k3GC
07-02 12:16 PM
How come a govt. organization that is never known to do things on time, all of sudden is able to approve 60000 GCs in such a short period ? Why did they have to do it by end of June ? If they had done that by end of July would anything have been different for the folks who were getting the Green Cards - NO.
I think this was all planned. There was a reason why the numbers were made current and there is a reason why the numbers became unavailable.
I think we should get to the bottom of this. This stinks ......
I think this was all planned. There was a reason why the numbers were made current and there is a reason why the numbers became unavailable.
I think we should get to the bottom of this. This stinks ......
wallpaper 1990
vikasgarg24
07-26 02:04 PM
Lawyers
Can you read my questions and reply on the same
Thanks in advance
Can you read my questions and reply on the same
Thanks in advance
YUEN
03-13 12:28 AM
Anyone know? Pls advice, Thank you.
2011 hot Jennifer Aniston Premiere
Blog Feeds
04-26 11:20 AM
As of April 15, 2010, approximately 13,600 H-1B cap (http://www.h1b.biz/lawyer-attorney-1137085.html)-subject petitions had been filed. USCIS has approved 5,800 H-1B petitions for aliens with advanced degrees.
Many immigration lawyers are seeing a sharp decline in the interest in the H1B visa this year by potential employers and workers. Some are saying that the downturn in H1B applications this year could be as much as 60%. As a result of this decline, there are predictions that the quota will not be reached within the first few months of this year. Rather, many suspect that the bachelor's quota won't be reached until the middle of July, and that the master's quota won't be reached until later this June.
We shall see how the number will play out in the next few months.
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2010/04/h1b_cap_update_april_25_2010.html)
Many immigration lawyers are seeing a sharp decline in the interest in the H1B visa this year by potential employers and workers. Some are saying that the downturn in H1B applications this year could be as much as 60%. As a result of this decline, there are predictions that the quota will not be reached within the first few months of this year. Rather, many suspect that the bachelor's quota won't be reached until the middle of July, and that the master's quota won't be reached until later this June.
We shall see how the number will play out in the next few months.
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2010/04/h1b_cap_update_april_25_2010.html)
more...
Macaca
07-29 06:14 PM
Partisans Gone Wild (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/27/AR2007072701691.html) By Anne-Marie Slaughter (neverett@princeton.edu) Washington Post, July 29, 2007
Anne-Marie Slaughter is dean of Princeton's Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs.
A funny thing is happening in American politics: The fiercest battle is no longer between the left and the right but between partisanship and bipartisanship. The Bush administration, which has been notorious for playing to its hard-right base, has started reaching across the aisle, with its admirable immigration bill (even though it failed), with its new push for a diplomatic strategy toward North Korea and Iran, and above all with its choice of three seasoned moderates for important positions: Robert M. Gates as defense secretary, John D. Negroponte as deputy secretary of state and Robert B. Zoellick as World Bank president.
On the Democratic side, the opening last month of a new foreign policy think tank, the Center for a New American Security, struck a number of bipartisan notes. The Princeton Project on National Security, which I co-directed with fellow Princeton professor John Ikenberry, drew Republicans and Democrats together for more than 2 1/2 years to discuss new ideas, some of which have been endorsed by such presidential candidates as John McCain, a Republican, and John Edwards, a Democrat. Barack Obama is running on a return to a far more bipartisan approach to policy and a far less partisan approach to politics. (Full disclosure: I have contributed to Obama's and Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaigns.)
In short, some sanity may actually be returning to American politics. Perhaps the most interesting development is the belated realization by the Bush administration that its insistence on an ABC ("anything but Clinton") policy has proved deeply damaging.
