it is ok
08-21 07:50 PM
Dear All:
Do we need to dial 011-91-and then Phone Number, or we can simply Dial the number..
Thanks,
Do we need to dial 011-91-and then Phone Number, or we can simply Dial the number..
Thanks,
wallpaper A League of Their Own
jsb
10-13 11:02 AM
As per the conference call discussion, I have sent details to Ombudsman, including Fedex tracking and covering letter, received by USCIS NSC on July 2
psaxena
06-08 09:14 PM
Call USCIS and they should be able be give you the right direction. Please update us on how it goes.
Hi Guys,
I am pretty new to the forum (as a member), I have been browsing the same for quite some time and found it a good source of information regarding immigration related activities. Right now I am getting removed from my project as one of the top 3 Indian outsourcing firm is dumping their L1 resources at my client site and replacing all the citizens, GCs, EADs, H1 etc. These resources are used in projects managed and controlled by my client (most of them are consulting assignments) and these resources are used on java/.net/oracle projects, these two are violations of L1 visa restrictions set by USCIS, I want to know how and where to complain against this violation and we have all evidence to prove the same (project documents, time sheets, work assignments etc). Please let me know exactly and to which agencies we should complain.
Thanks in Advance,
Srini
Hi Guys,
I am pretty new to the forum (as a member), I have been browsing the same for quite some time and found it a good source of information regarding immigration related activities. Right now I am getting removed from my project as one of the top 3 Indian outsourcing firm is dumping their L1 resources at my client site and replacing all the citizens, GCs, EADs, H1 etc. These resources are used in projects managed and controlled by my client (most of them are consulting assignments) and these resources are used on java/.net/oracle projects, these two are violations of L1 visa restrictions set by USCIS, I want to know how and where to complain against this violation and we have all evidence to prove the same (project documents, time sheets, work assignments etc). Please let me know exactly and to which agencies we should complain.
Thanks in Advance,
Srini
2011 A League of Their Own
waitnwatch
08-21 12:33 PM
Yes, the same law can be interpreted like this:
EB1-ROW unused visa will go to EB2-ROW
EB2-ROW unused visa will go to EB3-ROW
Same for each country.
But its not happening. What actually is happening that they are giving unused visa from EB1-ROW to EB2-ROW to EB2-I/C. WHY?
So EB3-ROW is retrogressed bcoz it doesn't get any spillover and hence it affect EB3-I.
So where is the correct interpretation? Does any body know?
Don't take me wrong here. I don't favor EB3-ROW or any particular category. I am EB3-I with PD Nov 2002.
The bottom line is that there should not exist such severe retrogression and that is what all of us should work to remove. But the law is what it is -
The law makes allotment between categories (EB1, EB2 and EB3) in Sec. 203 of the INA. Section 202 talks about country limit (note the exception clause which provides for the parallel distribution as the country limit becomes invalid if more visas are available in a category than is consumed using per country limitation).
Excerpt from Section 202 of the INA
(2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. - Subject to 1a/ paragraphs (3), (4), and (5) the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed 7 percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or 2 percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.
(3) Exception if additional visas available. - If because of the application of paragraph (2) with respect to one or more foreign states or dependent areas, the total number of visas available under both subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who otherwise may be issued such a visa, paragraph (2) shall not apply to visas made available to such states or areas during the remainder of such calendar quarter.
EB1-ROW unused visa will go to EB2-ROW
EB2-ROW unused visa will go to EB3-ROW
Same for each country.
But its not happening. What actually is happening that they are giving unused visa from EB1-ROW to EB2-ROW to EB2-I/C. WHY?
So EB3-ROW is retrogressed bcoz it doesn't get any spillover and hence it affect EB3-I.
So where is the correct interpretation? Does any body know?
Don't take me wrong here. I don't favor EB3-ROW or any particular category. I am EB3-I with PD Nov 2002.
