coopheal
12-17 10:52 AM
Fact is you can always make smaller contribution using pay pal or make $100 one time contribution in every few months.
You have no intension to make contribution, so just try to find excuses for not contributing.
Might be thinking �it not my fault�. only if IV lowers contribution amount�. You can keep thinking this and make yourself happy.
I shall say please don't repeat the same thing over and over again. ... if it doesn't work it doesn't.... yes... i will leave this forum soon, if things remain naggingly same.
And please remember it's bottom up that works here not top-down.
You have no intension to make contribution, so just try to find excuses for not contributing.
Might be thinking �it not my fault�. only if IV lowers contribution amount�. You can keep thinking this and make yourself happy.
I shall say please don't repeat the same thing over and over again. ... if it doesn't work it doesn't.... yes... i will leave this forum soon, if things remain naggingly same.
And please remember it's bottom up that works here not top-down.
wallpaper Lara Stone makes gap teeth and
svgupta
05-22 03:12 PM
plz contribute and update your signature as well.
McLuvin
04-02 04:52 PM
Even a broken clock is right twice a day. I just think it�s a waste of time 'predicting'
Anyways, don't you think we should behave a little better in public forums? (I'm referring to the language in your post)
Well... I agree with you and please accept my apologies !!!
Anyways, don't you think we should behave a little better in public forums? (I'm referring to the language in your post)
Well... I agree with you and please accept my apologies !!!
2011 Lara Stone
centaur
10-05 09:04 PM
AND PAY THE SAME TAXES AND SOCIAL SECURITY AS ANY AMERICAN
I agree, I was so upset when I read it... Thank you Logiclife for bringing that to our notice.
I just wrote an email to the editors with the email address provided by walking_dude. My email says this:
Dear Editor
You mention in an article dated today that "HIGH-TECH EMPLOYERS get lift from House Republican letter to Speaker Pelosi urging passage of immigration bill to help "attract and retain" high-skilled workers". And in the same breath you say that "In a poll 56% of Republicans earning more than $75,000 annually would "strongly" or "partially" agree with candidate who would bar illegal immigrants from path to citizenship." Do you know the difference between highly skilled legal immigrants and illegal immigrants?. Why do you have to imply that all highly skilled are illegal, infact 99.99% of highly skilled workers (Tech workers) came to the USA legally and continue to live legally. They are here at the behest of their employers.
So please correct your article to reflect that.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119154966904949270.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
An Upset highly skilled worker
I agree, I was so upset when I read it... Thank you Logiclife for bringing that to our notice.
I just wrote an email to the editors with the email address provided by walking_dude. My email says this:
Dear Editor
You mention in an article dated today that "HIGH-TECH EMPLOYERS get lift from House Republican letter to Speaker Pelosi urging passage of immigration bill to help "attract and retain" high-skilled workers". And in the same breath you say that "In a poll 56% of Republicans earning more than $75,000 annually would "strongly" or "partially" agree with candidate who would bar illegal immigrants from path to citizenship." Do you know the difference between highly skilled legal immigrants and illegal immigrants?. Why do you have to imply that all highly skilled are illegal, infact 99.99% of highly skilled workers (Tech workers) came to the USA legally and continue to live legally. They are here at the behest of their employers.
So please correct your article to reflect that.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119154966904949270.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
An Upset highly skilled worker
more...
kavas
04-03 12:58 PM
Core Members
You are all doing A Commedable and selfless job.We thank you for that irrespective of the outcome in the senate.
Please dont even respond to any negative comments.Simply delete the ones you find inappropriate.You are doing a big job and dont need such diversions.
You are all doing A Commedable and selfless job.We thank you for that irrespective of the outcome in the senate.
Please dont even respond to any negative comments.Simply delete the ones you find inappropriate.You are doing a big job and dont need such diversions.
Goodintentions
04-11 07:57 AM
You can be paid hourly or weekly or monthly or by weekly, does not matter as long as your job is fulltime and in same or similar occupation. Hourly pay is a more convinient tool for employers to keep you as contigent worker at times it works both ways because you can get paid more if you work more hours (depends on the state I guess).
You may verify the same with lawyers and gurus.