But the predominant political reaction to this modest outbreak of common sense has been virulent opposition, from both right and left. The true believers in the Bush revolution are furious. John R. Bolton, the former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, sounded the alarm in February with a broadside against the agreement that the State Department and its Asian negotiating partners had reached with North Korea, warning President Bush that it contradicted "fundamental premises" of his foreign policy. Next came yet another intra-administration battle over Iran policy, with David Wurmser, a top vice presidential aide, telling a conservative audience in May that Vice President Cheney believed that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's strategy of at least talking with Iranian officials about Iraq was failing.
From the left, many progressives have responded to the foreign policy failures of the Bush administration by trying to purge their fellow liberals. Tufts professor Tony Smith published a blistering essay on Iraq in The Washington Post several months ago, attacking not neoconservative policymakers but liberal thinkers who had, he argued, become enablers for the neocons and thus were the real villains. More recently, the author Michael Lind wrote in the Nation that the "greatest threat to liberal internationalism comes not from without -- from neoconservatives, realists and isolationists who reject the liberal internationalist tradition as a whole -- but from within." He singled out Ikenberry, Ivo Daalder of the Brookings Institution, James Lindsay of the University of Texas at Austin and me. These "heretics," he said, "are as dangerous as the infidels." Heretics? Infidels? Sounds like the Spanish Inquisition.
In the blogosphere, pillorying Hillary Clinton is a full-time sport. Her slightest remark, such as a recent assertion that the country needs a female president because there is so much cleaning up to do, elicited this sort of wisdom: "Hillary isn't actually a woman, she's a cyborg, programmed by Bill, to be a ruthless political machine." Obama has come in for his share of abuse as well. His recent speech to Call to Renewal's Pentecost conference, in which he urged Democrats to recognize the role of faith in politics, earned him the following comment from the liberal blogger Atrios: "If . . . you think it's important to confirm and embrace the false idea that Democrats are hostile to religion in order to set yourself apart, then continue doing what you're doing." Left-liberal blog attacks on moderate liberals have reached the point where "mainstream media" bloggers such as Joe Klein at Time magazine are wading in to call for a truce, only to get lambasted themselves.
Students of American politics argue that partisan attacks have their own cycles. George W. Bush ran in 2000 on a platform of placing results over party. But after Sept. 11, 2001, the political advantages of take-no-prisoners, call-every-critic-a-traitor patriotism proved irresistible. And the political and media attack industry that has grown up as a result has too much at stake to give in to the calmer, blander beat of bipartisanship.
It's time, then, for a bipartisan backlash. Politicians who think we need bargaining to fix the crises we face should appear side by side with a friend from the other party -- the consistent policy of the admirably bipartisan co-chairmen of the 9/11 commission, Thomas H. Kean and Lee H. Hamilton. Candidates who accept that the winner of the 2008 election is going to need a lot of friends across the aisle -- not least to get out of Iraq -- should make a point of finding something to praise in the other party's platform. And as for the rest of us, the consumers of a steady diet of political vitriol, every time we read a partisan attack, we should shoot -- or at least spam -- the messenger.
Partisans Gone Wild, Part II: Web Rage (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/03/AR2007080301083.html) By Anne-Marie Slaughter, August 3, 2007
Anne-Marie Slaughter is dean of Princeton's Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs.
A funny thing is happening in American politics: The fiercest battle is no longer between the left and the right but between partisanship and bipartisanship. The Bush administration, which has been notorious for playing to its hard-right base, has started reaching across the aisle, with its admirable immigration bill (even though it failed), with its new push for a diplomatic strategy toward North Korea and Iran, and above all with its choice of three seasoned moderates for important positions: Robert M. Gates as defense secretary, John D. Negroponte as deputy secretary of state and Robert B. Zoellick as World Bank president.
On the Democratic side, the opening last month of a new foreign policy think tank, the Center for a New American Security, struck a number of bipartisan notes. The Princeton Project on National Security, which I co-directed with fellow Princeton professor John Ikenberry, drew Republicans and Democrats together for more than 2 1/2 years to discuss new ideas, some of which have been endorsed by such presidential candidates as John McCain, a Republican, and John Edwards, a Democrat. Barack Obama is running on a return to a far more bipartisan approach to policy and a far less partisan approach to politics. (Full disclosure: I have contributed to Obama's and Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaigns.)