The bottom line is that there should not exist such severe retrogression and that is what all of us should work to remove. But the law is what it is -
The law makes allotment between categories (EB1, EB2 and EB3) in Sec. 203 of the INA. Section 202 talks about country limit (note the exception clause which provides for the parallel distribution as the country limit becomes invalid if more visas are available in a category than is consumed using per country limitation).
Excerpt from Section 202 of the INA
(2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. - Subject to 1a/ paragraphs (3), (4), and (5) the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed 7 percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or 2 percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.
(3) Exception if additional visas available. - If because of the application of paragraph (2) with respect to one or more foreign states or dependent areas, the total number of visas available under both subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who otherwise may be issued such a visa, paragraph (2) shall not apply to visas made available to such states or areas during the remainder of such calendar quarter.
more...
AreWeThereYet
08-18 12:26 PM
Congratulations!!
So, the IO just called? Did you raise any SR/file complaint with ombudsman/enquire through congressman?
our applications were supposedly approved today. IO called home around 7:30AM.
Dependent case is being worked on though..he said we should get approval notice in 3 days.
I am just waiting for approval notice now..hmm..its a different wait :D:D
So, the IO just called? Did you raise any SR/file complaint with ombudsman/enquire through congressman?
our applications were supposedly approved today. IO called home around 7:30AM.
Dependent case is being worked on though..he said we should get approval notice in 3 days.
I am just waiting for approval notice now..hmm..its a different wait :D:D
indio0617
01-12 05:29 PM
**Deleted the post**
Guys: That was old news from 2004... Just spotted it. Hope he really acts on it this year
Guys: That was old news from 2004... Just spotted it. Hope he really acts on it this year
more...
wandmaker
01-09 06:39 PM
Now long awaited Feb 08 bulletin is out and the dates are as expected. It is time for all IVans (including guests) to help IV to succeed in the campaign. Focus your energy, spread the word, make others do the same - IV will help us succeed.
2010 2010 hair in A League of Their
CADude
09-28 11:33 AM
Please write to your congressman/senator/USCIS Compaint dept, if you have not done so far. Template and details are available in this tread. Thank you.
more...
intbuz
08-19 02:37 PM
Yes. Indeed you are approved..Congrats.
thanks Anil
thanks Anil
hair Tea Leoni was born on February
Rajk
06-16 12:29 PM
A# is the alien number that is given to the applicant during the GC process. It is either given at 140 approval or at 485. If you have a A# in your 140 approval then you can use that # in all your 485 forms.
To answer pranju's question, yes its only for primary applicant. You can leave that field as blank for your spouse.
Thanks gcnirvana.
I have a copy of my approved I-140, and the only number I see on it is Receipt Number at the top left side of the notice. It reads like LIN-xx-xxx-xxxxx.
Is this the A# number you are referring to?
To answer pranju's question, yes its only for primary applicant. You can leave that field as blank for your spouse.
Thanks gcnirvana.
I have a copy of my approved I-140, and the only number I see on it is Receipt Number at the top left side of the notice. It reads like LIN-xx-xxx-xxxxx.
Is this the A# number you are referring to?
more...
kiran24
06-29 07:20 PM
yeah enjoy ur weekend. if you have filed ur application then chill and if not then ....what r u doing , lazy boy...move ur ass and courier it now.....hahahhhaha.
Most of us are at the mercy of our attorney's to file for I-485. The attorney's take their sweet time to prepare the draft and send the application. In this heated moment the attorney's offices should hire more people and get the ball rolling.
All that we can do as employees is pester our HRs and attorneys.:p
Most of us are at the mercy of our attorney's to file for I-485. The attorney's take their sweet time to prepare the draft and send the application. In this heated moment the attorney's offices should hire more people and get the ball rolling.