=================
Kindly read text below. Based on whatever is said here, an element of risk still exists if your ex-employer decides to harass you. As someone had pointed out in one of the threads, what is supported here is long term indentured labour keeping people like like us perpetually under the mercy of the greedy employers. Do we have really anything in our favour ??? :) :) :)
AC21 and I-140 Revocation : INS Inconsistent on I-485s
Posted Feb 07, 2003
The law and applications of the law are ever-changing. What seems to be firm ground one day turns to quicksand the next. And so it goes with AC21 and the impact of I-140 revocation.
For more than a year, top-level INS officials have stated in AILA meetings that an I-485 that has been pending for 180 days or more can gain approval under AC21, even if the employer revokes the I-140. That is, once the I-485 has been pending for 180 days, the employer's revocation of an I-140 is ineffective as far as causing a denial of the I-485 in the context of AC21. The INS elaborated on this to clarify that the date of revocation of the I-140 is the date the INS acts upon the revocation request, not the date the request is made. Therefore, an individual could benefit by the INS' delays in processing routine mail. Our June 28, 2002 MurthyBulletin article, I-485 Approval after I-140 Revocation, available on MurthyDotCom, covers a victory involving this precise issue. Unfortunately, the INS guidance has never been submitted in writing. This is currently causing problems in several cases that have come to our attention.
We have recently become aware of cases in which the INS has denied I-485s due to the revocation of the I-140 petition, even though the I-140 revocation occurred after the 180-day point. Motions to Reopen and Reconsider were filed asking that the cases be approved based upon the INS' stated policy. Both the California and Nebraska Service Centers issued denials of the Motions, essentially citing that there is no written policy. Accordingly, without a written policy, the INS cannot deviate from the general legal requirement that an I-485 application needs to be supported by an approved, un-revoked I-140 petition. We cannot be certain whether this is a change in policy or an issue requiring the training of examiners unaware of the policy.
The Law Office of Sheela Murthy recently contacted the INS Headquarters in Washington, D.C. to rectify this situation and urge that the INS follow their own guidance. INS policy personnel have reiterated that the I-485 application should not be denied if it has been pending for over 180 days based on a previously approved I-140 petition. INS Headquarters has informed our Office that they will contact the particular INS service centers to have them reconsider their earlier decisions, based on Headquarters' policy. However, INS has not yet addressed what happens to post-July 31, 2002, concurrently-filed cases in which the I-140 was never approved but the I-485 remains pending for over 180 days.
If AC21 is to have any meaning, the sponsoring employer must not retain control over the foreign national after the 180-day point. An individual's ability to obtain approval of an I-485 based on a job offer from a new employer should not rest upon the former employer's whim to revoke the I-140 petition or not. Fortunately, the majority of employers do not tend to revoke the I-140 petition. However, we have seen employers inadvertently revoke I-140s when the intent was to revoke the H1B petition, as is required under certain regulations. We have seen some employers attempt to retaliate against an ex-employee by revoking the I-140 petition after the 180-day point. We have seen employers revoke I-140s who simply do not want any extra papers bearing their names at INS. Employers hoping to hire more foreign nationals in the future may want to revoke the I-140 in order to use the labor certification and substitute another foreign national as the beneficiary. There are many reasons an employer may revoke an I-140. However, none of them is related to the spirit and intent of AC21 in allowing the beneficiary the freedom to move to another position and gain approval once the adjudication of the case has taken half a year or longer.
� The Law Office of Sheela Murthy, P.C.
==================
Best wishes!!!
You may verify the same with lawyers and gurus.
=================
Kindly read text below. Based on whatever is said here, an element of risk still exists if your ex-employer decides to harass you. As someone had pointed out in one of the threads, what is supported here is long term indentured labour keeping people like like us perpetually under the mercy of the greedy employers. Do we have really anything in our favour ??? :) :) :)
AC21 and I-140 Revocation : INS Inconsistent on I-485s
Posted Feb 07, 2003
The law and applications of the law are ever-changing. What seems to be firm ground one day turns to quicksand the next. And so it goes with AC21 and the impact of I-140 revocation.
