cal_dood
07-05 03:20 PM
Since the sentiment is so strong against freeloaders - aren't all the people not donating to AILF freeloaders too ? Let's donate to AILF too while we are at it...
wallpaper Good Friends Wallpaper
LostInGCProcess
01-16 05:50 PM
Excellent writeup...It was very interesting to read, since lot of us are in almost the same situation.
May I suggest you some cost cutting measures especially in the difficult economic times?
1) Quit buying Starbucks coffee. It may be a small sacrifice but it adds up in the end. You can make your own coffee at home.
2) Quit buying News paper. You get more latest news on the internet.
3) try to save as much as possible.
May I suggest you some cost cutting measures especially in the difficult economic times?
1) Quit buying Starbucks coffee. It may be a small sacrifice but it adds up in the end. You can make your own coffee at home.
2) Quit buying News paper. You get more latest news on the internet.
3) try to save as much as possible.
rajkr
06-11 01:21 PM
Dude, we are not suggesting or even thinking that we should move away from main agenda, thats there and thats where IV advocacy days aimed at. Its part of the game. You cant sail the sea without winning over turbulences. these are not if and if nots.
Other If's you are trying to post are not in the works, if they are then its same path. You cant turn a blind eye to something that is already happening.
If you really believe that this bogus bill will become a Law, then also see the real picture, that is why I posted the other Ifs.
This Bill is titled as "Employ America Act". By having the GC, you are not an American. If you do not know the rule here it is, GC is a "Privilege", and it is not a "Right". So if this Bill passes all these people with alerady having GC will also need to pack their Bags and Go. That is the reality, dude.
So again and again do not fall over it. If you respond to this Bill, and Vote "No" against it, you are trying to send wrong messages to the originators of the bill, that we are scared. Why you guys are making everyone scared, when there is nothing to be scared about.
Other If's you are trying to post are not in the works, if they are then its same path. You cant turn a blind eye to something that is already happening.
If you really believe that this bogus bill will become a Law, then also see the real picture, that is why I posted the other Ifs.
This Bill is titled as "Employ America Act". By having the GC, you are not an American. If you do not know the rule here it is, GC is a "Privilege", and it is not a "Right". So if this Bill passes all these people with alerady having GC will also need to pack their Bags and Go. That is the reality, dude.
So again and again do not fall over it. If you respond to this Bill, and Vote "No" against it, you are trying to send wrong messages to the originators of the bill, that we are scared. Why you guys are making everyone scared, when there is nothing to be scared about.
2011 Best Desktop Wallpapers
hara_patta_for_rico
07-10 08:12 AM
It seems several persons are already discrediting the lawsuit and from the comments I have seen, it is apparent that some have not read the entire complaint.
In order to understand how a civil lawsuit works one needs to understand that in a complaint, one makes no legal arguments, does not cite case or precedent law but only cites the simple facts. The other side can respond to the complaint and deny or accept the allegations in part or in whole. Many cases do not go to trial, they end up in settlements or are decided through summary judgement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_judgment) (for the plaintiff or the defendants) if the case has undisputable matters of facts and one of the parties petitions for it. Several processes also take place ie Discovery long before an actual trial. I recommend reading the following wikipedia entry to familiarize one at a high level with the processes and rules involved:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Rule_of_Civil_Procedure
To get to the core legal arguments behind the case, one needs to read the counts (they are only stated and not argued/expounded on starting pg 13). Namely those are:
COUNT I: VIOLATION OF THE FIFTH AMENDMENT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution) (constitutional rights issue)
COUNT II: VIOLATION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_Procedures_Act)
COUNT III: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ACT (http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title4/civ00036.htm)
COUNT IV: EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT (http://www.hhs.gov/dab/guidelines/eaja.html)
COUNT V: PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promissory_estoppel#Promissory_estoppel)
There are several laws cited above, its thus puzzling to see requests for one to cite the laws USCIS/DOS is accused of violating when its all there in the lawsuit. The plaintiff has the burden of proving the counts they have stated at the appropriate time and not in the complaint. One does not play all their cards in the initial complaint.
