gsc999
07-17 02:38 PM
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2007/07/immigration-v-1.html#comment-76176292
--
I couldn't help post a reply. I was trying not to add to the buzy server traffic.
Isn't it amazing, thousands of people are waiting with bated breath for the USCIS update news and some idiot opens a new threads to start a baseless rumor. And claims that news comes from Greg. This so called news as it turns out is a comment by some troll "south" on Greg's website.
Our friend here who opened this thread fails to even see the connection between the id handle "south" and his post" going south." Honestly, things like this make you wonder, how can such people call themselves highly skilled.
--
I couldn't help post a reply. I was trying not to add to the buzy server traffic.
Isn't it amazing, thousands of people are waiting with bated breath for the USCIS update news and some idiot opens a new threads to start a baseless rumor. And claims that news comes from Greg. This so called news as it turns out is a comment by some troll "south" on Greg's website.
Our friend here who opened this thread fails to even see the connection between the id handle "south" and his post" going south." Honestly, things like this make you wonder, how can such people call themselves highly skilled.
wallpaper google earth live sri lanka.
makemygc
07-18 02:16 PM
Atlanta PERM Center belongs to DOL not USCIS
My mistake. You don't need to bold it.
My mistake. You don't need to bold it.
GCNirvana007
04-08 06:04 PM
Please feel free to delete my id.
I am done here. Wish good luck to everybody. Hope everyone gets GC soon.
I am done here. Wish good luck to everybody. Hope everyone gets GC soon.
2011 google earth live sri lanka.
pappu
11-25 10:10 PM
Next year is also critical for our lobbying efforts with the new administration and going through the bill cycle all over again. For that it will be very helpful if members sign up for monthly contributions. The monthly contributions help us plan future events and lobby efforts.
I urge all new and old non contributing members to sign up for monthly contributions to strengthen your organization.
I urge all new and old non contributing members to sign up for monthly contributions to strengthen your organization.
more...
DDLMODES
07-09 03:28 PM
even now?
Thats strange.....
What is strange ?? He used PP in June when it was still available. USCIS suspended PP only for new cases to process what they already had.
I can't wait to get the chance to upgrade mine .... not that I will do anything with it for a while (other than H1B extension) but is nice to have the approval in your pocket.
:rolleyes:
Thats strange.....
What is strange ?? He used PP in June when it was still available. USCIS suspended PP only for new cases to process what they already had.
I can't wait to get the chance to upgrade mine .... not that I will do anything with it for a while (other than H1B extension) but is nice to have the approval in your pocket.
:rolleyes:
Steve Mitchell
December 5th, 2003, 09:44 PM
Could you put a link up to that plug in? I really like that.
more...
vin13
09-30 10:34 AM
I also have soft LUD on 09/26 and 09/29...But the online status still shows status pending and transferred to the office.
Is ur case in NSC too.
Is ur case in NSC too.
2010 dresses shore of Sri Lanka which google earth live sri lanka.
aph0025
11-12 12:21 PM
From the day you file your case you are legal to work with your new employer until its approval or denial. When you file your case (filed in normal processing without including paystub) sometimes they just approve it and sometimes they ask for a current paystub for evidence to close the case as approved. As you start working for your new company you would get a pay stub which can be used for the query.
That's a good point as well. I am planning to go in for premium processing on the safer side. But, if there is a query for pay stubs, they would require my previous employer's pay stubs right (the one from whom I am transferring my H1B visa to begin with)? I hope you are right, and my assumption is wrong. Looking at the responses, a lot is dependant on the immigration officer.
That's a good point as well. I am planning to go in for premium processing on the safer side. But, if there is a query for pay stubs, they would require my previous employer's pay stubs right (the one from whom I am transferring my H1B visa to begin with)? I hope you are right, and my assumption is wrong. Looking at the responses, a lot is dependant on the immigration officer.
more...
sapota
02-27 01:51 PM
From March 05 to Sep 06 data can be found at :
http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/pdf/OFLC_Report_v11_8-23-07.pdf
This is the kind of transparency people are looking for. USCIS does publish statisics too. Hoping that they take all this data & propose legislation and or administrative solutions to address bottleneck issues.
http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/pdf/OFLC_Report_v11_8-23-07.pdf
This is the kind of transparency people are looking for. USCIS does publish statisics too. Hoping that they take all this data & propose legislation and or administrative solutions to address bottleneck issues.
hair 20th match Group A - Live
delax
07-16 05:41 PM
"Rumors have been rampant about whether (and, if so, how) Department of Homeland Security and/or Department of State are going to address their actions resulting in the refusal of adjustment of status filings for most employment-based applicants in July and for 'other worker' applicants during June. There have been efforts, including EXTREMELY active efforts by AILA and AILF, on all possible fronts to pressure the government into remedying its own actions. However, as of this writing nothing has been resolved and it is not known if it will be resolved without litigation. The situation is extremely fluid, and as soon as there is something FACTUAL to report, it will be posted immediately on InfoNet."
more...
reallow23
09-28 09:49 PM
Hello Everyone,
Thank for all your help..My case have been pending over a year now of the due date......So can I file the Mandamus????