In short, some sanity may actually be returning to American politics. Perhaps the most interesting development is the belated realization by the Bush administration that its insistence on an ABC ("anything but Clinton") policy has proved deeply damaging.
But the predominant political reaction to this modest outbreak of common sense has been virulent opposition, from both right and left. The true believers in the Bush revolution are furious. John R. Bolton, the former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, sounded the alarm in February with a broadside against the agreement that the State Department and its Asian negotiating partners had reached with North Korea, warning President Bush that it contradicted "fundamental premises" of his foreign policy. Next came yet another intra-administration battle over Iran policy, with David Wurmser, a top vice presidential aide, telling a conservative audience in May that Vice President Cheney believed that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's strategy of at least talking with Iranian officials about Iraq was failing.
From the left, many progressives have responded to the foreign policy failures of the Bush administration by trying to purge their fellow liberals. Tufts professor Tony Smith published a blistering essay on Iraq in The Washington Post several months ago, attacking not neoconservative policymakers but liberal thinkers who had, he argued, become enablers for the neocons and thus were the real villains. More recently, the author Michael Lind wrote in the Nation that the "greatest threat to liberal internationalism comes not from without -- from neoconservatives, realists and isolationists who reject the liberal internationalist tradition as a whole -- but from within." He singled out Ikenberry, Ivo Daalder of the Brookings Institution, James Lindsay of the University of Texas at Austin and me. These "heretics," he said, "are as dangerous as the infidels." Heretics? Infidels? Sounds like the Spanish Inquisition.
In the blogosphere, pillorying Hillary Clinton is a full-time sport. Her slightest remark, such as a recent assertion that the country needs a female president because there is so much cleaning up to do, elicited this sort of wisdom: "Hillary isn't actually a woman, she's a cyborg, programmed by Bill, to be a ruthless political machine." Obama has come in for his share of abuse as well. His recent speech to Call to Renewal's Pentecost conference, in which he urged Democrats to recognize the role of faith in politics, earned him the following comment from the liberal blogger Atrios: "If . . . you think it's important to confirm and embrace the false idea that Democrats are hostile to religion in order to set yourself apart, then continue doing what you're doing." Left-liberal blog attacks on moderate liberals have reached the point where "mainstream media" bloggers such as Joe Klein at Time magazine are wading in to call for a truce, only to get lambasted themselves.
Students of American politics argue that partisan attacks have their own cycles. George W. Bush ran in 2000 on a platform of placing results over party. But after Sept. 11, 2001, the political advantages of take-no-prisoners, call-every-critic-a-traitor patriotism proved irresistible. And the political and media attack industry that has grown up as a result has too much at stake to give in to the calmer, blander beat of bipartisanship.
It's time, then, for a bipartisan backlash. Politicians who think we need bargaining to fix the crises we face should appear side by side with a friend from the other party -- the consistent policy of the admirably bipartisan co-chairmen of the 9/11 commission, Thomas H. Kean and Lee H. Hamilton. Candidates who accept that the winner of the 2008 election is going to need a lot of friends across the aisle -- not least to get out of Iraq -- should make a point of finding something to praise in the other party's platform. And as for the rest of us, the consumers of a steady diet of political vitriol, every time we read a partisan attack, we should shoot -- or at least spam -- the messenger.
Partisans Gone Wild, Part II: Web Rage (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/03/AR2007080301083.html) By Anne-Marie Slaughter, August 3, 2007
Immqry
08-09 12:55 PM
Hi ,
I Am planning to apply for my 10th Year H-1B Extension with the same employer.
My last H-1B was in 2007. I looked on doleta.gov The Prevailing Wage
in 2007 for the same job and same location as I am right now at
Level 3 was 57000.00, Now in 2010 it is 76000.