Even more puzzling is the persistent fear that there would be retributory action from USCIS. Judges do not take kindly to such behavior and USCIS would have no chance defending itself on charges of retaliatory actions.
Thank you for getting some sanity into the conversation....atleast some people are realising that actions, especially those perpetrated by Govt Agencies, are watched closely. They will be held accountable, whether one likes it or not . If the lawyers want to profit from all of this, let it be so, as long as the voice of a troubled community is heard in a court of law. That is just the first step....
In order to understand how a civil lawsuit works one needs to understand that in a complaint, one makes no legal arguments, does not cite case or precedent law but only cites the simple facts. The other side can respond to the complaint and deny or accept the allegations in part or in whole. Many cases do not go to trial, they end up in settlements or are decided through summary judgement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_judgment) (for the plaintiff or the defendants) if the case has undisputable matters of facts and one of the parties petitions for it. Several processes also take place ie Discovery long before an actual trial. I recommend reading the following wikipedia entry to familiarize one at a high level with the processes and rules involved:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Rule_of_Civil_Procedure
To get to the core legal arguments behind the case, one needs to read the counts (they are only stated and not argued/expounded on starting pg 13). Namely those are:
COUNT I: VIOLATION OF THE FIFTH AMENDMENT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution) (constitutional rights issue)
COUNT II: VIOLATION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_Procedures_Act)
COUNT III: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ACT (http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title4/civ00036.htm)
COUNT IV: EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT (http://www.hhs.gov/dab/guidelines/eaja.html)
COUNT V: PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promissory_estoppel#Promissory_estoppel)
There are several laws cited above, its thus puzzling to see requests for one to cite the laws USCIS/DOS is accused of violating when its all there in the lawsuit. The plaintiff has the burden of proving the counts they have stated at the appropriate time and not in the complaint. One does not play all their cards in the initial complaint.
Even more puzzling is the persistent fear that there would be retributory action from USCIS. Judges do not take kindly to such behavior and USCIS would have no chance defending itself on charges of retaliatory actions.
Thank you for getting some sanity into the conversation....atleast some people are realising that actions, especially those perpetrated by Govt Agencies, are watched closely. They will be held accountable, whether one likes it or not . If the lawyers want to profit from all of this, let it be so, as long as the voice of a troubled community is heard in a court of law. That is just the first step....
more...
chmur
09-10 06:53 PM
It is a given that Demand is not stagnant . If it were , backlog would have been reduced by 140K this year alone.
Each year the new quota is 140K , as long as the new demand each year ~100K - the remaining 40K goes towards backlog elimination . We will know in the next inventory report what is "net" reduction for 2010. One can do rough math of latest inventory report and the current priority dates to arrive at ~approximate figure of 35-40K.
I think EB3 should get cleared in next 5 years - I think flood of new EB2 applications are overblown.
I think "peak demand" was between 2003 and 2007 . Good news is USCIS is no more wasting numbers .
Given that change to laws is almost impossible. We should sit tight and wait for 3-5 years.
Each year the new quota is 140K , as long as the new demand each year ~100K - the remaining 40K goes towards backlog elimination . We will know in the next inventory report what is "net" reduction for 2010. One can do rough math of latest inventory report and the current priority dates to arrive at ~approximate figure of 35-40K.
I think EB3 should get cleared in next 5 years - I think flood of new EB2 applications are overblown.
I think "peak demand" was between 2003 and 2007 . Good news is USCIS is no more wasting numbers .
Given that change to laws is almost impossible. We should sit tight and wait for 3-5 years.
vijayassr
08-05 08:53 PM
Hi, Looks like you have a propabilities now.
1) If your H1 gets approved first before OCT'01st and your L1 does not approve, you should change to company B (who applied H1), if B applied your H1 with CHANGE OF STATUS (you will see new I-94 issued along with approval).
Good thing u can stay in country and work for B.
2) IF your H1 & L1 gets approved one after other in sequence, means first H1 then L1 then I think you are safe to work with company A without leaving country, Murthy.com says its the sequence that matters.
