mundada
01-12 04:53 PM
Here is the history of derivative acts under 14th amendment related to employement:
14th Amendment of the United States Constitution: guarantees due process and equal protection under the laws.
The Civil Rights Act of 1866, Section 1981: covers race-based discrimination by employers. Individuals may sue to assert their rights under this Act; which, unlike Title VII, has no limitation on back-pay liability.
The Civil rights Act of 1871, Section 1983: provides persons who believe they have been deprived of rights, privileges or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws to redress and holds those responsible for the deprivation liable to the person injured.
Equal Pay Act of 1963: forbids pay differentials based on sex. It covers all employees who come under the Fair Labor Standards Act, plus executive, administrative, professional employees and outside sales people. Investigation and compliance responsibilities were transferred from the Labor Department to the EEOC on July 1, 1979.
Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act: bans discrimination in employment because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. It covers all terms and conditions of employment; and, it holds employers responsible for any discrimination that goes on within the employer's organization. Title VII is administered by the EEOC and covers employers with 15 or more employees.
Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA): bans employment discrimination because of age against anyone 40 years of age and older, (also know as ADEA). Investigation and compliance responsibilities were transferred from the Labor Department to the EEOC on July 1, 1979.
Executive Order 11246: requires Federal contractors to include a nondiscrimination clause in all contracts and subcontracts in excess of $110.000 and all construction projects financed, even in part, with Federal funds. Revised Order No. 4 requires a written affirmative action program from contractors with 50 or more employees and contracts of $50,000 or more. This order is enforced by the U.S. Department of Labor.
Rehabilitation Act of 1973: Section 503 requires employers with government contracts and subcontracts of $2,500 or more to take affirmative action for qualified handicapped individuals. The regulations implementing the Act require "reasonable accommodation" to the physical and mental limitations of handicapped employees and applicants. Section 504 covers the employment practices of all recipients of Federal financial assistance, a broad spectrum of agencies and institutions from private employers operating under a Federal grant, to public schools, colleges and universities. Both Sections 503 and 504 are enforced by the OFCCP.
Pregnancy Discrimination Act: amends Title VII and states that employment discrimination based on pregnancy, childbirth, and related medical conditions is prohibited under Title VII. According to EEOC, the amendment, which affects those employers under the jurisdiction of Title VII, requires that "persons affected by pregnancy, childbirth, and related medical conditions be treated the same as persons affected by other temporary disabilities."
South Carolina Human Affairs Law: prohibits discrimination based on race, religion, color, age, sex, disability and national origin.
Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA): gives protections to qualified individuals with disabilities that are like those provided under Title VII. It also guarantees equal opportunity in employment, public accommodations, transportation, state/local government services and telecommunication. ADA is enforced by EEOC.
1991 Civl Rights Act of 1991: allows employees to seek compensatory and punitive damages and for trial-by-jury. (this amends Title VII.)
=====
Now the way I interpret it, the requirement to not discriminate based on place of birth is protected by constitution under 14th amendment.
The Equal Protection Clause, part of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, provides that "no state shall ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws". The Equal Protection Clause can be seen as an attempt to secure the promise of the United States' professed commitment to the proposition that "all men are created equal" by empowering the judiciary to enforce that principle against the states.
Furthermore, the precedent rulings related to The Civil Rights Act of 1964 indicate how strictly this is interpreted and enforced. For example, in 1974, the Supreme Court ruled that the San Francisco school district was violating non-English speaking students' rights under the 1964 act by placing them in regular classes rather than providing some sort of accommodation for them.
I therefore believe there is a good chance at the Supreme Court ruling that because of long wait times of more than 3 years for a Green Card plus requirement of same or similar job during that long wait until the green card is received plus country quota affecting people born only in few countries leads to disadvantage for people of these few countries at work.
And yes, even I took law course and gave a seminar during my MBA. But even you would concur that this course at best is basic and does not make a person authority of the US legal system.
Finally, forget me or you, even a lawyer cannot say for sure what the final ruling will be in any case. And hence the best a person can do is give an educated opinion. In addition by human nature, the way I would interpret laws would be to my advantage while the way you would interpret them would be to your advantage. And hence I can understand your biases (and mine as well) because in case the country quota is found illegal by the US Supreme Court, it is the ROW that is going to be affected the most.
Don't want to pick on anyone one or anything.. just case-in-point to what I posted earlier.. here we have intense legal debates, and legal opinions with people who can not distinguish between Title VII and EEO which are legislative laws and between the constitution. These laws are not part of the constitution and they include provisions for federal and local governments and their agencies to override parts of rules if they deem necessary.
