sravani
05-22 12:32 PM
Hi All!
I have my 140 approved ,in order to apply for I485 do I need stamped H1 visa in my passport?
I dont have my H1 stamped since 2003 ,I have I 94 valid until oct.2007.
then accordingly we can go to canda or my country to get it stamped the earliest,if it is mandatory.
Your input is appreciated.
Thank you.
You don't need Visa Stamping. I-94 only matters for USCIS. I applied my 485 last month and my passport Visa stamping expired one year ago. Good Luck!
I have my 140 approved ,in order to apply for I485 do I need stamped H1 visa in my passport?
I dont have my H1 stamped since 2003 ,I have I 94 valid until oct.2007.
then accordingly we can go to canda or my country to get it stamped the earliest,if it is mandatory.
Your input is appreciated.
Thank you.
You don't need Visa Stamping. I-94 only matters for USCIS. I applied my 485 last month and my passport Visa stamping expired one year ago. Good Luck!
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
gcbeku
08-13 03:10 PM
Who is the primary applicant ?
I am the Primary - Last update on my case is 2009
Did you create an SR ? Yes
Did you have an Infopass ? Yes - which was of no use
My wife has a RFE last year so may be taht soft LUD is they r checkin may be
how many SRs did you create? Two SRs would be good - call once for your receipt number and then, after 5-10 mins have your wife call once for her receipt number.
At the end of the day they send the SRs to the corresponding service center (TSC or NSC) where it is looked at...and responded to later. (this is what the customer service rep told me).
I am the Primary - Last update on my case is 2009
Did you create an SR ? Yes
Did you have an Infopass ? Yes - which was of no use
My wife has a RFE last year so may be taht soft LUD is they r checkin may be
how many SRs did you create? Two SRs would be good - call once for your receipt number and then, after 5-10 mins have your wife call once for her receipt number.
At the end of the day they send the SRs to the corresponding service center (TSC or NSC) where it is looked at...and responded to later. (this is what the customer service rep told me).
garamchai2go
01-09 09:47 AM
Thanks IV. I think this is much easier for hundreds of people to participate as its easy, doesent take up too much time etc. and brings about our points across as compared to DC rally (please dont get me wrong here it was great but difficult for lot of people to attend because of various reasons). So I think we should spread out word about this as much as possible. Again, please dont get me wrong. Thank you.
I agree. Could we post ads on some frequently visited websites like Sulekha/Samachar/TOI and draw them into IV website and make them aware and participate? Even if 1% join it will be a significantly good number. We can also think of making an online petetion to gather signatures from immigrant community; we can use email media effectively to spread the new about online petetion to reach the immigration community. I am sure there will be lot of response for online petetion.
Fyi..I am going to try to meet my anti-immigrant Iowa Senator , Chuck Grassley, this week.
I agree. Could we post ads on some frequently visited websites like Sulekha/Samachar/TOI and draw them into IV website and make them aware and participate? Even if 1% join it will be a significantly good number. We can also think of making an online petetion to gather signatures from immigrant community; we can use email media effectively to spread the new about online petetion to reach the immigration community. I am sure there will be lot of response for online petetion.
Fyi..I am going to try to meet my anti-immigrant Iowa Senator , Chuck Grassley, this week.
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
brahmam
09-24 11:12 PM
Hey Bharatpremi, taking your numbers and assuming horizontal spill over instead of vertical would make eb2 all over current. total spill over from eb1 = 53807, total eb2 quota = 40040, pending eb2 = 74932
assume eb1 demand = 5000, eb2 demand = 20000
we can easily see eb2 getting completely approved.
assume eb1 demand = 5000, eb2 demand = 20000
we can easily see eb2 getting completely approved.
more...
rajpatelemail
01-05 06:16 PM
Do not think this to discourage or anything like that...
Guys .. Pls stop dreaming.. you do not have any idea what you are talking about..
Guys in this thread may be newcomers to the game..
