snthampi
07-28 07:20 PM
I donot think its in any way wrong to come meet somebody and say hi and try to talk to but what is wrong is the methodology adopted by these folks which basically irritates people.
I do not think its any way different then any networking event in Bay Area , the only difference is you meet somebody introduce yourselves and about your product and then move on and then just wait for the other person to contact you, however in case of amway first part of meeting is ok but they completely miss out on the second part instead of waiting for the second person to call they just keep calling you and harassing you with calls
Hi, Bayarea07 & gopinathan, I myself fell prey for this and was an IBO for 15 days. I was really disgusted by their behavior and totally dishonest ways of doing business. Even after I told them I was quitting, they were kept calling me for quite some time. Amway as a corporation has nothing to do with this menace. The disgustingly greedy people involved in this pyramid (or network) marketing are creating such an atmosphere and name. Unfortunately, a big number of people who are involved in this biz are Desis.
How can you ask personal questions to someone you don't know and just met? I can't comprehend it.
I do not think its any way different then any networking event in Bay Area , the only difference is you meet somebody introduce yourselves and about your product and then move on and then just wait for the other person to contact you, however in case of amway first part of meeting is ok but they completely miss out on the second part instead of waiting for the second person to call they just keep calling you and harassing you with calls
Hi, Bayarea07 & gopinathan, I myself fell prey for this and was an IBO for 15 days. I was really disgusted by their behavior and totally dishonest ways of doing business. Even after I told them I was quitting, they were kept calling me for quite some time. Amway as a corporation has nothing to do with this menace. The disgustingly greedy people involved in this pyramid (or network) marketing are creating such an atmosphere and name. Unfortunately, a big number of people who are involved in this biz are Desis.
How can you ask personal questions to someone you don't know and just met? I can't comprehend it.
wallpaper PLAY. John#39;s Rant Of The Day:
Legal
07-25 09:13 PM
Next years numbers are not consequential to EB2I movement to be honest. Any realistic movement will depend on spillover. Consider that EB2I is statutorily limited to about 2800 visas(inclusive of family members) without spillover. Whereas spillover has the potential to contribute tens of thousands of visas.
Very true. My speculation :) is most EB2-I upto mid 2006 will be cleared up and the puny new numbers will trickle to keep the PD around June 2006, or slightly earlier rather than going to 2004 or earlier.
Very true. My speculation :) is most EB2-I upto mid 2006 will be cleared up and the puny new numbers will trickle to keep the PD around June 2006, or slightly earlier rather than going to 2004 or earlier.
485_se_dukhi
07-26 08:54 PM
I think the reason people get defensive is because love for your country is an emotional topic (some might call it patriotism)...just as love for your mother (or parents) or religion or political party etc. These are deeply personal issues. When you question any of these, expect fireworks.
Many people migrate for better opportunity/ better lifestyle. Is that enough reason to question why they still love their original country? I might move from Lucknow to Bombay (for those of you who don't know these places, please substitute Wichita to New York) for the same reasons. Does it mean I stop being nostalgic about Lucknow? or stop loving it? How does migrating affect my love for the place one was born and brought up in?
Needless to mention there are people from different countries in this forum. So lets refrain from implying that people who immigrate should not love their original motherland/fatherland etc.
Actually its getting quite ridiculous now. So may I again request the moderators/ admin to pls close this thread. Thank you.
I think this thread has definitely deviated from its main theme.
?[/B]
Many people migrate for better opportunity/ better lifestyle. Is that enough reason to question why they still love their original country? I might move from Lucknow to Bombay (for those of you who don't know these places, please substitute Wichita to New York) for the same reasons. Does it mean I stop being nostalgic about Lucknow? or stop loving it? How does migrating affect my love for the place one was born and brought up in?
Needless to mention there are people from different countries in this forum. So lets refrain from implying that people who immigrate should not love their original motherland/fatherland etc.
Actually its getting quite ridiculous now. So may I again request the moderators/ admin to pls close this thread. Thank you.
I think this thread has definitely deviated from its main theme.
?[/B]
2011 tanned limb of one Ginger
yetanotherguyinline
09-04 07:44 PM
Admins - can some one please close this thread. This is thread is neither about immigration nor will anything good come out of this.
more...
smari
03-29 05:05 PM
H1-B transfer petition pending. Could I enter Canada for PR and comeback to US with old H1-B (not stamped) and receipt notice for transfer petition. Any suggestions?
andy garcia
02-15 12:27 PM
when did you check?