14th Amendment of the United States Constitution: guarantees due process and equal protection under the laws.
The Civil Rights Act of 1866, Section 1981: covers race-based discrimination by employers. Individuals may sue to assert their rights under this Act; which, unlike Title VII, has no limitation on back-pay liability.
The Civil rights Act of 1871, Section 1983: provides persons who believe they have been deprived of rights, privileges or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws to redress and holds those responsible for the deprivation liable to the person injured.
Equal Pay Act of 1963: forbids pay differentials based on sex. It covers all employees who come under the Fair Labor Standards Act, plus executive, administrative, professional employees and outside sales people. Investigation and compliance responsibilities were transferred from the Labor Department to the EEOC on July 1, 1979.
Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act: bans discrimination in employment because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. It covers all terms and conditions of employment; and, it holds employers responsible for any discrimination that goes on within the employer's organization. Title VII is administered by the EEOC and covers employers with 15 or more employees.
Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA): bans employment discrimination because of age against anyone 40 years of age and older, (also know as ADEA). Investigation and compliance responsibilities were transferred from the Labor Department to the EEOC on July 1, 1979.
Executive Order 11246: requires Federal contractors to include a nondiscrimination clause in all contracts and subcontracts in excess of $110.000 and all construction projects financed, even in part, with Federal funds. Revised Order No. 4 requires a written affirmative action program from contractors with 50 or more employees and contracts of $50,000 or more. This order is enforced by the U.S. Department of Labor.
Rehabilitation Act of 1973: Section 503 requires employers with government contracts and subcontracts of $2,500 or more to take affirmative action for qualified handicapped individuals. The regulations implementing the Act require "reasonable accommodation" to the physical and mental limitations of handicapped employees and applicants. Section 504 covers the employment practices of all recipients of Federal financial assistance, a broad spectrum of agencies and institutions from private employers operating under a Federal grant, to public schools, colleges and universities. Both Sections 503 and 504 are enforced by the OFCCP.
Pregnancy Discrimination Act: amends Title VII and states that employment discrimination based on pregnancy, childbirth, and related medical conditions is prohibited under Title VII. According to EEOC, the amendment, which affects those employers under the jurisdiction of Title VII, requires that "persons affected by pregnancy, childbirth, and related medical conditions be treated the same as persons affected by other temporary disabilities."
South Carolina Human Affairs Law: prohibits discrimination based on race, religion, color, age, sex, disability and national origin.
Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA): gives protections to qualified individuals with disabilities that are like those provided under Title VII. It also guarantees equal opportunity in employment, public accommodations, transportation, state/local government services and telecommunication. ADA is enforced by EEOC.
1991 Civl Rights Act of 1991: allows employees to seek compensatory and punitive damages and for trial-by-jury. (this amends Title VII.)
=====
Now the way I interpret it, the requirement to not discriminate based on place of birth is protected by constitution under 14th amendment.
The Equal Protection Clause, part of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, provides that "no state shall ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws". The Equal Protection Clause can be seen as an attempt to secure the promise of the United States' professed commitment to the proposition that "all men are created equal" by empowering the judiciary to enforce that principle against the states.
Furthermore, the precedent rulings related to The Civil Rights Act of 1964 indicate how strictly this is interpreted and enforced. For example, in 1974, the Supreme Court ruled that the San Francisco school district was violating non-English speaking students' rights under the 1964 act by placing them in regular classes rather than providing some sort of accommodation for them.
I therefore believe there is a good chance at the Supreme Court ruling that because of long wait times of more than 3 years for a Green Card plus requirement of same or similar job during that long wait until the green card is received plus country quota affecting people born only in few countries leads to disadvantage for people of these few countries at work.
And yes, even I took law course and gave a seminar during my MBA. But even you would concur that this course at best is basic and does not make a person authority of the US legal system.
Finally, forget me or you, even a lawyer cannot say for sure what the final ruling will be in any case. And hence the best a person can do is give an educated opinion. In addition by human nature, the way I would interpret laws would be to my advantage while the way you would interpret them would be to your advantage. And hence I can understand your biases (and mine as well) because in case the country quota is found illegal by the US Supreme Court, it is the ROW that is going to be affected the most.