I was here since 1998... and cud not stop surprised to see the ideas in this thread..veeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeerrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrryy yyyyyyyy farrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr from reality.
Better to wor for admin things like visa recapture, some admin things within INS w/o any legislative action.
Do you guys have any idea that it needs legislative approval for things you are dreaming of...
It means it shd win in 100 members senate and in 500+ members house.
As Pappu suggested it is better to get more publicity, funds and then work for few admin things first(Gives a big relief) ...
But guys, what you are thinking is far beyond the dream itself.
I guess Pappu is the only guy active in Core now...
However let us concentrate as Core suggested, as they know the realities/pains involved.
Pappu, any core members active other than yourself, because i did not see a core member other than you fr more than a year...
Guys .. Pls stop dreaming.. you do not have any idea what you are talking about..
Guys in this thread may be newcomers to the game..
I was here since 1998... and cud not stop surprised to see the ideas in this thread..veeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeerrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrryy yyyyyyyy farrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr from reality.
Better to wor for admin things like visa recapture, some admin things within INS w/o any legislative action.
Do you guys have any idea that it needs legislative approval for things you are dreaming of...
It means it shd win in 100 members senate and in 500+ members house.
As Pappu suggested it is better to get more publicity, funds and then work for few admin things first(Gives a big relief) ...
But guys, what you are thinking is far beyond the dream itself.
I guess Pappu is the only guy active in Core now...
However let us concentrate as Core suggested, as they know the realities/pains involved.
Pappu, any core members active other than yourself, because i did not see a core member other than you fr more than a year...
desi3933
08-07 12:44 PM
...
...
I guess Mr. Sunshine will be out then, he said he is shit scared that he is going to loose his job...Dude, I say go home, NOW, aren't you ashamed about your sorry job....
I strongly disagree with you. No one has right to say to anyone else to go home.
We may not agree with SunnySurya for this lawsuit, but we should keep debate civilized. No personal attacks please.
___________________________
Permanent Resident since 2002
...
I guess Mr. Sunshine will be out then, he said he is shit scared that he is going to loose his job...Dude, I say go home, NOW, aren't you ashamed about your sorry job....
I strongly disagree with you. No one has right to say to anyone else to go home.
We may not agree with SunnySurya for this lawsuit, but we should keep debate civilized. No personal attacks please.
___________________________
Permanent Resident since 2002
more...
desitechie
08-26 12:47 AM
Looks like Vonage is turning the heat on in the VOIP segment. It will be good for us if Lingo and Telebend match or beat vonage.
I would wait for a month and then decide which way to go.
I would wait for a month and then decide which way to go.
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
l1fraud
06-08 10:15 PM
Thanks ... normal options in USCIS asks you to call ICE.gov ... BUT ICE.gov doesn't seem to have a local office.. please let me know if anyone out there has gone this route and any update regarding what all documents we need to produce to prove our case. Since its a Billion dollar company they are bound to fight the case (hopefully). Any information regarding the same is appretiate.
more...
ankur6ue
09-08 09:27 PM
Thanks for everybody's support and good suggestions. I feel that even if there is no immigration related legislation due to this forum, the enormous amount of knowledge that has been accumulated due to contributions from everybody is a tremendous resource in itself. No more guessing what to answer to a confusing question on I 765 or I 131. Just do a google search and more often than not, a thread from IV will be the top on the list (and it usually contains useful info)! That itself is a great achievment. So thanks everybody and specially to IV core for keeping this effor going on. Hope we will have some meaningful legislative reforms soon. However I feel that it's good to remember that GC is like money- it's value stems from it's scarcity :-)
PD: Aug 12 2006
I 485 mail date: Aug 2008 (so they are looking at later filed 485's also, not just july 2007 filers)
Did SR and infopass, standard responses..Asked lawyer to do TSC streamline process email (she was clueless about it)
PD: Aug 12 2006
I 485 mail date: Aug 2008 (so they are looking at later filed 485's also, not just july 2007 filers)
Did SR and infopass, standard responses..Asked lawyer to do TSC streamline process email (she was clueless about it)
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
nixstor
08-04 07:59 PM
HV000,
I agree with you. How ever you have not still updated your profile with DC rally attendance info. Please follow the thread (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=11846) here to update your profile.