I checked 10 min. ago it looks COOL;)
I checked 10 min. ago it looks COOL;)
more...
GCWhru
07-23 11:38 AM
Guys,
I think we have talked and analyzed enough about how many visas available for August and September and pretty much arrived at conclusion that at the minimum 20K visas available. (Thanks to vdlrao).
Now we should talk about capability of USCIS and its processing speed? What is the normal approval rate with USCIS's regular processing. Also we heard that USCIS recruited many people, Do we suppose to see any improvement in processing. Do we think all the 20K visas will be used within 2 months?
If USCIS is going to approve only 5K visas over next 2 months, there is no point in talking how many visas left.
Thanks
I think we have talked and analyzed enough about how many visas available for August and September and pretty much arrived at conclusion that at the minimum 20K visas available. (Thanks to vdlrao).
Now we should talk about capability of USCIS and its processing speed? What is the normal approval rate with USCIS's regular processing. Also we heard that USCIS recruited many people, Do we suppose to see any improvement in processing. Do we think all the 20K visas will be used within 2 months?
If USCIS is going to approve only 5K visas over next 2 months, there is no point in talking how many visas left.
Thanks
2010 brown sugar with ginger
bobzibub
04-04 10:14 AM
As a Canuck:
It is an honor that you folks choose my country to live in.
Temporarily, or permanent, I hope it works out.
Every country has its warts. (Mine has them too) but the immigrants to a country are what give it life.
For the Doctors, check out some rural areas various provinces. I think they have programs that ease the regulatory burden.
Welcome!
-b
It is an honor that you folks choose my country to live in.
Temporarily, or permanent, I hope it works out.
Every country has its warts. (Mine has them too) but the immigrants to a country are what give it life.
For the Doctors, check out some rural areas various provinces. I think they have programs that ease the regulatory burden.
Welcome!
-b
more...
add78
09-24 04:41 PM
IV has been discussing about the possibility of one for two solution (partial). The idea is to request congress to exempt EB applicants & their dependents from numerical limits of the Immigrant visas, if they buy a home. It is my belief that market sentiment is the most important thing in any financial market(s) and the housing prospects look pretty bleak. There are lot of members in the EB community that have NOT bought their own home, even though they could afford one because of the uncertainty with EB GC. IV's idea is to bridge the financial committees and judiciary committees in the House/Senate and see if corresponding Chairman/Ranking members are willing to listen. Things are moving so fast with the 700bn USD bail out plan and we will NOT have time to do things the normal way, through our counsel. We have to present this idea to the corresponding staff members of key members of congress (see list below) and see if this gets traction now or going forward.
Are there any influential members in either house that are also pro-EB that we are especially targeting? I mean since House and Senate is debating on the bailout plan now and with McCain going back to DC to reach some agreement, there will be different ideas that can be included in the bailout, if we can get our idea across a few influential and sympathetic Representatives, they might come up with some proposal that will include this. I am sure Core is working with our lobbyists on this so I urge everyone to please send out emails.
Are there any influential members in either house that are also pro-EB that we are especially targeting? I mean since House and Senate is debating on the bailout plan now and with McCain going back to DC to reach some agreement, there will be different ideas that can be included in the bailout, if we can get our idea across a few influential and sympathetic Representatives, they might come up with some proposal that will include this. I am sure Core is working with our lobbyists on this so I urge everyone to please send out emails.
hair dating any person either.
inthehole
07-21 09:54 PM
I apologize if this question has been answered before.
I changed employer "A" after 8 years and joined employer "B" last month.
I have LCA approval copy,I140 approval copy and I485 receipt notice copy. I never had access to my employer A's attorney before and the attorney cannot & will not talk to me now.
Now I am with employer "B" using my EAD. Since all the queries or any RFE's would still go to my previous employer's attorney, I would like to file a change of representation G-28 with a new attorney so that I can receive any future communication from USCIS.
But few attorneys I contacted are asking me for my LCA papers from my employer "A" to get my job description. My employer A will not give it to me.