Don't want to pick on anyone one or anything.. just case-in-point to what I posted earlier.. here we have intense legal debates, and legal opinions with people who can not distinguish between Title VII and EEO which are legislative laws and between the constitution. These laws are not part of the constitution and they include provisions for federal and local governments and their agencies to override parts of rules if they deem necessary.
wallpaper Ronaldo And Real Madrid Not
anilsal
10-04 02:09 PM
He was handling MI chapter.
optimist578
04-10 07:03 AM
I am both surprised and grateful to see the response. I am open for any positions which require expertise in programming, design, research and analysis in Securities industry. I have PM-ed most of the folks here who offered help.
Thanks.
Thanks.
2011 Cristiano Ronaldo scores first
ssa
06-23 06:18 PM
done.
more...
seebi
06-17 02:35 PM
My current H1B was sponosred through an educational institution and was hence cap exempt. Will I be able to transfer my current H1B if I decide to move to a private company?
Thanks!
When I spoke to my Lawyer about the same issue he said that if the H1B visa was never counted against the quota, you can not unless the visa numbers are available in the fiscal year. He also mentioned that the move into for profit company would be considered as a new visa and should counted against the quota.
Thanks!
When I spoke to my Lawyer about the same issue he said that if the H1B visa was never counted against the quota, you can not unless the visa numbers are available in the fiscal year. He also mentioned that the move into for profit company would be considered as a new visa and should counted against the quota.
go_guy123
08-08 11:02 PM
If you dont have an offer from candian employer or you are not an international studen , then you should
�be a skilled worker who has at least one year of experience in one or more of the following occupations:
0111: Financial Managers
0213: Computer and Information Systems Managers
0311: Managers in Health Care
0631: Restaurant and Food Service Managers
0632: Accommodation Service Managers
0711: Construction Managers
1111: Financial Auditors and Accountants
2113: Geologists, Geochemists and Geophysicists
2143: Mining Engineers
2144: Geological Engineers
2145: Petroleum Engineers
3111: Specialist Physicians
3112: General Practitioners and Family Physicians
3141: Audiologists and Speech Language Pathologists
3143: Occupational Therapists
3142: Physiotherapists
3151: Head Nurses and Supervisors
3152: Registered Nurses
3215: Medical Radiation Technologists
3233: Licensed Practical Nurses
4121: University Professors
4131: College and Other Vocational Instructors
6241: Chefs
6242: Cooks
7213: Contractors and Supervisors, Pipefitting Trades
7215: Contractors and Supervisors, Carpentry Trades
7217: Contractors and Supervisors, Heavy Construction Equipment Crews
7241: Electricians (Except Industrial and Power System)
7242: Industrial Electricians
7251: Plumbers
7252: Steamfitters, Pipe fitters and Sprinkler System Installers
7265: Welders and Related Machine Operators
7312: Heavy-Duty Equipment Mechanics
7371: Crane Operators
7372: Drillers and Blasters � Surface Mining, Quarrying and Construction
8221: Supervisors, Mining and Quarrying
8222: Supervisors, Oil and Gas Drilling and Service
9212: Supervisors, Petroleum, Gas and Chemical Processing and Utilities
Where is the computer Engineer or IT analyst, Software Engineer in the list.
So OP (not sure he is in IT) cannot apply for Candada PR.
Yes this rule was added in Feb 2008. Now Canada skilled immigration is mainly open to
people studying/working in Canada.
�be a skilled worker who has at least one year of experience in one or more of the following occupations:
0111: Financial Managers
0213: Computer and Information Systems Managers
0311: Managers in Health Care
0631: Restaurant and Food Service Managers
0632: Accommodation Service Managers
0711: Construction Managers
1111: Financial Auditors and Accountants
2113: Geologists, Geochemists and Geophysicists
2143: Mining Engineers
2144: Geological Engineers
2145: Petroleum Engineers
3111: Specialist Physicians
3112: General Practitioners and Family Physicians
3141: Audiologists and Speech Language Pathologists
3143: Occupational Therapists
3142: Physiotherapists
3151: Head Nurses and Supervisors
3152: Registered Nurses
3215: Medical Radiation Technologists
3233: Licensed Practical Nurses
4121: University Professors
4131: College and Other Vocational Instructors
6241: Chefs
6242: Cooks
7213: Contractors and Supervisors, Pipefitting Trades
7215: Contractors and Supervisors, Carpentry Trades
7217: Contractors and Supervisors, Heavy Construction Equipment Crews
7241: Electricians (Except Industrial and Power System)
7242: Industrial Electricians
7251: Plumbers
7252: Steamfitters, Pipe fitters and Sprinkler System Installers
7265: Welders and Related Machine Operators
7312: Heavy-Duty Equipment Mechanics
7371: Crane Operators
7372: Drillers and Blasters � Surface Mining, Quarrying and Construction
8221: Supervisors, Mining and Quarrying
8222: Supervisors, Oil and Gas Drilling and Service
9212: Supervisors, Petroleum, Gas and Chemical Processing and Utilities
Where is the computer Engineer or IT analyst, Software Engineer in the list.