All that we can do as employees is pester our HRs and attorneys.:p
hot Own. tea leoni a league of
kumar1
07-13 10:15 AM
Lou Dobbs and CNN runs an hour long "Hate Immigrants" Program every night Monday to Friday. He repeatedly calls US immigration as a failed system, H1-B and L1...as cheap labor and stealing American jobs, he has big problem with China and China's developing economy, He blames foreigners for bad economic condition of California. He proudly uses the word "Illegal Alien". His program "Lou Dobbs Tonight" is nothing less that someone in Iran running a hate show against America. Lou Dobb always called CIR as "So Called Grand Amnesy"! Once this July visa bulletin fiasco settles down, we need to get together and attack this guy, every night so that he can stop his hate propoganda.
more...
house A League of Their Own
soni7007
08-07 01:24 PM
LOL...
This reminds me:
Car = $30,000
iPhone = $200
House = $450,000
Icecream = $2.50
TV = $500
There are some things money CAN buy, For everything else, there's GREEN CARD
(i don't know what everything else is though...LOL)
To add a few more conditions to the aforesaid situation...
This is 2008.. Both JE and MBA are thinking that they will get their GC in 2009...
Meanwhile they start arguing.. and many like them join their verbal-struggle..
Because of this, IV community is divided.. Earlier only 200 people used to respond to action items .. now because of the rift only 100 do... this weakens the momentum that the campaign had..
Meanwhile, NumbersUSA et all increased their efforts..
Anti-immigration forces are united and under their pressure all the EB relief bills fail...
Election is close USCIS shifts the focus to FB visas..
EB backlog, retrogression goes up..
JE and MBA still fighting their verbal fight... in same line.. still fighting with words... with few more years added to their wait-time.
This reminds me:
Car = $30,000
iPhone = $200
House = $450,000
Icecream = $2.50
TV = $500
There are some things money CAN buy, For everything else, there's GREEN CARD
(i don't know what everything else is though...LOL)
To add a few more conditions to the aforesaid situation...
This is 2008.. Both JE and MBA are thinking that they will get their GC in 2009...
Meanwhile they start arguing.. and many like them join their verbal-struggle..
Because of this, IV community is divided.. Earlier only 200 people used to respond to action items .. now because of the rift only 100 do... this weakens the momentum that the campaign had..
Meanwhile, NumbersUSA et all increased their efforts..
Anti-immigration forces are united and under their pressure all the EB relief bills fail...
Election is close USCIS shifts the focus to FB visas..
EB backlog, retrogression goes up..
JE and MBA still fighting their verbal fight... in same line.. still fighting with words... with few more years added to their wait-time.
tattoo A League of Their Own
kevinkris
01-24 02:55 PM
How can you confirm this?
Police solved the Duke case partially that it's robbery case.
Don't come to conclusions yourselves..
On top of these issues, apparent hate crimes against Indians at LSU and then at Duke would certainly make a lot of parents a little nervous before sending their kids for higher education here.
GG_007
Police solved the Duke case partially that it's robbery case.
Don't come to conclusions yourselves..
On top of these issues, apparent hate crimes against Indians at LSU and then at Duke would certainly make a lot of parents a little nervous before sending their kids for higher education here.
GG_007
more...
pictures tea leoni a league of their
SunnySurya
08-07 10:16 AM
Thank you , you are the first one to understand my message.
Thousands of people are paying thousands of dollars to port to EB2 but they can't spare even a shameful 5 bucks to support a truly great initiative.
By the way , I am serious about lawsuit. As it will block an easy way out for most people.
I guess everybody should support Rolling and Sunny because this initative will create an opening for all other immigration issues.
Everyone waiting for years to get their GC has a real reason to think why USCIS didn't do their job right.
I would say if Sunny and Rolling stone really file a lawsuit, it is like they turning the spotlight on USCIS and from there the rest us can work to bring more light to the bigger issues with USCIS
Thousands of people are paying thousands of dollars to port to EB2 but they can't spare even a shameful 5 bucks to support a truly great initiative.
By the way , I am serious about lawsuit. As it will block an easy way out for most people.
I guess everybody should support Rolling and Sunny because this initative will create an opening for all other immigration issues.