For more than a year, top-level INS officials have stated in AILA meetings that an I-485 that has been pending for 180 days or more can gain approval under AC21, even if the employer revokes the I-140. That is, once the I-485 has been pending for 180 days, the employer's revocation of an I-140 is ineffective as far as causing a denial of the I-485 in the context of AC21. The INS elaborated on this to clarify that the date of revocation of the I-140 is the date the INS acts upon the revocation request, not the date the request is made. Therefore, an individual could benefit by the INS' delays in processing routine mail. Our June 28, 2002 MurthyBulletin article, I-485 Approval after I-140 Revocation, available on MurthyDotCom, covers a victory involving this precise issue. Unfortunately, the INS guidance has never been submitted in writing. This is currently causing problems in several cases that have come to our attention.
We have recently become aware of cases in which the INS has denied I-485s due to the revocation of the I-140 petition, even though the I-140 revocation occurred after the 180-day point. Motions to Reopen and Reconsider were filed asking that the cases be approved based upon the INS' stated policy. Both the California and Nebraska Service Centers issued denials of the Motions, essentially citing that there is no written policy. Accordingly, without a written policy, the INS cannot deviate from the general legal requirement that an I-485 application needs to be supported by an approved, un-revoked I-140 petition. We cannot be certain whether this is a change in policy or an issue requiring the training of examiners unaware of the policy.
The Law Office of Sheela Murthy recently contacted the INS Headquarters in Washington, D.C. to rectify this situation and urge that the INS follow their own guidance. INS policy personnel have reiterated that the I-485 application should not be denied if it has been pending for over 180 days based on a previously approved I-140 petition. INS Headquarters has informed our Office that they will contact the particular INS service centers to have them reconsider their earlier decisions, based on Headquarters' policy. However, INS has not yet addressed what happens to post-July 31, 2002, concurrently-filed cases in which the I-140 was never approved but the I-485 remains pending for over 180 days.
If AC21 is to have any meaning, the sponsoring employer must not retain control over the foreign national after the 180-day point. An individual's ability to obtain approval of an I-485 based on a job offer from a new employer should not rest upon the former employer's whim to revoke the I-140 petition or not. Fortunately, the majority of employers do not tend to revoke the I-140 petition. However, we have seen employers inadvertently revoke I-140s when the intent was to revoke the H1B petition, as is required under certain regulations. We have seen some employers attempt to retaliate against an ex-employee by revoking the I-140 petition after the 180-day point. We have seen employers revoke I-140s who simply do not want any extra papers bearing their names at INS. Employers hoping to hire more foreign nationals in the future may want to revoke the I-140 in order to use the labor certification and substitute another foreign national as the beneficiary. There are many reasons an employer may revoke an I-140. However, none of them is related to the spirit and intent of AC21 in allowing the beneficiary the freedom to move to another position and gain approval once the adjudication of the case has taken half a year or longer.
� The Law Office of Sheela Murthy, P.C.
==================
Best wishes!!!
more...
Marphad
03-18 04:25 PM
I hope the admins keep this thread open and not kill it. I am not sure what the intentions of the OP ( some of you claimed that he wants to create a rift ), but this is definitely a valid concern for all the EB3(I) guys. This is a natural reaction to the frustrations of EB3(I) guys just like the mass upheaval during the July 2007 VB fiasco. Since it was across the board, there were no differences. Now since this involves only EB3(I), there is not much support from IV or others. But in my opinion, this is as much unfair as the Julay VB fiasco.
Some of the EB2(I) guys are worried that their GC dreams would get delayed if there is any Admin fix for EB3(I). For all those individuals in EB2(I) who want to oppose any kind of admin fix for EB3(I), I just want you to think about it. Is it really fair? There are individuals in EB3(I) waiting since 2001 - a total of 8+ years. Don't get me wrong - but some of the EB2(I) guys who have applied as late as 2006 and 2007 are expecting/hoping to get their GC this year if there is a spillover. And I think these are the individuals ( not all of the EB2 guys though ) who are opposing any kind of admin fix ( please dont yell at me or curse me etc...if you are not one among those mentioned, then please dont worry..this is not about you::) Ofcourse i would like each one of us to get GC as soon as possible) to EB3(I).
And I dont see why there will be a rift between EB2 and EB3 if each of us follows net etiquette in positng responses. Let's do some constuctive brainstoming - without getting into perosnal attacks or getting too emotional. Let's do what is right and not what each one of us thinks is right. Then I guess there wont be any rifts. The only thing I am asking is to get EB3(I) to advnace a little bit. I am not asking for it be on par with EB2(I). I hope some of you see a point in my frustration::))
Do you really want EB2(I) to advance to 2005/2006 while EB3(I) guys are still languishing in 2001? That's totally unfair in my opinion. I know this world is not fair but how can anyone else try to divide us if we all stand united? And to stand united, EB2 guys should be willing to support any initiative to help EB3(I) move from stone ages::))
Peace!