So OP (not sure he is in IT) cannot apply for Candada PR.
Yes this rule was added in Feb 2008. Now Canada skilled immigration is mainly open to
people studying/working in Canada.
more...
GreenCardLegion
03-21 03:40 PM
I have got an RFE for 485 application. USCIS is asking me for Employment Letter, Paystubs and W2 for the employer I NEVER worked. (I have typed exact message below)
*
This is my situation-
I worked for 'Employer #1' from Jan-2000 to Jan-2005
Then I started working with 'Employer #2' from Jan-2005 to present. Employer #2 filed my H1/Labor/140/485. I am still working for Employer #2
*
However, I thought of changing job in 2006 and 'Employer X' offered me a job and sponsored my H1 and it got approved too, but I changed my mind and decided to continue with my current employer (Employer #2) and I am still with Employer #2. Please note my latest H1B was sponsored by �Employer X�, but I never worked for this Employer.
*
Please advice-
1) What should I send to USCIS? As I don�t have (can�t get) Employment Letter, Paystubs and W2 for �Employer X�
2) Would you consider this as simple case or complicated?
3) Should I hire attorney? (I self filed my 485 in July-2007)
*
*
This is the exact text - (changed Employer names)
Service records indicate that you were granted an H1-B nonimmigrant worker classification for employment from DEC 11, 2006 to DEC 11, 2009 for �Employer X"-. However, according to the G-325a submitted with your application, you had only worked for "Employer #1" from Jan-2000 to Jan-2005 and for the "Employer #2" from Jan-2005 to the present. Please provide evidence that you were employed with �Employer X". Such evidence may include copies of: employment letter, pay stubs or w2s
Thank you for your time and help.
Your post absolutely doesnt make sense. You are asking us here "485 RFE and USCIS asking paystubs for employer you never worked"
This does not seem to be a 485 RFE but a H1 RFE. Put some sense into the post before posting here and confusing people. How can yours be a 485 RFE when employer X never sponsored your GC and when USCIS is asking paystubs from Employer X for H1 transfer and when your GC is still running with Employer 2. Senseless post.
*
This is my situation-
I worked for 'Employer #1' from Jan-2000 to Jan-2005
Then I started working with 'Employer #2' from Jan-2005 to present. Employer #2 filed my H1/Labor/140/485. I am still working for Employer #2
*
However, I thought of changing job in 2006 and 'Employer X' offered me a job and sponsored my H1 and it got approved too, but I changed my mind and decided to continue with my current employer (Employer #2) and I am still with Employer #2. Please note my latest H1B was sponsored by �Employer X�, but I never worked for this Employer.
*
Please advice-
1) What should I send to USCIS? As I don�t have (can�t get) Employment Letter, Paystubs and W2 for �Employer X�
2) Would you consider this as simple case or complicated?
3) Should I hire attorney? (I self filed my 485 in July-2007)
*
*
This is the exact text - (changed Employer names)
Service records indicate that you were granted an H1-B nonimmigrant worker classification for employment from DEC 11, 2006 to DEC 11, 2009 for �Employer X"-. However, according to the G-325a submitted with your application, you had only worked for "Employer #1" from Jan-2000 to Jan-2005 and for the "Employer #2" from Jan-2005 to the present. Please provide evidence that you were employed with �Employer X". Such evidence may include copies of: employment letter, pay stubs or w2s
Thank you for your time and help.
Your post absolutely doesnt make sense. You are asking us here "485 RFE and USCIS asking paystubs for employer you never worked"
This does not seem to be a 485 RFE but a H1 RFE. Put some sense into the post before posting here and confusing people. How can yours be a 485 RFE when employer X never sponsored your GC and when USCIS is asking paystubs from Employer X for H1 transfer and when your GC is still running with Employer 2. Senseless post.
2010 APPLIES) Cristiano Ronaldo
alien2006
06-30 11:00 AM
Seems like this is just a Republican backed bill. Dems will fight this or insist that some provisions for illegals be included as well. Also once elections are over it is possible that the Dems will be majority and then this bill gets kicked to the side.
more...
aadimanav
03-14 06:23 PM
Can this be true?
