be approved first. Now I am saying applied for 485, not Labor/Perm. Now dont come back with a post saying I applied July 2 00:01, but someone with July 3rd 23:55 is getting approved before I am. Afford some granularity of a week or so.
Why is it not sustainable, now you are defending something that is wrong, why should I have to wait though my GC was started ages before?
I did not say USCIS is "doodh ka dula", but DoL and USCIS are two different entities. You cant blame one for the problems of the other. USCIS has its share of blames, but to blame everything on USCIS just shows that you have lost your objectivity. You don't want to be blamed for the actions of your colleague, so why do you blame USCIS for things which are not their doing??
Just because I said USCIS is doing something wrong (not following processing order..) doesn�t mean I said that DOS did something right.. you keep assuming things..
If you keep blaming USCIS for everything (I am sure some of you want to blame the economic crisis, the Darfur issue etc. on USCIS too, come on!, you know you wanted to ;) ), the community's credibility comes into question.
Again you are running your imagination wild, who blamed all the other things on USCIS?..
End of the day, you (and/or others) are distracting the OP's idea with FUD. If you have constructive ideas to channel OPs enthusiasm you should suggest alternatives. Not make her/him fearful with untenable accusations of retribution from USCIS.
Dude, show me one post of mine which said anything against the idea. I even gave a green for what he is trying to do, at least he is doing something while the rest of us are watching�.
more...
pictures Grace - Pink Roses, a
ajthakur
07-14 08:08 PM
The LUD on my 140 is for sunday 7/13/2008. Why would they touch it on a sunday.
dresses Bunch of Pink Roses;
ek_bechara
09-10 05:33 PM
Citizenship? LOL... you made my day.
more...
makeup Flowers: Pink Roses
deepakjain
08-10 04:36 PM
Dude,
now a days predictions have become more like weather forecasting saying that past few years we had rains around this time hence forth it may rain. :p
2010, all those who filed 485 by 2006 will be cleared up and will be given GC, 2010 end there will be another wave of 485 filers who will continue as cash cows for next 5 years for EAD and AP, 2007 july filers will be cleared up by 2012. Do not ask the source of information it is more of stock market and weather forecast were in stocks falls and gains every 5th year and 6th of June is the first day of monsoon in mumbai....:D
No point in giving stess to your grey cells, all are predictive cycle &, process
now a days predictions have become more like weather forecasting saying that past few years we had rains around this time hence forth it may rain. :p
2010, all those who filed 485 by 2006 will be cleared up and will be given GC, 2010 end there will be another wave of 485 filers who will continue as cash cows for next 5 years for EAD and AP, 2007 july filers will be cleared up by 2012. Do not ask the source of information it is more of stock market and weather forecast were in stocks falls and gains every 5th year and 6th of June is the first day of monsoon in mumbai....:D
No point in giving stess to your grey cells, all are predictive cycle &, process
girlfriend Light Pink Flower Carpet Rose
Jaime
09-13 01:48 AM
C -u -n -dc!!!!!!!!!!
hairstyles 24 Pink red roses bunch
CSPAvictim
07-09 06:30 PM
I came across this law about the departmental control of numerical limitations, and I'd appreciate it if you all could post your interpretations of the same.
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
chanduv23
07-29 01:48 PM
In that case, employers should mention the following in the offer letter
" In case, in future, if economy goes bad and recession occurs,we cannot sponsor your green card since it is easy to find american citizens who has minimum qualification."
This should be mentioned on the offer letters given by big comapnies.Then it is up to H1B candidate whenter to take the offer(risk) or not.
Can these companies do this????
Though it is unfortunate, I don't think you are understanding stuff right. If you think you have a case to fight, go ahead and do it. Consult an employment lawyer and see what can be done.
Anywhere in the world, it is always the employer who has the upper hand and you fight only if you are capable of.
It looks to me that you are venting out on the employer on this forum because you feel decieved or cheated, but the reality is that, it is just an unfortunate situation for you and all of us go through bad and frustrating times.
There are some companies who have filed EB1C left and right and employees got GCs in few months, there are companies who file EB3 for most qualified and that too when in 5th year.
A lot of physicians get future offers while they do fellowships etc... and the employer actualy files directly for GC and these folks get GC by the time their fellowships are over and they start work immediately.
Work with the situation, work with your employer, look for options, try to infleunce the system to make process better .... along the way you will see that you can achieve a lot by being positive about things.
Try to "Make things happen" rather than expecting things to happen, because things change and we all know "change is constant"
" In case, in future, if economy goes bad and recession occurs,we cannot sponsor your green card since it is easy to find american citizens who has minimum qualification."
This should be mentioned on the offer letters given by big comapnies.Then it is up to H1B candidate whenter to take the offer(risk) or not.
Can these companies do this????
Though it is unfortunate, I don't think you are understanding stuff right. If you think you have a case to fight, go ahead and do it. Consult an employment lawyer and see what can be done.
Anywhere in the world, it is always the employer who has the upper hand and you fight only if you are capable of.
It looks to me that you are venting out on the employer on this forum because you feel decieved or cheated, but the reality is that, it is just an unfortunate situation for you and all of us go through bad and frustrating times.
There are some companies who have filed EB1C left and right and employees got GCs in few months, there are companies who file EB3 for most qualified and that too when in 5th year.
A lot of physicians get future offers while they do fellowships etc... and the employer actualy files directly for GC and these folks get GC by the time their fellowships are over and they start work immediately.
Work with the situation, work with your employer, look for options, try to infleunce the system to make process better .... along the way you will see that you can achieve a lot by being positive about things.
Try to "Make things happen" rather than expecting things to happen, because things change and we all know "change is constant"
GCBy3000
04-04 04:58 PM
http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=22027
No comments:
Post a Comment