Also they are insisting that I must send a AC21 portability letter to USCIS on behalf of my new employer B. My new employer B is a big multinational company with heavy Bureaucracy and does not understand AC21 law. As long as I have an EAD, I will be employed by employer "B".
Even though I understand the reasons behind the attorney's suggestions, my question is
1. Can't I just file the Change of Representation G-28 form to make sure that I receive any future communication from USCIS and respond to the same or similar job question if I get an RFE?.
2. Also am I or my new employer B breaking any laws by not sending the AC21 portability letter to USCIS?
(my I140 is approved on 2005 and will not be revoked by my ex employer. Changed job after more than 200 days since I filed my I485)
Thank you.
I changed employer "A" after 8 years and joined employer "B" last month.
I have LCA approval copy,I140 approval copy and I485 receipt notice copy. I never had access to my employer A's attorney before and the attorney cannot & will not talk to me now.
Now I am with employer "B" using my EAD. Since all the queries or any RFE's would still go to my previous employer's attorney, I would like to file a change of representation G-28 with a new attorney so that I can receive any future communication from USCIS.
But few attorneys I contacted are asking me for my LCA papers from my employer "A" to get my job description. My employer A will not give it to me.
Also they are insisting that I must send a AC21 portability letter to USCIS on behalf of my new employer B. My new employer B is a big multinational company with heavy Bureaucracy and does not understand AC21 law. As long as I have an EAD, I will be employed by employer "B".
Even though I understand the reasons behind the attorney's suggestions, my question is
1. Can't I just file the Change of Representation G-28 form to make sure that I receive any future communication from USCIS and respond to the same or similar job question if I get an RFE?.
2. Also am I or my new employer B breaking any laws by not sending the AC21 portability letter to USCIS?
(my I140 is approved on 2005 and will not be revoked by my ex employer. Changed job after more than 200 days since I filed my I485)
Thank you.
more...
hopefulgc
02-13 07:36 PM
Done.
hopefulgc - please dedicate some time and update your first post with more information on lawsuit, you may want to quote lazycis 's posts and other information.
A lot of people may not be very knowledgable and may backoff when they see the word "lawsuit".
Those who are saying YES on the poll - it is assumed that you will not backoff - if you have not yet updated your profile on IV - please update your complete profile - this will show that you can be counted on.
hopefulgc - please dedicate some time and update your first post with more information on lawsuit, you may want to quote lazycis 's posts and other information.
A lot of people may not be very knowledgable and may backoff when they see the word "lawsuit".
Those who are saying YES on the poll - it is assumed that you will not backoff - if you have not yet updated your profile on IV - please update your complete profile - this will show that you can be counted on.
hot Blake Lively is a ginger now
acecupid
08-15 10:22 AM
Collin Powell incident is America's problem. Even after the civil rights movement and equality to Blacks, they are still having discrimination. Just ask Black people in America and how they feel in their daily life.
So according to you by coming to America we should forget India because you will call us traitor? Have you heard how Jews in America are so strong and care for Israel even after becoming US citizens?
The fact is Indians are responsible for their own problems and greencard woes. They want to live in this sorry state and blame everyone else around them except themselves. They do not have any pride in their roots and thus flee their own country. They do not come to this country for betterment of their skills, education and experience but because they want to flee the country. There maybe exceptions but this is what I have seen in Indians who are on H1B or who have become US Citizens.
Why is your profile info empty ? Have you forgotten your motherland or where you came from ?
So according to you by coming to America we should forget India because you will call us traitor? Have you heard how Jews in America are so strong and care for Israel even after becoming US citizens?
The fact is Indians are responsible for their own problems and greencard woes. They want to live in this sorry state and blame everyone else around them except themselves. They do not have any pride in their roots and thus flee their own country. They do not come to this country for betterment of their skills, education and experience but because they want to flee the country. There maybe exceptions but this is what I have seen in Indians who are on H1B or who have become US Citizens.
Why is your profile info empty ? Have you forgotten your motherland or where you came from ?
more...
house I think the ginger man looks
walking_dude
02-13 11:13 AM
This theory that 'AILA/AILF lawsuit threat overturned July VB' is out of touch with the reality. Threatening lawsuit was bad for AILA. They were not involved in the discussions that finaly resulted in reversal. IV was a participant but AILA was not.