Some one with 2006 EB3 INDIA got 485-approval today:
http://www..com/discussion-forums/i485-1/81447145/last-page/
Some one with 2006 EB3 INDIA got 485-approval today:
http://www..com/discussion-forums/i485-1/81447145/last-page/
hair Cristiano Ronaldo speaking to
paskal
09-22 02:44 AM
Rally agenda - from the start, the D.C rally has not seemed need-based rally. San Jose rally and flower campaign were need-based. They were needed because USCIS ditched all July hopefuls. We were aghast and speech-less. So there was that burning-sensation in our tummies that took us to streets and greet the USCIS chief with bloody flowers!!
i guess you need durbin grassley to return before the "burning feeling" is back. never fear, it's just waiting....btw were you in san jose? when have you been on the streets? who is "us"?
D.C rally has been strategic one. Somewhere in the beginning of the game, we pushed wrong buttons in marketing/selling the strategy or signing up people for the D.C rally. I remember very very few messages on the rally forums and tons and 100s of messages on "July 2" forum.
and whose fault is that? are the core members and other leaders of iv babysitters?
we should now be responsible for spending our remaining life's time explaining why it's important to do something about the mess we are in? oh wait! we did! and copped a ton of abuse for it. go back and look at your posts and everyone else's on the July 2 thread....who has to put the posts on rally threads and not on July 2 threads? who exactly are you blaming here?
and who is "we"? what role have you played?
All senior fellows and the 1000+ members who made it to rally - have you surprised why there is NO 5000 - 10000 attendance.
the registration was actually 2,000. and no we are not surprised. the sheer apathy of those that would benefit from this action and the obsession with receipt notices made it quite clear we were never going too exceed this number. we know that their are many like you here that want us to come to your house with a begging bowl so you can associate handles with real people without lifting a little finger yourself.
thankfully there are 2,000 others that know they are doing this for themselves .
Some more pointers to my thoughts -
> I can't associate all IV handles with real people easily.
and? would you like my ss no? those who came to DC have solved this problem. others solved it long ago by getting involved and taking responsibility and sharing burden. it's yours to deal with now.
> I don't know who is what (like in organizations we have people associated with certain responsibilities).
there is a core team, and there are iv- chapter leaders. join your state chapter if you can drag yourself of the tracking threads and meet the leaders. i got to know real people because i pm'd them then e mailed them and called them, set up a state chapter and met them...
nobody is going to put food in your mouth just because it is open. we are volunteers who give up a lot to keep iv going. we too have commitments at home and work. and they are as important as yours. the only difference is that our sense of self importance is a little less...
> Has anyone ever asked whether we should mention our association with IV in 485 application? And the repercussions?
this is hilarious. aman kapoor the visible founder and leader got his green card just recently. and he is not the only prominent or visible leader to have got it. what does green card processing have to do with exercising your rights to petition government? did you read what siskind and murthy wrote? would they ask their clients to jeopardize their futures? for the record, the 485 asks what organization you are a member of- and i am a member of iv- and i wrote that.
it's a legal, registered non profit org. what's to be ashamed/petrified of?
this seems to be your real problem, the rest is just a cover up.
there are clearly many people with very genuine reasons for not being in DC. and that will always happen with any action. but we are 23,000+ strong. and you are benefiting from our actions per your own words. yet you lurk on tracking threads and then wonder why there are more posts there then on rally threads? wow...rocket science for the highly skilled!
franklin! i begin to think this thread is pointless. those that have genuine reasons do...people like mhb, susie, sunny and madhuri will participate when they can. others like rajesh (can't associate the name with a real person btw ) and inskrish revel in being armchair critics. they will only be genuine participants when it comes from inside them. meanwhile we have to suffer their petty complaints and feel like we owe them something. (!!!!!)
rajesh was in the DC area!!!!! and he chose to see other "attractions" on tuesday. you see it was not "need based". hilarious...but gives me heartburn. let's please close the thread.
i guess you need durbin grassley to return before the "burning feeling" is back. never fear, it's just waiting....btw were you in san jose? when have you been on the streets? who is "us"?
D.C rally has been strategic one. Somewhere in the beginning of the game, we pushed wrong buttons in marketing/selling the strategy or signing up people for the D.C rally. I remember very very few messages on the rally forums and tons and 100s of messages on "July 2" forum.
and whose fault is that? are the core members and other leaders of iv babysitters?
we should now be responsible for spending our remaining life's time explaining why it's important to do something about the mess we are in? oh wait! we did! and copped a ton of abuse for it. go back and look at your posts and everyone else's on the July 2 thread....who has to put the posts on rally threads and not on July 2 threads? who exactly are you blaming here?
and who is "we"? what role have you played?