Check with Murthy.com attornies as well, but other Attorneys does not agree with them.It will be only problem when you apply GC, and not in mean while.
3)IF its L1 then H1,and if you want to work with company A, then you need to go out of country and get L1 stamped. Your H1 will remain avilable unless company B cancells it.
4) If your L1 gets approved and H1 gets problem(rejected I dont want this but if happens) then any how u can work for company A.
Hope the above things help.
Thanks
Vijay
1) If your H1 gets approved first before OCT'01st and your L1 does not approve, you should change to company B (who applied H1), if B applied your H1 with CHANGE OF STATUS (you will see new I-94 issued along with approval).
Good thing u can stay in country and work for B.
2) IF your H1 & L1 gets approved one after other in sequence, means first H1 then L1 then I think you are safe to work with company A without leaving country, Murthy.com says its the sequence that matters.
Check with Murthy.com attornies as well, but other Attorneys does not agree with them.It will be only problem when you apply GC, and not in mean while.
3)IF its L1 then H1,and if you want to work with company A, then you need to go out of country and get L1 stamped. Your H1 will remain avilable unless company B cancells it.
4) If your L1 gets approved and H1 gets problem(rejected I dont want this but if happens) then any how u can work for company A.
Hope the above things help.
Thanks
Vijay
more...
roseball
07-09 03:55 PM
Yes, you are right that we cannot sue anyone for working harder. I agree with that part too.
I didnt say they broke the "law" by processing several thousands of cases. What they did is broke their own "regulations" by approving applications with incomplete security/back ground checks.....In the current environment the country is in, this could be a very serious issue. Well again they can argue that regulations can be moulded/twisted to their liking.....
From Oct 2006 - June 2007 USCIS only used 80k of 140k immigrant numbers available and by the end of June, they consumed all of the 140k quota.....There were cases where 485s were approved on 2nd and 3rd of July.....They made a complete mockery of their own regulations is alloting visa numbers as they like....
I didnt say they broke the "law" by processing several thousands of cases. What they did is broke their own "regulations" by approving applications with incomplete security/back ground checks.....In the current environment the country is in, this could be a very serious issue. Well again they can argue that regulations can be moulded/twisted to their liking.....
From Oct 2006 - June 2007 USCIS only used 80k of 140k immigrant numbers available and by the end of June, they consumed all of the 140k quota.....There were cases where 485s were approved on 2nd and 3rd of July.....They made a complete mockery of their own regulations is alloting visa numbers as they like....
2010 tekken wallpaper
chanduv23
09-10 11:42 AM
THIS IS THE TIME - SET YOURSELVES FREE - MARCH TO WASHINGTON
more...
Googler
02-22 11:43 PM
All this discussion about revealing sources and gaining fame is really funny from my pov.
AILA liaison reports routinely name this official, news reports also routinely name this official. He has also testified before Congress and those transcripts are freely available to those who look. If you have not heard his name before and do not know he is the one who sets cutoff dates, it is only because you haven't been paying attention in class...:)
Also in this case it was Ron Gotcher reporting on the AILA So Cal Liaison meeting who revealed his name in the first place.
I should also add that I have no special connection with this or any other official (sigh -- wouldn't I have my greencard already if I did). I've done my share of research since I got stuck in retrogression in Oct 2005, and have exercised my rights as a stakeholder in the immigration process to pick up the phone and ask questions where ever I can. Knowing the sections of the INA, the contents of the Ombudsmans Reports, CRS reports etc. tends to make people very responsive.
As for the reason for me sharing this information -- which after all I could have just sat on for myself -- was because I would want the same -- if someone found out something that potentially was going to affect my greencard I would want to know. I want to know every possible shred of information.
Of course maybe that is what I should do the next time. Just sit tight.:D
AILA liaison reports routinely name this official, news reports also routinely name this official. He has also testified before Congress and those transcripts are freely available to those who look. If you have not heard his name before and do not know he is the one who sets cutoff dates, it is only because you haven't been paying attention in class...:)
Also in this case it was Ron Gotcher reporting on the AILA So Cal Liaison meeting who revealed his name in the first place.