Everyone waiting for years to get their GC has a real reason to think why USCIS didn't do their job right.
I would say if Sunny and Rolling stone really file a lawsuit, it is like they turning the spotlight on USCIS and from there the rest us can work to bring more light to the bigger issues with USCIS
dresses in A League of Their Own
Milind123
07-18 11:41 PM
One way to end his mis-information is to make a list of the companies who advertise on his show. After that we need to communicate with these companies about the lies he spews on his show and also threaten to boycott all their products, if they continue to sponsor his show.
Remember, I can't make a difference, you can't make a difference. But both of us can certainly make a difference.
Remember, I can't make a difference, you can't make a difference. But both of us can certainly make a difference.
more...
makeup madonna. $16.00
H1B-GC
02-02 04:03 PM
eb_retrogression,
Can you post the article here? I'm not able to get to it.
Admin,
Here you go ::p
President Takes Dual Tack on Immigration
White House Seeks Tougher Enforcement,
While Pushing Idea of Guest-Worker Program
By JUNE KRONHOLZ
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
February 2, 2006; Page A8
WASHINGTON -- President bush drew big applause during his State of the Union address with a renewed call for "a rational, humane guest-worker program" to keep the economy humming.
But that appeal came only after Mr. Bush issued a much sterner one first -- for tougher enforcement of immigration laws, more vigilance on the border and an immigration policy that "reflects our values."
The message Mr. Bush delivered to lawmakers is the same one an increasingly vocal anti-immigration chorus is sending to him: First get tough; then we'll talk.
Mr. Bush was cheered by an unlikely alliance of pro-business Republicans, Democrats, unions and immigrant groups when he called for a guest-worker program in his State of the Union address two years ago. But the idea has hit a wall of opposition from the party's cultural conservatives and security hawks who first want to stop the flood of illegal immigrants into the U.S. (See related article.)
In December, the House of Representatives passed legislation that would, among other things, extend a short wall on the border with Mexico to 700 miles. The Senate, which had planned to overhaul immigration laws when it takes up its own bill in a few weeks, now also is under pressure from some Republicans to toughen border controls first.
As immigration soars to an all-time high, that get-tough argument is gaining political steam. With the 2006 elections still 10 months away, a half-dozen candidates are running for national office on pledges to stop illegal immigration. Bills on the issue, many denying benefits to illegal immigrants, have been introduced in 31 state legislatures.
STATE OF THE UNION REVIEW
• Can President's Plan Keep America Competitive?
• Bush's Energy Plan Faces Hurdles
• Industry Cheers Cleaner-Coal Push
• Full Text: Read the complete prepared text of the address.
• Question of the Day: Which topic should the Bush administration make its top priority this year?
And polls show mounting voter unease about immigration: A December 2005 Wall Street Journal-NBC poll found that 57% of those questioned think the U.S. is "too open to immigrants."
"It's astonishing how much this has become an issue across the country," says Brian Bilbray, a San Diego Republican who hopes to return to the U.S. House of Representatives this year after spending the past six years as a lobbyist for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, which wants to restrict immigration.
But for all the emotion immigration is stirring up, political operatives in both parties warn that it isn't an issue that rallies voters. "Will this impact your electoral ambitions?" asks Ryan Ellis of the conservative group Americans for Tax Reform, who has studied the role immigration played in recent elections. "All history has indicated 'no,' whether you're in Arizona or Maine," he answers.
It didn't prove a successful strategy for the Virginia governor's race in November. Republican Jerry Kilgore seized late in the campaign on the issue of taxpayer-funded job centers for illegal immigrants, and in a stinging television ad asked of his Democratic opponent, "What part of illegal does Tim Kaine not understand?" Although immigration was only one issue in the campaign, Mr. Kaine won with 52% of the vote.
Likewise, in December, in a special House election in California's Orange County -- where illegal immigration is a flashpoint -- Jim Gilchrist, founder of the Minuteman Project, a volunteer border-patrol group, won just 25% of the vote.