All senior fellows and the 1000+ members who made it to rally - have you surprised why there is NO 5000 - 10000 attendance.
the registration was actually 2,000. and no we are not surprised. the sheer apathy of those that would benefit from this action and the obsession with receipt notices made it quite clear we were never going too exceed this number. we know that their are many like you here that want us to come to your house with a begging bowl so you can associate handles with real people without lifting a little finger yourself.
thankfully there are 2,000 others that know they are doing this for themselves .
Some more pointers to my thoughts -
> I can't associate all IV handles with real people easily.
and? would you like my ss no? those who came to DC have solved this problem. others solved it long ago by getting involved and taking responsibility and sharing burden. it's yours to deal with now.
> I don't know who is what (like in organizations we have people associated with certain responsibilities).
there is a core team, and there are iv- chapter leaders. join your state chapter if you can drag yourself of the tracking threads and meet the leaders. i got to know real people because i pm'd them then e mailed them and called them, set up a state chapter and met them...
nobody is going to put food in your mouth just because it is open. we are volunteers who give up a lot to keep iv going. we too have commitments at home and work. and they are as important as yours. the only difference is that our sense of self importance is a little less...
> Has anyone ever asked whether we should mention our association with IV in 485 application? And the repercussions?
this is hilarious. aman kapoor the visible founder and leader got his green card just recently. and he is not the only prominent or visible leader to have got it. what does green card processing have to do with exercising your rights to petition government? did you read what siskind and murthy wrote? would they ask their clients to jeopardize their futures? for the record, the 485 asks what organization you are a member of- and i am a member of iv- and i wrote that.
it's a legal, registered non profit org. what's to be ashamed/petrified of?
this seems to be your real problem, the rest is just a cover up.
there are clearly many people with very genuine reasons for not being in DC. and that will always happen with any action. but we are 23,000+ strong. and you are benefiting from our actions per your own words. yet you lurk on tracking threads and then wonder why there are more posts there then on rally threads? wow...rocket science for the highly skilled!
franklin! i begin to think this thread is pointless. those that have genuine reasons do...people like mhb, susie, sunny and madhuri will participate when they can. others like rajesh (can't associate the name with a real person btw ) and inskrish revel in being armchair critics. they will only be genuine participants when it comes from inside them. meanwhile we have to suffer their petty complaints and feel like we owe them something. (!!!!!)
rajesh was in the DC area!!!!! and he chose to see other "attractions" on tuesday. you see it was not "need based". hilarious...but gives me heartburn. let's please close the thread.
more...
muni_k
05-31 05:53 PM
Receipt ID: 3347-9248-3773-8217
contributed $ 50
contributed $ 50
hot cristiano ronaldo real madrid
gc_check
06-16 02:11 PM
I applied for my AP renewal on June 2nd by mail and the same got delivered on June 8th but no reply as of now. I sent me personal check for 305 USD. Please advice.
Thanks.
Which center did you apply for.
In my case, I filed through an attorney with TSC. My papers were Fedexed to reach on 6/2 and my attorney sent me scanned copy of receipt notice on 6/8, not sure when he received the RN's but the Receipt Date / Notice Date in the Recipet Notice is 6/2, If your documents reached on 6/8 which is a Monday, leave it a couple days and followup. You have to leave some time for the actual RN to reach you via USPS as well. The payment was made for my case to the Attorney and they cut a check for USCIS. So I do not know how soon the checks will be encashed. Good luck with your renewal process.
Thanks.
Which center did you apply for.
In my case, I filed through an attorney with TSC. My papers were Fedexed to reach on 6/2 and my attorney sent me scanned copy of receipt notice on 6/8, not sure when he received the RN's but the Receipt Date / Notice Date in the Recipet Notice is 6/2, If your documents reached on 6/8 which is a Monday, leave it a couple days and followup. You have to leave some time for the actual RN to reach you via USPS as well. The payment was made for my case to the Attorney and they cut a check for USCIS. So I do not know how soon the checks will be encashed. Good luck with your renewal process.
more...
house Cristiano Ronaldo The Legendary Player Real Madrid 2009 2010 [HD 720p]
Leo07
11-14 09:14 PM
Major reform is "not viable in this Congress," added Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, chairwoman of the House Judiciary subcommittee on immigration. (http://www.dailynews.com/news/ci_7437469)
There is also opposition to consider piecemeal options which treat legal immigration reform separately.
I am generally a very optimistic person but not seeing whats really viable this year.