I should also add that I have no special connection with this or any other official (sigh -- wouldn't I have my greencard already if I did). I've done my share of research since I got stuck in retrogression in Oct 2005, and have exercised my rights as a stakeholder in the immigration process to pick up the phone and ask questions where ever I can. Knowing the sections of the INA, the contents of the Ombudsmans Reports, CRS reports etc. tends to make people very responsive.
As for the reason for me sharing this information -- which after all I could have just sat on for myself -- was because I would want the same -- if someone found out something that potentially was going to affect my greencard I would want to know. I want to know every possible shred of information.
Of course maybe that is what I should do the next time. Just sit tight.:D
hair Good TimesIan Smith Desktop
bestia
01-19 01:28 PM
...
I did argue about the scenario if I ended up losing my passport and vital documents, which is why I had made copies. He shook his head and repeated the same - NO PHOTOCOPIES OF OFFICIAL US IMMIGRATION DOCUMENTS FOR PERSONAL USE.
....
Presenting copies of your documents to government officials is not PERSONAL use. You could argue that. Personal use is if you would be playing monopoly with copies of your documents with your friends. But if you make a copy of US document for the intent to present to US official and not to misrepresent the original document, it is not "personal use" and it is not illegal. That's why lawyers are suggesting making and having copies.
I did argue about the scenario if I ended up losing my passport and vital documents, which is why I had made copies. He shook his head and repeated the same - NO PHOTOCOPIES OF OFFICIAL US IMMIGRATION DOCUMENTS FOR PERSONAL USE.
....
Presenting copies of your documents to government officials is not PERSONAL use. You could argue that. Personal use is if you would be playing monopoly with copies of your documents with your friends. But if you make a copy of US document for the intent to present to US official and not to misrepresent the original document, it is not "personal use" and it is not illegal. That's why lawyers are suggesting making and having copies.
more...
prioritydate
09-20 10:08 AM
These stories are scary
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080918/ap_on_bi_ge/ny_economy_4
By MICHAEL GORMLEY, Associated Press Writer Thu Sep 18, 1:03 PM ET
ALBANY, N.Y. - A new projection shows Wall Street's meltdown will likely cost New York state up to 40,000 private sector jobs and $3 billion in tax revenues over the next two years, two state officials said Thursday.
ADVERTISEMENT
The revised numbers in the snapshot of worst case estimates was done Wednesday at the highest levels of New York's state government.
The projection is worse than Gov. David Paterson predicted just Tuesday when he said the state could lose some $1 billion in revenue because of upheaval in the financial sector.
Wall Street is a major economic force in New York state, generating one-fifth of the state's revenues each year.
The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren't authorized to comment on the fiscal analysis.
Both hits would be substantial. The total New York state budget including federal funds is about $120 billion, and the state has about 7.25 million private-sector jobs.
State officials used the model of the fiscal damage to New York after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Then, Gov. George Pataki said it was the worst financial hit to New York since the Great Depression 70 years earlier.
The new analysis includes the stock market drop, lost revenue from transactions and projected lost income tax revenue from Wall Street jobs.
Three of the five major U.S. investment banks � Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch � have either gone out of business or been driven into the arms of another bank. The two remaining banks, Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Morgan Stanley, are under siege.
Oh man! that is really scary.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080918/ap_on_bi_ge/ny_economy_4
By MICHAEL GORMLEY, Associated Press Writer Thu Sep 18, 1:03 PM ET
ALBANY, N.Y. - A new projection shows Wall Street's meltdown will likely cost New York state up to 40,000 private sector jobs and $3 billion in tax revenues over the next two years, two state officials said Thursday.
ADVERTISEMENT
The revised numbers in the snapshot of worst case estimates was done Wednesday at the highest levels of New York's state government.
The projection is worse than Gov. David Paterson predicted just Tuesday when he said the state could lose some $1 billion in revenue because of upheaval in the financial sector.