Mr. Ellis of Americans for Tax Reform also points to seven 2004 Republican primaries where immigration-restriction candidates never won more than 46% of the vote. Among those beating back challenges: Arizona Congressmen James Kolbe and Jeff Flake, who are sponsors of a House bill that would let illegal immigrants earn legal residency in the U.S.
Candidates who want to restrict immigration seem not to fare well because very few people worry enough about immigration to vote on it -- even though many of them tell pollsters they're worried. In the Wall Street Journal-NBC poll, 78% of those questioned favored "tightening" the border with Mexico -- but only 7% said illegal immigration was their biggest national concern.
Immigration is "a loud debate that produces few voters," says Frank Sharry, director of the National Immigration Forum, a Washington immigrants-rights group.
But that doesn't mean immigration won't be talked about this campaign season. Most prominently among 2006 candidates, Rep. Tom Tancredo, a Colorado Republican, is toying with a symbolic run for the White House. Among other things, Mr. Tancredo wants to deport the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants now in the U.S. and deny citizenship to the U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants.
Immigration restrictionists also have announced runs for governor in Colorado, for the U.S. Senate from California and for a smattering of House seats. San Diego's Mr. Bilbray is running in an April primary to succeed former Rep. Randall "Duke" Cunningham while also pursuing a class-action lawsuit that would prevent California public colleges from offering in-state tuition to illegal aliens.
Some state legislatures are considering extending in-state tuition, health benefits and driver's licenses to illegal immigrants, even while others want to ban such benefits. In Ohio, a statehouse Republican has said he is considering an amendment to the U.S. Constitution to exclude illegal immigrants from the census counts that are used to apportion Congressional seats.
Bills in New Hampshire and North Carolina would require local policemen to enforce federal immigration laws, and one in Virginia would require proof of legal residency to obtain a marriage license.
With Republicans largely leading the anti-immigration charge, the issue is causing heartburn for the national party, which was hoping that its generally pro-immigration stand would help it pick up Hispanic voters. Twelve years ago, California's Republican Gov. Pete Wilson won re-election in part by campaigning for a ballot measure that would deny benefits to illegal aliens -- a rare instance where an anti-immigration stand won the day.
But a decade passed before Republicans won the governor's office again, and they still haven't won back Hispanic voters. "It was a metaphor for short-term gain, long-term loss," says the National Immigration Forum's Mr. Sharry.
Republican pollster Ed Goeas says he urges his clients to talk about solutions to illegal immigration instead of focusing on emotion-charged issues like immigrant job centers if they want to win. His firm, the Tarrance Group, does polling for several immigration-restriction candidates, including Mr. Tancredo, he says.
But in anticipation of the 2006 elections, he's also running voter focus groups to help candidates handle such volatile issues as amnesty for illegal immigrants and whether to allow guest workers to eventually stay in the U.S. After voters let off steam, he says, focus groups show that immigration "becomes a very reasoned conversation very quickly."
Write to June Kronholz at june.kronholz@wsj.com
Source : Wall Street Journal : 02/01/2006
Can you post the article here? I'm not able to get to it.
Admin,
Here you go ::p
President Takes Dual Tack on Immigration
White House Seeks Tougher Enforcement,
While Pushing Idea of Guest-Worker Program
By JUNE KRONHOLZ
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
February 2, 2006; Page A8
WASHINGTON -- President bush drew big applause during his State of the Union address with a renewed call for "a rational, humane guest-worker program" to keep the economy humming.
But that appeal came only after Mr. Bush issued a much sterner one first -- for tougher enforcement of immigration laws, more vigilance on the border and an immigration policy that "reflects our values."
The message Mr. Bush delivered to lawmakers is the same one an increasingly vocal anti-immigration chorus is sending to him: First get tough; then we'll talk.