I understand that IV is looking into other angles as well. Once again not sure.
Can IV core comment about what our realistic chances are?
Please dont answer "Join your state chapters". I am already a state chapter member.
I don't think it's possible to comment on 'realistic' chances...compred to 2008 there will be better rewards for the same amount of effort.
Because it is a election year people/politicians will focus more on "popular" bills that will draw real voters. Now they are still in 'fund raising' mode and they may have to budge a bit for the corporation monies...
To be honest with you, No matter what the chances are what the IV core will comment on this issue, it's for us to think whether there is a better option than 'not acting now'?
There is also opposition to consider piecemeal options which treat legal immigration reform separately.
I am generally a very optimistic person but not seeing whats really viable this year.
I understand that IV is looking into other angles as well. Once again not sure.
Can IV core comment about what our realistic chances are?
Please dont answer "Join your state chapters". I am already a state chapter member.
I don't think it's possible to comment on 'realistic' chances...compred to 2008 there will be better rewards for the same amount of effort.
Because it is a election year people/politicians will focus more on "popular" bills that will draw real voters. Now they are still in 'fund raising' mode and they may have to budge a bit for the corporation monies...
To be honest with you, No matter what the chances are what the IV core will comment on this issue, it's for us to think whether there is a better option than 'not acting now'?
tattoo cristiano-ronaldo-real-madrid-
willgetgc2005
07-01 10:29 AM
Core IV,
How does the House version of SKIL compare blow by blow with the senate provisions for EB in CIR. Does House version of SKIL include recapture of unused visas as well as a raise which was part of the CIR. Compete America report only talks about excluding spouse and depenedents in the House SKIL version for EB visa numbers
If you have some analysis can you please post. Thank You !
Very good news indeed.
In the US politics for some reason, certain issues seem to get clubbed together.
Sometimes it suits our purposes and at other times it is vexing. Clearly our issue of legal immigration does not create the type of backlash from conservative republicans that the issue of illegal immigration does. Hence when our circumstances necessitate that we have to try to board the CIR train to our goals I consider it unfortunate.
On the other hand when it comes to H1b immigration, every H1b increase has corresponded with some sort of provision(mainly recapture) of EB visas also. H1b increase has tremendous support and pressure from the powerful capitalist forces in this country. Just see how the Wall street Journal and Pres.Bush gives publicity to this issue. I doubt pure EB provisions can get that sort of visibility in spite of the tremendous work of organisations like IV.
In that sense the H1b cap being exhausted indirectly gives our issue more visibility and is a good development. Lets wait until the 20K US masters cap is also filled, then publicity will increase even more.
All in all it looks good that something will work for us by the end of this year. The pressure is building on congress to do something about EB immigration.
How does the House version of SKIL compare blow by blow with the senate provisions for EB in CIR. Does House version of SKIL include recapture of unused visas as well as a raise which was part of the CIR. Compete America report only talks about excluding spouse and depenedents in the House SKIL version for EB visa numbers
If you have some analysis can you please post. Thank You !
Very good news indeed.
In the US politics for some reason, certain issues seem to get clubbed together.
Sometimes it suits our purposes and at other times it is vexing. Clearly our issue of legal immigration does not create the type of backlash from conservative republicans that the issue of illegal immigration does. Hence when our circumstances necessitate that we have to try to board the CIR train to our goals I consider it unfortunate.
On the other hand when it comes to H1b immigration, every H1b increase has corresponded with some sort of provision(mainly recapture) of EB visas also. H1b increase has tremendous support and pressure from the powerful capitalist forces in this country. Just see how the Wall street Journal and Pres.Bush gives publicity to this issue. I doubt pure EB provisions can get that sort of visibility in spite of the tremendous work of organisations like IV.
In that sense the H1b cap being exhausted indirectly gives our issue more visibility and is a good development. Lets wait until the 20K US masters cap is also filled, then publicity will increase even more.
All in all it looks good that something will work for us by the end of this year. The pressure is building on congress to do something about EB immigration.
more...
pictures Cristiano Ronaldo Real Madrid
rajsand
09-21 10:09 AM
Just an analogy please dont think i am against undocumented fellows.. They are definitely facing a bigger problem than us!
Compare the following
Nondocumented vs. Documented Legals
1] Not well educated / Highly Skilled
2] Not much computer savvy / Mostly everyone should be
3] Not have enough resources to advertise their struggle!
/ Trying all ways to advertise & campaign
4] Do not have enough monetary collection to run a rally / advt /
set up a website
/ Have some collection to do the basics
5] Come here illegally and yet have the courage to demand a legal status openly...