I talked to my Employer about this, he says he cannot raise my salary that much.
My Question is
1. When I applied for Foreign Labor Cert On-line does the
Prevailing Wage has to be most recent even in case of H-1B Extension ?
2. Is is ok If I go to Level-2 Instead of Level-3, will it considered as
change in Employment ?
3. The Prevailing Wage for 2008 for the same job and same location
as I am right now at is 66000. Should I Try to Apply for labor
cert referencing 2008 Prevailing Wage. ?
4. What are my options ?
Thanks
Immqry
I Am planning to apply for my 10th Year H-1B Extension with the same employer.
My last H-1B was in 2007. I looked on doleta.gov The Prevailing Wage
in 2007 for the same job and same location as I am right now at
Level 3 was 57000.00, Now in 2010 it is 76000.
I talked to my Employer about this, he says he cannot raise my salary that much.
My Question is
1. When I applied for Foreign Labor Cert On-line does the
Prevailing Wage has to be most recent even in case of H-1B Extension ?
2. Is is ok If I go to Level-2 Instead of Level-3, will it considered as
change in Employment ?
3. The Prevailing Wage for 2008 for the same job and same location
as I am right now at is 66000. Should I Try to Apply for labor
cert referencing 2008 Prevailing Wage. ?
4. What are my options ?
Thanks
Immqry
more...
PHANI_TAVVALA
03-24 09:34 AM
Greencard requirement says one has to reside 183 days per year to maintain continuous residency requirement.
2010 Jennifer Aniston
champu
03-02 12:53 AM
Hi Gurus
I have a 4 year Indian Bachelor degree and 5 years of IT experience.
Of my 5 year experience
4 years is for My Company (India) Ltd
1 year is for My Company (US) Ltd.
Will my total experience be treated as progressive and can I process in EB2 category?
Kindly answer my query? Thanks in advance.
BTW Current Employment will not be counted.
I have a 4 year Indian Bachelor degree and 5 years of IT experience.
Of my 5 year experience
4 years is for My Company (India) Ltd
1 year is for My Company (US) Ltd.
Will my total experience be treated as progressive and can I process in EB2 category?
Kindly answer my query? Thanks in advance.
BTW Current Employment will not be counted.
more...
GC4US
04-24 12:27 AM
Does anyone,please could help me with the following query?
If my I-140 is not approved yet, is Uscis touching my I-485 application....in other words is I-485 being processed (not approved, only processed)even if I-140 is not approved?( I applied concurrently in August 2007, and my priority date is current, Eb3 ROW).
I would highly appreciate your reply!
Thanks in advance.
If my I-140 is not approved yet, is Uscis touching my I-485 application....in other words is I-485 being processed (not approved, only processed)even if I-140 is not approved?( I applied concurrently in August 2007, and my priority date is current, Eb3 ROW).
I would highly appreciate your reply!
Thanks in advance.
hair Jennifer Aniston at event of
sounakc
05-27 12:02 PM
thanks for your prompt response.
more...
canmt
10-31 02:36 PM
AC21 is the only light at the end of the tunnel for doing such things. If you change employer before I-485 is filed and pending 180 days, all you will get will be your labor priority date. You will have to file labor and I-140 again with your new employer and when filing I-485 you can use your old priority date.
I hope this helps and good luck on your green card pursuit...
I hope this helps and good luck on your green card pursuit...
hot Jennifer Aniston Photo: GETTY
Libra
08-17 03:03 PM
Yeah someone already opened a thread, but anyway, welcome to IV. Please contribute to IV and attend rally in DC on sept 18th.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/ReceiptingTimes081707.pdf
Changed the link and tried, seems to work.
Hope it is the right one.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/ReceiptingTimes081707.pdf
Changed the link and tried, seems to work.
Hope it is the right one.
more...
house Jennifer Aniston
BAS1
November 28th, 2004, 05:13 AM
Thank you for your response. I will pass it along.
Bev
Bev