( I am getting ready with my body armour for all the brickbats various people are going to throw at me::))
Regards
I am completely with you. We should start brainstorming thread with no negative posts.
Some of the EB2(I) guys are worried that their GC dreams would get delayed if there is any Admin fix for EB3(I). For all those individuals in EB2(I) who want to oppose any kind of admin fix for EB3(I), I just want you to think about it. Is it really fair? There are individuals in EB3(I) waiting since 2001 - a total of 8+ years. Don't get me wrong - but some of the EB2(I) guys who have applied as late as 2006 and 2007 are expecting/hoping to get their GC this year if there is a spillover. And I think these are the individuals ( not all of the EB2 guys though ) who are opposing any kind of admin fix ( please dont yell at me or curse me etc...if you are not one among those mentioned, then please dont worry..this is not about you::) Ofcourse i would like each one of us to get GC as soon as possible) to EB3(I).
And I dont see why there will be a rift between EB2 and EB3 if each of us follows net etiquette in positng responses. Let's do some constuctive brainstoming - without getting into perosnal attacks or getting too emotional. Let's do what is right and not what each one of us thinks is right. Then I guess there wont be any rifts. The only thing I am asking is to get EB3(I) to advnace a little bit. I am not asking for it be on par with EB2(I). I hope some of you see a point in my frustration::))
Do you really want EB2(I) to advance to 2005/2006 while EB3(I) guys are still languishing in 2001? That's totally unfair in my opinion. I know this world is not fair but how can anyone else try to divide us if we all stand united? And to stand united, EB2 guys should be willing to support any initiative to help EB3(I) move from stone ages::))
Peace!
( I am getting ready with my body armour for all the brickbats various people are going to throw at me::))
Regards
I am completely with you. We should start brainstorming thread with no negative posts.
2010 Lara Stone Wants to be a Bond
niklshah
08-24 08:28 PM
can some one pls list the documents which we need to sent for renewal of AP and do we need to sent photographs too with the application?
more...
paskal
04-09 05:33 PM
i'll break my word for one last piece of advice for my sensistive friend:
"The very reason why we join this forum so that we can, as whole, say something that may influence the law makers of this country to change the existing laws so that our problem with GC will be resolve."
no lawmaker is bothering to read this silly thread. Please stop dreaming. if you want to influence, go meet them! that remain's iv's official word on the matter too...see the meet the lawmaker campaign. and if you already have...you have my respect, you are too good in that case to waste your time complaining about this stuff.
"The very reason why we join this forum so that we can, as whole, say something that may influence the law makers of this country to change the existing laws so that our problem with GC will be resolve."
no lawmaker is bothering to read this silly thread. Please stop dreaming. if you want to influence, go meet them! that remain's iv's official word on the matter too...see the meet the lawmaker campaign. and if you already have...you have my respect, you are too good in that case to waste your time complaining about this stuff.
hair #lara stone #babes #gap tooth
qplearn
10-12 12:26 PM
Sorry I did not read this thread before. Just a simple question: should we use nycgal's draft?
more...
summitpointe
08-27 12:03 PM
PA,
If you go for reneval you should have atleast one year validity in your I-94. Other wise they may not extend.
NJ,
You can get 90 days extn by explaining the situation
If you go for reneval you should have atleast one year validity in your I-94. Other wise they may not extend.
NJ,
You can get 90 days extn by explaining the situation
hot Lara Stone Blamed for
cpolisetti
04-26 12:01 PM
IV Core team, you have proved once again how valuable IV has been just in four months. I noticed on washingtonpost.com, this article is most viewed in the business section as of 12:30PM EST. ( following is the copy and paste from screen on WP.com), also this is the fifth most viewed article on WP.com and thrid in most emailed article.
Business On the Site
Updated 12:31 p.m. ET
• Skilled Immigrants Turn to K Street
• GOP Blocks Measures Boosting Taxes on Oil Companies' Profits
• Bush Calls For Probe Of Rising Gas Prices
• Lay Defends Goodwill Earnings
• Chrysler Expanding Its Ethanol Model Line
I would like to congratulate the core team for their tremendous efforts. Also would like to to thank all the members who were involved in getting this article out.