We shouldn't repeat their mistake. The moment IV files a lawsuit, USCIS will stop discussing with us. We will be off the discussion table. Only place they'll talk to us will be in the courtroom. We also shouldn't forget the pressure applied by Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren on USCIS and DOS. She was ready to wash their dirty linen in public. No doubt, she was influenced by rally in San Jose - which happens to be her constituency.
3 year EAD/AP, AC21 interpretation are rules that USCIS makes, there's no way a judge can dictate what rules a government department should make. You wrote "there is nothign to lose but a lot to win" . Like someone pointed out we won't even be recovering 10k -20k spent on it, even if we win. We'll be getting into a case which has no chances or very slim chances of winning.
If we lose the case, there's no going back to discussions with USCIS. They won't be entertaining us after we sued them. It's a grave risk you should understand. I feel tired at having to explain it the Nth time to some of you who still consider AILA as a messiah. Nothing happens because of just one factor. It's a combination of several factors that ultimately produces results. There are no silver bullets that fix every problem. Its the reality.
it is the threat of a massive lwsuit from immigration lawyers association that made uscis backtrack and open up july 2 filing..we are all benefeciaries of that.
itz not our flowers or the rally that did the trick it is the threat of lawsuit.
if we consult lawyers we can check if we have a case and on what grounds. even f not anything else we may win on things like 3 yr AP relaxed ac21 rules etc. these are operational policies and dont need congress. USCIS can change these rules.
there is nothign to lose but a lot to win.
we can even appeal on the grounds that USCIS policies led us in to a bonded labor situation unable to change employer , foregone career choices and income potential..etc.. this violates the concept of free will and just labor practices. Many rules in AC21 and AP still try to tie us down to the employer who has already enjoyed > 5 years of our hardwork.
We shouldn't repeat their mistake. The moment IV files a lawsuit, USCIS will stop discussing with us. We will be off the discussion table. Only place they'll talk to us will be in the courtroom. We also shouldn't forget the pressure applied by Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren on USCIS and DOS. She was ready to wash their dirty linen in public. No doubt, she was influenced by rally in San Jose - which happens to be her constituency.
3 year EAD/AP, AC21 interpretation are rules that USCIS makes, there's no way a judge can dictate what rules a government department should make. You wrote "there is nothign to lose but a lot to win" . Like someone pointed out we won't even be recovering 10k -20k spent on it, even if we win. We'll be getting into a case which has no chances or very slim chances of winning.
If we lose the case, there's no going back to discussions with USCIS. They won't be entertaining us after we sued them. It's a grave risk you should understand. I feel tired at having to explain it the Nth time to some of you who still consider AILA as a messiah. Nothing happens because of just one factor. It's a combination of several factors that ultimately produces results. There are no silver bullets that fix every problem. Its the reality.
it is the threat of a massive lwsuit from immigration lawyers association that made uscis backtrack and open up july 2 filing..we are all benefeciaries of that.
itz not our flowers or the rally that did the trick it is the threat of lawsuit.
if we consult lawyers we can check if we have a case and on what grounds. even f not anything else we may win on things like 3 yr AP relaxed ac21 rules etc. these are operational policies and dont need congress. USCIS can change these rules.
there is nothign to lose but a lot to win.
we can even appeal on the grounds that USCIS policies led us in to a bonded labor situation unable to change employer , foregone career choices and income potential..etc.. this violates the concept of free will and just labor practices. Many rules in AC21 and AP still try to tie us down to the employer who has already enjoyed > 5 years of our hardwork.
tattoo a creamy tanned ginger to
satyasaich
12-13 02:10 PM
Well, interesting topic and here are my 2 cents.
i just googled for a minute, for the definition of "Equal Employment Opportunity" by Federal Government and the result is as below
Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) :A term used by the federal government to refer to employment practices that ensure nondiscrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, color, national origin, physical or mental ability, medical condition, ancestry, or age.
The principle behind EEO is that everyone should have the same access to opportunities
AND Ethnic References are American Indians, Asians (Pakistani/East Indian: Persons having origins in any of the original
peoples of the Indian sub-continent), Black, Hispanic, Caucasian
The above definition itself speaks very loudly about access to opportunities, which if restricted due to another federal law or provision, then it is clearly a conflict within Constitution.