Wall Street is a major economic force in New York state, generating one-fifth of the state's revenues each year.
The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren't authorized to comment on the fiscal analysis.
Both hits would be substantial. The total New York state budget including federal funds is about $120 billion, and the state has about 7.25 million private-sector jobs.
State officials used the model of the fiscal damage to New York after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Then, Gov. George Pataki said it was the worst financial hit to New York since the Great Depression 70 years earlier.
The new analysis includes the stock market drop, lost revenue from transactions and projected lost income tax revenue from Wall Street jobs.
Three of the five major U.S. investment banks � Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch � have either gone out of business or been driven into the arms of another bank. The two remaining banks, Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Morgan Stanley, are under siege.
Oh man! that is really scary.
hot desktop background wallpapers.
amitjoey
01-02 04:14 PM
Is there any way to find out the number of members in IV. I talked about IV with a lot of my friends and 6 of them have become members. It would be nice to know the number of members in IV just like we know the Percentage of Target Met for $ contributions.
From Pappu's post- total Members till now 7,921.
From Pappu's post- total Members till now 7,921.
more...
house Good Bye Summer
Administrator2
06-11 12:22 PM
Everyone is again talking about ifs and buts. Guys why do not you put your hard work on what is more important than what is never ever going to happen. People with a GC, if this Bill passes, they are not going to renew your GC also. How's about that? People with a US citizenship, with previous GC status, they will not renew the USA passport, if this Bill passes. How's about that?
So forget all these bogus bills, and support our main agenda, which is to remove the Backlogs. If you do not have any new news, then sit idle, but please do not spread these bogus out-of-world stories.
Don’t think you understand so let me give it a shot.
We just got off a conference call with our coalition partners. This is a real threat. Everyone, including some of the largest of companies on the planet think this is a real threat. It you are a lawyer or if you represent some law firm, then please go back and get busy with entering items like first and last name in a simple immigration form. This is not your area of expertise.
Experts with this are saying that the language is deliberately kept vague. Some of the terms used in the language of the amendment do not have direct corresponding visa. Since we don’t trust the guys behind this amendment, we think they have deliberately kept the language which is not precise.
Consider this as a kick-off for the election campaign. The real risk is, even if this amendment is defeated, between now and the elections we will all see many similar amendments. At some point Senators will be forced to vote on an issue which is pitched as “American citizens” v/s “foreign workers”. Experts believe that anti immigrants will try to push this amendment in middle of the night in the must pass bills.
Some lawyer, for the purpose of pandering to the client base, is of the opinion that this amendment does not affect EADs. In the grand scheme of things this is plain wrong because he/she will not be asked to leave the country if such an amendment passes in the middle of the night. Just engaging in name calling Senator Grassley or calling the Senator pig face is not going to stop the amendment. Please grow up and get real. Your pandering may get innocent audience to believe that there is no real threat even when everyone with any real sense of expertise is scrambling to oppose this amendment.
Immigration Voice and its coalition partners do not see this amendment in isolation. We are hoping for the best and preparing for the worst. And for the lack of clarity from the amendment language, we think that the intent of the amendment sponsors is to see us all out of here.
There is no simple way for the anti-immigrants to throw us all out in a single stroke. They will always engage in systematic elimination of everyone starting from the most vulnerable. The language is vague and it could be interpreted in lot of different ways. It is not wise to look for the most favorable interpretation of the language to find reasons for not doing anything because in the end our interpretation will mean nothing.
Let’s be smart, think for ourselves and act on our own behalf to send simple message requesting the Senate offices to oppose this amendment. What is so complicated about this? And if you don't want to participate, that's fine, but why would you discourage others from sending a simple message to the Senators from their state? Don't you have anything better to do?
So forget all these bogus bills, and support our main agenda, which is to remove the Backlogs. If you do not have any new news, then sit idle, but please do not spread these bogus out-of-world stories.
Don’t think you understand so let me give it a shot.
We just got off a conference call with our coalition partners. This is a real threat. Everyone, including some of the largest of companies on the planet think this is a real threat. It you are a lawyer or if you represent some law firm, then please go back and get busy with entering items like first and last name in a simple immigration form. This is not your area of expertise.