Thank for all your help..My case have been pending over a year now of the due date......So can I file the Mandamus????
hot pictures Thanks to Google Earth and google earth live sri lanka. google
gcadream
02-25 07:54 AM
That is really cool man !!
2 months less in 3 yrs is no big deal...its almost 3 yrs extn for you.
Thanks for sharing with us, lets see how the ball rolls out for me.
2 months less in 3 yrs is no big deal...its almost 3 yrs extn for you.
Thanks for sharing with us, lets see how the ball rolls out for me.
more...
house dresses google earth live sri
mailmy_gc
10-15 03:15 PM
Verify your G-325 application form properly especially the employment history you provided. My wife also got the similar RFE early this year due to technical error that we made in G325 form. (My wife applied for H1 but she did not worked through that company mean while she got her EAD then started working for another company, Which voided H1-B, In G-325 we mentioned that she was working from July 2007 but her H1 is valid from October so Officer might have thought that she worked illegally for 3 months) .
We provided w2's, pay stubs and amended G325 etc to prove that she did not worked on her H1 or illegally.
Hope this helps you.
We provided w2's, pay stubs and amended G325 etc to prove that she did not worked on her H1 or illegally.
Hope this helps you.
tattoo hot google earth car. google earth live sri lanka. sri lanka cricket world
gimmemygreen
12-27 07:47 AM
Now the new price for GC is 100 grand
more...
pictures world cup cricket final. world
purgan
11-09 11:09 AM
Now that the restrictionists blew the election for the Republicans, they're desperately trying to rally their remaining troops and keep up their morale using immigration scare tactics....
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
dresses hot Google+earth+live+pakistan
h1bemployee
02-25 06:20 PM
You need to provide more details on bold words from your post. If you really need pointers from IV members.
in the intial offer letter ,they said they are going to pay 58k... and my job title was also different in the offer letter.
As the client is paying very low billing rate .... they said they need to change the LCA showing less salary(less than 58k)
in the intial offer letter ,they said they are going to pay 58k... and my job title was also different in the offer letter.
As the client is paying very low billing rate .... they said they need to change the LCA showing less salary(less than 58k)
more...
makeup google earth live sri lanka.
andr.in
05-27 03:25 PM
lmao! These are great!
But the one fester made reminds me of the personal pages most estonians have! :P lol
I can't decide! They all suck <-- lol First time i've ever said that meaning that something is done well!
But the one fester made reminds me of the personal pages most estonians have! :P lol
I can't decide! They all suck <-- lol First time i've ever said that meaning that something is done well!
girlfriend makeup Vs sri lanka, live
snthampi
08-16 02:24 PM
Hi ,
I have a problem with my employer. He never paid me ontime and he didn't paid me since April,2010. So i have applied for H1 trasfer as i am having problems with this Employer. My H1 got approved and now my old employer sent me a notice saying i am in breach of agreement and i should not work for the same client and he will sue me for 50,000 dollars .
Then i replied him saying since he is not paying me from past 4 months his agreement got voided as he is in Material Breach of Agreement.
He is still giving me hard time. Can any one please give some suggestions like if i also proceed legally will it be helpful to me .
Thanks,
Srikanth
As @hebron suggested, complain to DOL. Prepare records for proving that you didn't get paid for significant amount of time to defend yourself.
I have a problem with my employer. He never paid me ontime and he didn't paid me since April,2010. So i have applied for H1 trasfer as i am having problems with this Employer. My H1 got approved and now my old employer sent me a notice saying i am in breach of agreement and i should not work for the same client and he will sue me for 50,000 dollars .
Then i replied him saying since he is not paying me from past 4 months his agreement got voided as he is in Material Breach of Agreement.
He is still giving me hard time. Can any one please give some suggestions like if i also proceed legally will it be helpful to me .
Thanks,
Srikanth
As @hebron suggested, complain to DOL. Prepare records for proving that you didn't get paid for significant amount of time to defend yourself.
hairstyles sri lanka cricket world cup
GCAmigo
12-04 10:30 AM
isn't that what is happening now?
Aah_GC
06-19 07:51 PM
If I were you, I would look for opportunities that fall in line with your GC labor. System Analyst and Project Manager don't really go well together, leave alone the SOC codes. Your PD also seems to be quite close (relatively speaking).
If anything try to negotiate your external title with your prospective employer.
Good luck, can understand your frustration.
If anything try to negotiate your external title with your prospective employer.
Good luck, can understand your frustration.
ramaonline
06-15 02:13 AM
h1 is dual intent visa under the current laws it is perfectly legal to hold both h1b and ead statuses - u can be in just h1b status if u wish or get into EAD status or maintain both if the h1 is valid
No comments:
Post a Comment