Mr. Bush was cheered by an unlikely alliance of pro-business Republicans, Democrats, unions and immigrant groups when he called for a guest-worker program in his State of the Union address two years ago. But the idea has hit a wall of opposition from the party's cultural conservatives and security hawks who first want to stop the flood of illegal immigrants into the U.S. (See related article.)
In December, the House of Representatives passed legislation that would, among other things, extend a short wall on the border with Mexico to 700 miles. The Senate, which had planned to overhaul immigration laws when it takes up its own bill in a few weeks, now also is under pressure from some Republicans to toughen border controls first.
As immigration soars to an all-time high, that get-tough argument is gaining political steam. With the 2006 elections still 10 months away, a half-dozen candidates are running for national office on pledges to stop illegal immigration. Bills on the issue, many denying benefits to illegal immigrants, have been introduced in 31 state legislatures.
STATE OF THE UNION REVIEW
• Can President's Plan Keep America Competitive?
• Bush's Energy Plan Faces Hurdles
• Industry Cheers Cleaner-Coal Push
• Full Text: Read the complete prepared text of the address.
• Question of the Day: Which topic should the Bush administration make its top priority this year?
And polls show mounting voter unease about immigration: A December 2005 Wall Street Journal-NBC poll found that 57% of those questioned think the U.S. is "too open to immigrants."
"It's astonishing how much this has become an issue across the country," says Brian Bilbray, a San Diego Republican who hopes to return to the U.S. House of Representatives this year after spending the past six years as a lobbyist for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, which wants to restrict immigration.
But for all the emotion immigration is stirring up, political operatives in both parties warn that it isn't an issue that rallies voters. "Will this impact your electoral ambitions?" asks Ryan Ellis of the conservative group Americans for Tax Reform, who has studied the role immigration played in recent elections. "All history has indicated 'no,' whether you're in Arizona or Maine," he answers.
It didn't prove a successful strategy for the Virginia governor's race in November. Republican Jerry Kilgore seized late in the campaign on the issue of taxpayer-funded job centers for illegal immigrants, and in a stinging television ad asked of his Democratic opponent, "What part of illegal does Tim Kaine not understand?" Although immigration was only one issue in the campaign, Mr. Kaine won with 52% of the vote.
Likewise, in December, in a special House election in California's Orange County -- where illegal immigration is a flashpoint -- Jim Gilchrist, founder of the Minuteman Project, a volunteer border-patrol group, won just 25% of the vote.
Mr. Ellis of Americans for Tax Reform also points to seven 2004 Republican primaries where immigration-restriction candidates never won more than 46% of the vote. Among those beating back challenges: Arizona Congressmen James Kolbe and Jeff Flake, who are sponsors of a House bill that would let illegal immigrants earn legal residency in the U.S.
Candidates who want to restrict immigration seem not to fare well because very few people worry enough about immigration to vote on it -- even though many of them tell pollsters they're worried. In the Wall Street Journal-NBC poll, 78% of those questioned favored "tightening" the border with Mexico -- but only 7% said illegal immigration was their biggest national concern.
Immigration is "a loud debate that produces few voters," says Frank Sharry, director of the National Immigration Forum, a Washington immigrants-rights group.
But that doesn't mean immigration won't be talked about this campaign season. Most prominently among 2006 candidates, Rep. Tom Tancredo, a Colorado Republican, is toying with a symbolic run for the White House. Among other things, Mr. Tancredo wants to deport the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants now in the U.S. and deny citizenship to the U.S.-born children of illegal immigrants.
Immigration restrictionists also have announced runs for governor in Colorado, for the U.S. Senate from California and for a smattering of House seats. San Diego's Mr. Bilbray is running in an April primary to succeed former Rep. Randall "Duke" Cunningham while also pursuing a class-action lawsuit that would prevent California public colleges from offering in-state tuition to illegal aliens.
Some state legislatures are considering extending in-state tuition, health benefits and driver's licenses to illegal immigrants, even while others want to ban such benefits. In Ohio, a statehouse Republican has said he is considering an amendment to the U.S. Constitution to exclude illegal immigrants from the census counts that are used to apportion Congressional seats.