Experts with this are saying that the language is deliberately kept vague. Some of the terms used in the language of the amendment do not have direct corresponding visa. Since we don’t trust the guys behind this amendment, we think they have deliberately kept the language which is not precise.
Consider this as a kick-off for the election campaign. The real risk is, even if this amendment is defeated, between now and the elections we will all see many similar amendments. At some point Senators will be forced to vote on an issue which is pitched as “American citizens” v/s “foreign workers”. Experts believe that anti immigrants will try to push this amendment in middle of the night in the must pass bills.
Some lawyer, for the purpose of pandering to the client base, is of the opinion that this amendment does not affect EADs. In the grand scheme of things this is plain wrong because he/she will not be asked to leave the country if such an amendment passes in the middle of the night. Just engaging in name calling Senator Grassley or calling the Senator pig face is not going to stop the amendment. Please grow up and get real. Your pandering may get innocent audience to believe that there is no real threat even when everyone with any real sense of expertise is scrambling to oppose this amendment.
Immigration Voice and its coalition partners do not see this amendment in isolation. We are hoping for the best and preparing for the worst. And for the lack of clarity from the amendment language, we think that the intent of the amendment sponsors is to see us all out of here.
There is no simple way for the anti-immigrants to throw us all out in a single stroke. They will always engage in systematic elimination of everyone starting from the most vulnerable. The language is vague and it could be interpreted in lot of different ways. It is not wise to look for the most favorable interpretation of the language to find reasons for not doing anything because in the end our interpretation will mean nothing.
Let’s be smart, think for ourselves and act on our own behalf to send simple message requesting the Senate offices to oppose this amendment. What is so complicated about this? And if you don't want to participate, that's fine, but why would you discourage others from sending a simple message to the Senators from their state? Don't you have anything better to do?
tattoo good desktop wallpaper is
GCard_Dream
12-12 05:48 PM
nomi,
I am very surprised that there is not as much interest in this thread as I had expected but you are doing great in trying to explore this avenue. I wish I had some of the answers. Keep up the good work.
I am very surprised that there is not as much interest in this thread as I had expected but you are doing great in trying to explore this avenue. I wish I had some of the answers. Keep up the good work.
more...
pictures est desktop wallpaper for mac
singhsa3
03-05 06:20 PM
We are people with certain mission and not a censorship board. Yes correct, everyone has right to express their opinion but not at the expense of the mission.
We have now a powerful story to tell. Almost 60% of repsondent are waiting, just waiting for immigration situation to improve, before they can take any major investment decision.
If I were a lawmaker with any softcorner for people like us , this is the story that we help him bring our issue to the frontline.
As we speak, people like Murali are working hard to schedule the lawmaker meetings.
Now, I see you are PD ROW, so most likely this is not as important to you as it is for us.
I think that everybody has the right to express their opinion.
Anything else is sensorship
good luck to all
We have now a powerful story to tell. Almost 60% of repsondent are waiting, just waiting for immigration situation to improve, before they can take any major investment decision.
If I were a lawmaker with any softcorner for people like us , this is the story that we help him bring our issue to the frontline.
As we speak, people like Murali are working hard to schedule the lawmaker meetings.
Now, I see you are PD ROW, so most likely this is not as important to you as it is for us.
I think that everybody has the right to express their opinion.
Anything else is sensorship
good luck to all
dresses Beer is good desktop wallpaper
mbartosik
09-19 03:52 AM
first - glad you liked my little skit / comedy show, Arman asked me to write a speech, I don't think that was quite what he had in mind when he asked me to speak :D
That was actually a toned down version of my skit :D I took out many of gags and would have loved to put more in.
I hope that a video will be posted, the crowd reaction was fantastic, at least that's what it sounded like from the stage. I had so many people coming up to me after. I've still not quite come down from it. It was fun to deliver too.