Consider a person with some skill set and born in Bangladesh or Pakistan working for Employer A
&
another person with exact skill set born in India working for same employer in the same capacity.
Assume that both have started the GC Process on the same day, but person from India is still waiting even after 5 or 7 years.
Where as the other person got the GC and no restrictions to accept a promotion and an increase in salary,based on the same skill set and experience.
Isn't that scenario defers the principle behind EEO which is everyone should have the same access to opportunities
and hence voilation of law?
There are thousands of glaring examples like these, and i'm wondering how this can not be considered as a good ground for challenging
(I do undersand the cost aspects of challenging and legal fees etc; and the hefty amount of funds needed)
by the way, i tried to find a federal government rationale for per country limit in current system (only from the EB Category perspective), but couldn't get a good answer
Satya
India / EB3/Nov2003/
--Any country's immigration policy has to have some control measures built into it. I cannot imagine any country opening its gates wide open for the entire world to migrate into her without any limitations. So the question is, whom to "restrict" and whom to allow? This leads to the same argument, do you see this "restriction" as discrimination? There are others who see as fair "reservation" for them.
there is no "reservation", the nature of the clause is a cap, it does not give another country a minimum quota, it is written as a restrictive provision. and again- just because it benefits someone else does not make discrimination "right", in the strictest sense. right and wrong when it comes to discrimination are not relative. and if you believe they are, it's mighty slippery slope my friend because it does not take time to find yourself on the other side.
--Good question. If we look at what qualifies a country to be included in the lottery program (oversubscription etc?), it would again lead to the "balancing" intent with regards to immigration.
so why the double dipping? if the balancing is done, why the country quota? the result is that as i said more bangladeshis come in than indians...so what does over subscription mean in the end? again...why the need for the diversity lottery? the country quota already balances things....or not?
"either it's wrong or right. the caste system is wrong, from every side of the fence. it may benefit some and hurt others. but it's wrong, wrong and wrong.
same for this country quota. sure it helps some, and looks good from "their side of the fence". that does not change the fact that it is wrong."
--You are opining that it is wrong. You cannot state that it is a fact
you sound suspiciously supportive of the caste system. i will say it again. such a system is wrong. i do not care which side of the fence you are on. was depriving blacks from voting wrong? or was it ok from the white side of the fence? please think before you post.
there is a difference between "something benefiting me so i justify it and fight to keep it" and being right or fair. everyone fights to keep what they have. sorry, still not right. and if you still feel the caste system can be justified as right from your (or any) side of the fence then let's stop here, we have no common ground. and i speak as someone with sufficiently "high caste" to have not suffered from it (so you know my side of the fence).
one last thing, i find it hard to believe you are terming as "right" the idea that I as an individual should be held back 10 years longer than my colleague because of where i was born. any way i look at it...sorry...just not right.
i just googled for a minute, for the definition of "Equal Employment Opportunity" by Federal Government and the result is as below
Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) :A term used by the federal government to refer to employment practices that ensure nondiscrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, color, national origin, physical or mental ability, medical condition, ancestry, or age.
The principle behind EEO is that everyone should have the same access to opportunities
AND Ethnic References are American Indians, Asians (Pakistani/East Indian: Persons having origins in any of the original
peoples of the Indian sub-continent), Black, Hispanic, Caucasian
The above definition itself speaks very loudly about access to opportunities, which if restricted due to another federal law or provision, then it is clearly a conflict within Constitution.
Consider a person with some skill set and born in Bangladesh or Pakistan working for Employer A
&
another person with exact skill set born in India working for same employer in the same capacity.
Assume that both have started the GC Process on the same day, but person from India is still waiting even after 5 or 7 years.
Where as the other person got the GC and no restrictions to accept a promotion and an increase in salary,based on the same skill set and experience.
Isn't that scenario defers the principle behind EEO which is everyone should have the same access to opportunities
and hence voilation of law?