Business On the Site
Updated 12:31 p.m. ET
• Skilled Immigrants Turn to K Street
• GOP Blocks Measures Boosting Taxes on Oil Companies' Profits
• Bush Calls For Probe Of Rising Gas Prices
• Lay Defends Goodwill Earnings
• Chrysler Expanding Its Ethanol Model Line
I would like to congratulate the core team for their tremendous efforts. Also would like to to thank all the members who were involved in getting this article out.
more...
house Lara Stone
Vsach
07-19 03:42 PM
Dear ALL,
As USCIS is swarmed with applications any idea how long do you think it will take, as we know this not a normal situation.
Inputs appreciated.
Regards
VS
As USCIS is swarmed with applications any idea how long do you think it will take, as we know this not a normal situation.
Inputs appreciated.
Regards
VS
tattoo Model Lara Stone in the lead
h1vegas
06-24 12:15 PM
In EAD form, they are asking about previous EAD info..like which service center, what date, GRANTED or REJECTEd etc.. Now I had two EADs..one is OPT and other one I got last year. Do I have to write info for both one or just for last year?? In last year's form, I wrote info about my OPT. But what now?
Please use the I-485 based OPT info and not the student based
make sure the A # starts with 0
Thx
Please use the I-485 based OPT info and not the student based
make sure the A # starts with 0
Thx
more...
pictures Lara Stone amp; Lauren Hutton
nk2
05-22 08:35 PM
Contributed 100$ now
PayPal receipt : 7TX925067N142104S
PayPal receipt : 7TX925067N142104S
dresses Lara Stone is one of my
eb3retro
01-12 04:12 PM
The link is still not working. But I did make a payment to your email id. Please check it out. and let me know.
eb3retro,
I tested it now and it is working. Earlier, PayPal's website was very slow and probably that caused some problem for you. Can you check it now?
If it is still not working, our PayPal email id is "donations at immigrationvoice dot org"
eb3retro,
I tested it now and it is working. Earlier, PayPal's website was very slow and probably that caused some problem for you. Can you check it now?
If it is still not working, our PayPal email id is "donations at immigrationvoice dot org"
more...
makeup Lara Stone | Babe Of The Day
chanduv23
10-04 12:13 PM
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
girlfriend cool Lara Stone-esque gaps
GCNirvana007
08-24 04:09 PM
Are there any transfered cases which got approved? I am yet to see one. My service center is TSC but my case starts with WAC as it was sent to Calif for data uploading ...my bad luck...I will be current next month but i doubt any transfered cases will get approved...
just fell thru the cracks....anyway good luck for those who are straight forward cases (if there are any)
SoP
Your case might just be a coincidence unless we have lot of transferred cases not being approved. Speaking of which we see this handle Visual whose PD is Jan 03.
If transferred case is the road block, you guys have a strong case to raise, even legal action.
just fell thru the cracks....anyway good luck for those who are straight forward cases (if there are any)
SoP
Your case might just be a coincidence unless we have lot of transferred cases not being approved. Speaking of which we see this handle Visual whose PD is Jan 03.
If transferred case is the road block, you guys have a strong case to raise, even legal action.
hairstyles Lara Stone-esque gap tooth
chanduv23
10-13 10:33 AM
We should have video taped 'laborchic' inspiring speech and post it on youtube :)
snathan
06-03 11:22 AM
I wouldn�t care about the nay Sayers about the Spelling bee...Yes, its lot more than that. Its the foundation and words do have power. You are basically training your brain for more logical thinking. These people are just jealous and making mockery of it. I challenge them to achieve the same...:D
kumarc123
07-18 11:49 AM
Hello All
I just sent the letter to Senator Benjamin L. Cardin for the state of MD. I called spoke to the receptionist in his office and she guided me on how to submit this letter. Now I am working on another submission. Guys please work with us and contact as many as you can, it will eventually help us.
Thanks
I just sent the letter to Senator Benjamin L. Cardin for the state of MD. I called spoke to the receptionist in his office and she guided me on how to submit this letter. Now I am working on another submission. Guys please work with us and contact as many as you can, it will eventually help us.
Thanks