------
I like to idea of legalimmigrationvoice.org
legalimmigrationvoice.com points here, but I see that
legalimmigrationvoice.org has this
"If you are interested to have this website please contact us at registerflyaccount@yahoo.com"
I hope that was one of us that registered it (not a camper).
On the rally I saw lots of positive reactions, and just one negative reaction, and I think that he could not read or just assumed illegal, he called out "it will never happen". Even if we had signs that said "We are legal" some would still assume that we were undocumented because they would think that we were only claiming not to be criminals since crossing the boarder without presenting oneself for inspection is technically a civil offense I think. If we all wore suits the mistake would have been made less. The undocumented issue is so embedded in the public's minds.
Signs do need to be more brief.
The anonymity of a forum alias is not a good thing I think. Although the aliases are often cute. Some people called and asked if they had to give their names at registration. The boggy man will not get us! Big brother is not watching, remember he can only afford $2 for name check, so he cannot afford prospection glasses. Also it is handy to know people's names.
Yes we are mostly Indian and mostly Indian and Chinese have really bad delays. But it is unhelpful refer to Indians and Chinese joining forces, or this being an Indian org. etc. I put a lot of effort into trying to show my face in places to make the point that we are not just Indians and Chinese.
(Being a minority Anglo Saxon here I also put a lot of effort into emphasizing dropping country quotas.)
I wore a suit, 3 piece, yes my shirt was sweaty, but that was not caused by the rally it is was my crazy schedule of back to back meetings, and running around logistics organizing. Ironically I rarely wear a suit at work.
Maybe holding a few signs with our job titles would make the point. I think that would have helped reporters pick people out for interviews.
I think that Aman learnt that he needed at least 2 personal assistants on the day.
That was actually a toned down version of my skit :D I took out many of gags and would have loved to put more in.
I hope that a video will be posted, the crowd reaction was fantastic, at least that's what it sounded like from the stage. I had so many people coming up to me after. I've still not quite come down from it. It was fun to deliver too.
------
I like to idea of legalimmigrationvoice.org
legalimmigrationvoice.com points here, but I see that
legalimmigrationvoice.org has this
"If you are interested to have this website please contact us at registerflyaccount@yahoo.com"
I hope that was one of us that registered it (not a camper).
On the rally I saw lots of positive reactions, and just one negative reaction, and I think that he could not read or just assumed illegal, he called out "it will never happen". Even if we had signs that said "We are legal" some would still assume that we were undocumented because they would think that we were only claiming not to be criminals since crossing the boarder without presenting oneself for inspection is technically a civil offense I think. If we all wore suits the mistake would have been made less. The undocumented issue is so embedded in the public's minds.
Signs do need to be more brief.
The anonymity of a forum alias is not a good thing I think. Although the aliases are often cute. Some people called and asked if they had to give their names at registration. The boggy man will not get us! Big brother is not watching, remember he can only afford $2 for name check, so he cannot afford prospection glasses. Also it is handy to know people's names.
Yes we are mostly Indian and mostly Indian and Chinese have really bad delays. But it is unhelpful refer to Indians and Chinese joining forces, or this being an Indian org. etc. I put a lot of effort into trying to show my face in places to make the point that we are not just Indians and Chinese.
(Being a minority Anglo Saxon here I also put a lot of effort into emphasizing dropping country quotas.)
I wore a suit, 3 piece, yes my shirt was sweaty, but that was not caused by the rally it is was my crazy schedule of back to back meetings, and running around logistics organizing. Ironically I rarely wear a suit at work.
Maybe holding a few signs with our job titles would make the point. I think that would have helped reporters pick people out for interviews.
I think that Aman learnt that he needed at least 2 personal assistants on the day.
more...
makeup good desktop wallpaper
fatboysam
12-25 10:20 AM
I will like to know if a person on L2 visa with EAD can open new company in US ?
girlfriend Good Ba Ba Desktop Wallpaper
Madhuri
04-02 03:41 PM
You are absolutely right about rippling effect. I personally know someone, yet to graduate, yet to get OPT also, but got trained in ETL/Datawarehousing before graduation, got a job thr' desi shop as a H1 consultant with 6 years experience. I was really shocked to see the level to which people can lie. I am sure their lies won't stand in critical work situations when REAL exp. is warrented. But the damage is already done.