/ Feel shy or sorry for demanding a legal status soon! (for those who dont think
this is worthwhile)
Inspite of all these negatives , they have grouped up so well ! highly commendable. I dont know what we can learn from them, only that they are all in the same boat , but we are in different ones .. as some have got gc, some have got receipts, some are ready to wait as they have just applied, some are just not interested!!
Compare the following
Nondocumented vs. Documented Legals
1] Not well educated / Highly Skilled
2] Not much computer savvy / Mostly everyone should be
3] Not have enough resources to advertise their struggle!
/ Trying all ways to advertise & campaign
4] Do not have enough monetary collection to run a rally / advt /
set up a website
/ Have some collection to do the basics
5] Come here illegally and yet have the courage to demand a legal status openly...
/ Feel shy or sorry for demanding a legal status soon! (for those who dont think
this is worthwhile)
Inspite of all these negatives , they have grouped up so well ! highly commendable. I dont know what we can learn from them, only that they are all in the same boat , but we are in different ones .. as some have got gc, some have got receipts, some are ready to wait as they have just applied, some are just not interested!!
dresses cristiano ronaldo real madrid
missourian
09-18 12:46 AM
Hi loudoggs, I replied your PM waiting for your answer
more...
makeup Cristiano Ronaldo#39;s home Real
![cristiano ronaldo madrid 2009. Cristiano Ronaldo The Legendary Player Real Madrid 2009 2010 [HD 720p]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/tHO52aXt_ok/0.jpg "Cristiano Ronaldo The Legendary Player Real Madrid 2009 2010 [HD 720p]")
subrarama
03-06 07:49 AM
Hi-
I have gone through this forum, and do not see a list of the documentation requirements for a H1b transfer.
Please assist me.
Ram
I have gone through this forum, and do not see a list of the documentation requirements for a H1b transfer.
Please assist me.
Ram
girlfriend cristiano ronaldo madrid 2009.
chiru229
06-10 03:10 PM
Given that the dates have moved to Oct 05, for someone with a PD in Mar 2005 how long will it take from now to get the actual card.
-Chiru
-Chiru
hairstyles Cristiano Ronaldo exclusive:
missourian
09-18 12:46 AM
Hi loudoggs, I replied your PM waiting for your answer
pd_recapturing
02-09 09:52 PM
If you read my post carefully, I am suggesting this 'in addition' to what's already on IV's agenda. Why can't we work on this item in conjunction to what's already being worked on? I have started preparing a fraud list from a bunch of websites like desicrunch.com. I noticed that almost 90% of firms reported there are fraud firms and it makes me wonder about the efficiency of local authorities. Also I don't see how targeting blood sucking desi firms would feed the anti-immigrant trolls. I would think we Indians would benefit the most since it would increase our credibility in general. Thanks for considering this idea at least. I would like to know other people's thoughts based on my clarification here. This drive might clean up cases freeing up visa numbers for genuine EB cases from India. Why should I be in line with crooks ahead of me? It doesn't make sense whatsoever.
And yes, my contribution to IV so far as been $1000 and involvement in other drives. Your question to me regarding my contribution made me squirm a bit since you might have categorized me with many of IV's freeloaders. That's just like Americans asking me all the time "Are you on an H1-B visa and do you work for a bodyshopper". :)
But I will work on making new contributions as well.
Contribution so far: $1000
StuckinMuck, I really appreciate your concern but my question to you is are you targeting the desi fraud companies or fraud employees? How would one decide as to which companies/employees are fraud? Suppose, you target a company because its fraud but there might be a huge possibility that some of the employees are genuine and they would suffer just because their employer is fraud. How would you avoid that?
And yes, my contribution to IV so far as been $1000 and involvement in other drives. Your question to me regarding my contribution made me squirm a bit since you might have categorized me with many of IV's freeloaders. That's just like Americans asking me all the time "Are you on an H1-B visa and do you work for a bodyshopper". :)
But I will work on making new contributions as well.
Contribution so far: $1000
StuckinMuck, I really appreciate your concern but my question to you is are you targeting the desi fraud companies or fraud employees? How would one decide as to which companies/employees are fraud? Suppose, you target a company because its fraud but there might be a huge possibility that some of the employees are genuine and they would suffer just because their employer is fraud. How would you avoid that?
syzygy
07-18 12:50 AM
Does anyone know if I can file I-485 if my LC is approved before August 17th? Or should it be approved during month of July?
Thanks
Thanks
No comments:
Post a Comment