Bills in New Hampshire and North Carolina would require local policemen to enforce federal immigration laws, and one in Virginia would require proof of legal residency to obtain a marriage license.
With Republicans largely leading the anti-immigration charge, the issue is causing heartburn for the national party, which was hoping that its generally pro-immigration stand would help it pick up Hispanic voters. Twelve years ago, California's Republican Gov. Pete Wilson won re-election in part by campaigning for a ballot measure that would deny benefits to illegal aliens -- a rare instance where an anti-immigration stand won the day.
But a decade passed before Republicans won the governor's office again, and they still haven't won back Hispanic voters. "It was a metaphor for short-term gain, long-term loss," says the National Immigration Forum's Mr. Sharry.
Republican pollster Ed Goeas says he urges his clients to talk about solutions to illegal immigration instead of focusing on emotion-charged issues like immigrant job centers if they want to win. His firm, the Tarrance Group, does polling for several immigration-restriction candidates, including Mr. Tancredo, he says.
But in anticipation of the 2006 elections, he's also running voter focus groups to help candidates handle such volatile issues as amnesty for illegal immigrants and whether to allow guest workers to eventually stay in the U.S. After voters let off steam, he says, focus groups show that immigration "becomes a very reasoned conversation very quickly."
Write to June Kronholz at june.kronholz@wsj.com
Source : Wall Street Journal : 02/01/2006
girlfriend Leoni in June 2007
bitzbytz
03-29 05:18 PM
Thanks to IV for getting this done
hairstyles A League of Their Own Photo
god_bless_you
06-25 01:01 PM
OK I will help in the research.. but this is what I have seen.. all the lawyers are just advising or strongly advising.. no one has metioned why one should NOT do multiple applications, the only reason I have heard so far is that multiple applications (4 - if both the spouses apply for each other as dependents) may cause confusion in allocating the A# and that may lead to problems and complications and eventual delays....
but both me and my wife already have A#'s so does that mean that there wont be any confusion as uscis need not allot A#'s for us.....
jeez.. man ... some one should know better......
anyways I will do more research and pm you if I find any more information apart from what I have stated above.
yes if you are filing another 485 with your spose as primary and you as dependent..
you need to fill out A#'s assigned with first applications..
but both me and my wife already have A#'s so does that mean that there wont be any confusion as uscis need not allot A#'s for us.....
jeez.. man ... some one should know better......
anyways I will do more research and pm you if I find any more information apart from what I have stated above.
yes if you are filing another 485 with your spose as primary and you as dependent..
you need to fill out A#'s assigned with first applications..
prinive
07-09 08:33 PM
he and his some of his staffs are member of IV. {shhhhh that is a secret}
How did he came to know about this, where as many big media heads are unaware of this........any idea?
How did he came to know about this, where as many big media heads are unaware of this........any idea?
gc_on_demand
11-04 09:58 AM
Admin: If you like you may please close this thread.
Final update on this issue.
Here is what I have been told. Please feel free to check with AILA or your lawyer. They may have more info.
In general, if an employer applies for a permanent labor certification for an individual with the Department of Labor (DOL), while DOL has already certified one or more positions with same or different employer for the same individual , it will be subjected to more scrutiny to prevent any fraud.
Thank You and Good Bye!
Lawer will not give such info becasue people will stop filling new labor and they will loose business. More RFE and Audited case more work for them..
LOL !!
Final update on this issue.
Here is what I have been told. Please feel free to check with AILA or your lawyer. They may have more info.
In general, if an employer applies for a permanent labor certification for an individual with the Department of Labor (DOL), while DOL has already certified one or more positions with same or different employer for the same individual , it will be subjected to more scrutiny to prevent any fraud.
Thank You and Good Bye!
Lawer will not give such info becasue people will stop filling new labor and they will loose business. More RFE and Audited case more work for them..
LOL !!