[QUOTE=imv116]
Nothing wrong, but just the fact that hiring becomes difficult and and people with genuine experience will also have to go through stringent hiring procedures. Say someone really has 8 years experience and someone is faking 8 years experience, both are competing for the same job and as a hiring manager, if the job is filled with someone with fake exp and this person does not perform, it will have a rippling effect. I have seen this happen.
[QUOTE=imv116]
Nothing wrong, but just the fact that hiring becomes difficult and and people with genuine experience will also have to go through stringent hiring procedures. Say someone really has 8 years experience and someone is faking 8 years experience, both are competing for the same job and as a hiring manager, if the job is filled with someone with fake exp and this person does not perform, it will have a rippling effect. I have seen this happen.
hairstyles desktop wallpapers,
factoryman
06-20 06:29 PM
Download and do it. Your attorney may be asking for that purpose. Only last 5 years.
Is there any official Period of Stay form or its just a summary statement from us about entry exit from start till now.
Is there any official Period of Stay form or its just a summary statement from us about entry exit from start till now.
gauravster
11-11 12:02 PM
The draft letter looks good. I think, we should also send a copy or new letter to the Ombudsman and to the DOS (as DOS is also involved in how many visas are released).
That way we do not get pushed around.
Good work.
Gaurav
That way we do not get pushed around.
Good work.
Gaurav
sprash
01-30 02:35 PM
Wow! Thanks a lot for posting such detailed RFE information. This really helps a lot in understanding what I may be asked.
My GC sponsoring employer revoked my H1 last year itself. I could see the change in status back then itself within a month of having left them. Nothing happenned after that. I got a new H1 from my (then) new employer and things continued as before. This employer has not yet revoked my H1 (from what I can see) and its probably because they are almost going under. There are less than 25 people left in the company so I doubt that they will have spent the money to go and revoke all the H1s of the folks they laid off.
Maybe its like someone suggested - USCIS is pre-processing my 485 based on received date since I mailed my app very early on in July 2007.
Yes, I believe thats what they might be doing - preprocessing. There was no obvious 'trigger' event that caused RFE on my case either. They raised these RFEs even though I had not changed my sponsoring employer or transferred my h1b. I have a feeling they preprocessed mine too.
I don't mean to scare you (just prepare you for the worst) --- you might want to talk to some desi consultants and make an arrangement that in case the RFE is employment verification, they give you pay stubs from the time you were laid off. As you can see from my RFE, you might need to show your recent paystubs and employment verification. Yes, it will be a financial loss for you, but without these I believe your case can get rejected (gurus correct me if I'm wrong!).
Again I am is just hypothesizing your situation, your case might be entirely different. This is 'just in case'.....
My GC sponsoring employer revoked my H1 last year itself. I could see the change in status back then itself within a month of having left them. Nothing happenned after that. I got a new H1 from my (then) new employer and things continued as before. This employer has not yet revoked my H1 (from what I can see) and its probably because they are almost going under. There are less than 25 people left in the company so I doubt that they will have spent the money to go and revoke all the H1s of the folks they laid off.
Maybe its like someone suggested - USCIS is pre-processing my 485 based on received date since I mailed my app very early on in July 2007.
Yes, I believe thats what they might be doing - preprocessing. There was no obvious 'trigger' event that caused RFE on my case either. They raised these RFEs even though I had not changed my sponsoring employer or transferred my h1b. I have a feeling they preprocessed mine too.
I don't mean to scare you (just prepare you for the worst) --- you might want to talk to some desi consultants and make an arrangement that in case the RFE is employment verification, they give you pay stubs from the time you were laid off. As you can see from my RFE, you might need to show your recent paystubs and employment verification. Yes, it will be a financial loss for you, but without these I believe your case can get rejected (gurus correct me if I'm wrong!).
Again I am is just hypothesizing your situation, your case might be entirely different. This is 'just in case'.....