There are thousands of glaring examples like these, and i'm wondering how this can not be considered as a good ground for challenging
(I do undersand the cost aspects of challenging and legal fees etc; and the hefty amount of funds needed)
by the way, i tried to find a federal government rationale for per country limit in current system (only from the EB Category perspective), but couldn't get a good answer
Satya
India / EB3/Nov2003/
--Any country's immigration policy has to have some control measures built into it. I cannot imagine any country opening its gates wide open for the entire world to migrate into her without any limitations. So the question is, whom to "restrict" and whom to allow? This leads to the same argument, do you see this "restriction" as discrimination? There are others who see as fair "reservation" for them.
there is no "reservation", the nature of the clause is a cap, it does not give another country a minimum quota, it is written as a restrictive provision. and again- just because it benefits someone else does not make discrimination "right", in the strictest sense. right and wrong when it comes to discrimination are not relative. and if you believe they are, it's mighty slippery slope my friend because it does not take time to find yourself on the other side.
--Good question. If we look at what qualifies a country to be included in the lottery program (oversubscription etc?), it would again lead to the "balancing" intent with regards to immigration.
so why the double dipping? if the balancing is done, why the country quota? the result is that as i said more bangladeshis come in than indians...so what does over subscription mean in the end? again...why the need for the diversity lottery? the country quota already balances things....or not?
"either it's wrong or right. the caste system is wrong, from every side of the fence. it may benefit some and hurt others. but it's wrong, wrong and wrong.
same for this country quota. sure it helps some, and looks good from "their side of the fence". that does not change the fact that it is wrong."
--You are opining that it is wrong. You cannot state that it is a fact
you sound suspiciously supportive of the caste system. i will say it again. such a system is wrong. i do not care which side of the fence you are on. was depriving blacks from voting wrong? or was it ok from the white side of the fence? please think before you post.
there is a difference between "something benefiting me so i justify it and fight to keep it" and being right or fair. everyone fights to keep what they have. sorry, still not right. and if you still feel the caste system can be justified as right from your (or any) side of the fence then let's stop here, we have no common ground. and i speak as someone with sufficiently "high caste" to have not suffered from it (so you know my side of the fence).
one last thing, i find it hard to believe you are terming as "right" the idea that I as an individual should be held back 10 years longer than my colleague because of where i was born. any way i look at it...sorry...just not right.
more...
pictures Dislikes: People who are
cableman
05-10 06:27 PM
Does anyone have a comment on this ?
I got this from: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/pub/imm-law.html#act12
Permanent residents
Persons who have been admitted to Canada as permanent residents have the right to come to the country and remain here, provided they have not lost that status or it has not been established that they have engaged in activities, such as criminal acts, that would otherwise subject them to removal.
Conditions may be imposed for a certain period on some permanent residents, such as entrepreneurs. A permanent resident must live in Canada for at least 730 days (two years) within a five-year period. In some situations, time spent outside Canada may count. All permanent residents must comply with this residency requirement or risk losing their status.
According to the website, you will lose your status if you go to Canada in the 5th year because you won't be able to attain the requirement of living in Canada for at least 730 days (two years) within a five-year period. Actually, after you pass your 3rd year, you will be in risk for the permanent status.
I got this from: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/pub/imm-law.html#act12
Permanent residents
Persons who have been admitted to Canada as permanent residents have the right to come to the country and remain here, provided they have not lost that status or it has not been established that they have engaged in activities, such as criminal acts, that would otherwise subject them to removal.
Conditions may be imposed for a certain period on some permanent residents, such as entrepreneurs. A permanent resident must live in Canada for at least 730 days (two years) within a five-year period. In some situations, time spent outside Canada may count. All permanent residents must comply with this residency requirement or risk losing their status.
According to the website, you will lose your status if you go to Canada in the 5th year because you won't be able to attain the requirement of living in Canada for at least 730 days (two years) within a five-year period. Actually, after you pass your 3rd year, you will be in risk for the permanent status.
dresses fassbender is ginger u no,
Kushal
07-27 12:07 PM
I'm not sure but some one did mention this on this forum. It's better if other people can comment on the veracity of this statement.
"..veracity of this statement"
Sure pick up the phone and dial IRS, or call your accountant. Or your lawyer if you want to play it safe.
Other people doesn't do or will never do anything, other then wearing pantyhose and tip toeing through the tulips.
"..veracity of this statement"
Sure pick up the phone and dial IRS, or call your accountant. Or your lawyer if you want to play it safe.
Other people doesn't do or will never do anything, other then wearing pantyhose and tip toeing through the tulips.
more...
makeup (Of course some people in
Leo07
06-16 04:58 PM
...immediate relief for legal immigrants, before Mr O gets to CIR?
Why are we seeing posts related to porn on this site???????
Why are we seeing posts related to porn on this site???????
girlfriend tanned pile of man-skin,
jayleno
07-10 12:49 PM
Hey dude
Dont insult a whole state....dont blame/depend on other people in making your decisions...
I need to hear more stories like this to realize I won't be alone when time comes for me to pack up.
I am from A.P. Lot of folks from my state in India can't accept anything but USA outside A.P. Me and my wife really like to live and work in other parts of world and we have even asked my company to send us out of USA. The only reason for me at this point to pursue GC is for my wife be able to work part-time.
Otherwise, I am very content being on H1.
Dont insult a whole state....dont blame/depend on other people in making your decisions...
I need to hear more stories like this to realize I won't be alone when time comes for me to pack up.
I am from A.P. Lot of folks from my state in India can't accept anything but USA outside A.P. Me and my wife really like to live and work in other parts of world and we have even asked my company to send us out of USA. The only reason for me at this point to pursue GC is for my wife be able to work part-time.
Otherwise, I am very content being on H1.
hairstyles of the ginger people…
angelfire76
06-02 12:27 PM
country quota is not racial discrimination...u must be a fool to say that.
To change the country quota..they have to change the whole philosophy of immigration in this country... Equal opportunity for all...
Its absurd to try to change the country quota..we must try for recapture..instead..
The US immigration system is the only immigration system which has per country quota, last time I checked. If you are arguing equal opportunity then denying somebody from applying for permanent residency because on their country of origin is denying equal opportunity.
In fact the per country quota actually violates the philosophy of equal opportunity by providing benefits to people who entered much later into the game and ignoring people waiting for the same benefits, just because they are from a particular country.
If they were really interested in "equalizing" the ethnic mix of employees in the country, they shouldn't have made H1B dual intent or they should impose this 7% at the H1B level (I don't want to give anybody bright ideas considering the witch-hunt of H1Bs going on now).
To change the country quota..they have to change the whole philosophy of immigration in this country... Equal opportunity for all...
Its absurd to try to change the country quota..we must try for recapture..instead..
The US immigration system is the only immigration system which has per country quota, last time I checked. If you are arguing equal opportunity then denying somebody from applying for permanent residency because on their country of origin is denying equal opportunity.
In fact the per country quota actually violates the philosophy of equal opportunity by providing benefits to people who entered much later into the game and ignoring people waiting for the same benefits, just because they are from a particular country.
If they were really interested in "equalizing" the ethnic mix of employees in the country, they shouldn't have made H1B dual intent or they should impose this 7% at the H1B level (I don't want to give anybody bright ideas considering the witch-hunt of H1Bs going on now).
_TrueFacts
09-04 08:08 PM
I spent almost an hr going through these massive 12 pages and concluded to support British's saying "Indians are dogs" and I want to add the following,
Kanaka
We are called dogs, because we discuss things, then what are we called if we don't and accept things in India as they are.
Kanaka
We are called dogs, because we discuss things, then what are we called if we don't and accept things in India as they are.
desigrad
09-22 12:22 AM
Dear friends,
I have a few questions regarding EAD renewal (based on pending AOS):
1. When we apply for EAD renewal, do we have to go for fingerprinting again? I have heard conflicting reports about this - one lawyer said that we have to go for fingerprinting even if we have already done our biometrics once. However some of my friends have applied for EAD renewal and they didn't have to go for fingerprinting. I read some where that they won't call us for fingerprinting if we apply via paper instead or electronically. Is that true?
2. Do we have to be in the US in order to apply for EAD renewal?
Thanks very much!
I have a few questions regarding EAD renewal (based on pending AOS):
1. When we apply for EAD renewal, do we have to go for fingerprinting again? I have heard conflicting reports about this - one lawyer said that we have to go for fingerprinting even if we have already done our biometrics once. However some of my friends have applied for EAD renewal and they didn't have to go for fingerprinting. I read some where that they won't call us for fingerprinting if we apply via paper instead or electronically. Is that true?
2. Do we have to be in the US in order to apply for EAD renewal?
Thanks very much!
No comments:
Post a Comment