Thanks
I agree with you. How ever you have not still updated your profile with DC rally attendance info. Please follow the thread (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=11846) here to update your profile.
Thanks
more...
bobby
05-21 04:32 PM
I am curious to know what USCIS actually does when they adjudicate adjustment of status cases. I know a security/name check is done when they have your fingerprints but what else? Do they use your social security number to look at your credit history or do they contact the IRS for transcripts of your tax returns etc, how do they verify information on your employer etc etc? Does anyone know what procedures/actions USCIS takes when adjudicating cases? Thanks...:confused:
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
bomber
06-29 05:36 PM
If its mailed out today, then you are ok. Its the POSTMARKED date that is seen. So even if it reaches there in July, as long as it went OUT today, they will have to accept it under June's batch of applications coz it is postmarked in June (june 29).
logiclife,
thanks for taking time to look at an individual case in the middle of mass chaos.
I hope my attorney really mailed it as they told me yesterday "your appplication is in Fedex envelope already, to be sent out Friday morning for Monday delivery"
My problem is a little more complex than that. My lawyers kept telling me from Dec' 2003 that my LC was filed under EB-2 since I have a BS+5 ... When they filed I-140 last year which is still pending, they kept telling me it was under EB-2..... yesterday when I emailed to ask if my application was out, an associate told me that it was ready in the Fedex envelope and scheduled for pickup today morning and that they had kept it on hold because my PD was becoming current only on July 1st...
that was a surprise to me because I thought I was EB-2 and my date was current as of June 1st... she said she didn't know anything about that and that the lawyer had instructed her to put it on hold for shipping Friday morning....
May be some kind of confusion on her part.. otherwise why would they accept and start working on my case right after the june bulletin which was released in May..
Life is already so complex......
logiclife,
thanks for taking time to look at an individual case in the middle of mass chaos.
I hope my attorney really mailed it as they told me yesterday "your appplication is in Fedex envelope already, to be sent out Friday morning for Monday delivery"
My problem is a little more complex than that. My lawyers kept telling me from Dec' 2003 that my LC was filed under EB-2 since I have a BS+5 ... When they filed I-140 last year which is still pending, they kept telling me it was under EB-2..... yesterday when I emailed to ask if my application was out, an associate told me that it was ready in the Fedex envelope and scheduled for pickup today morning and that they had kept it on hold because my PD was becoming current only on July 1st...
that was a surprise to me because I thought I was EB-2 and my date was current as of June 1st... she said she didn't know anything about that and that the lawyer had instructed her to put it on hold for shipping Friday morning....
May be some kind of confusion on her part.. otherwise why would they accept and start working on my case right after the june bulletin which was released in May..
Life is already so complex......
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
addsf345
11-25 01:12 PM
^^BUMPER^^
Guys, we need more letters...forwarded to my 4 other friends, they promised to send letters by tomorrow before thanksgivings break.
Guys, we need more letters...forwarded to my 4 other friends, they promised to send letters by tomorrow before thanksgivings break.
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
ashshef
09-24 05:07 PM
1) Each (EB1/2/3) - 28.6% WW quota = 40040
2) 5 subscription cataegories under each EB category: I,P,C,M,ROW
3) Assumption - USCIS distributes equal share among these 5 different subscription categories = 40040/5 =8008 in each EB category for a particular subscription category.
Example:
EB3 All = 40040 ( 0.286 x 140000)
EB3 ALL = EB3 I + EB3 C + EB3 M + EB3 P + EB3 ROW
Assuming equal share of all of these 5 subscription categories - 40040/5 = 8008 applications to be worked for "Assigning the visa number" not " for granting the visa (IN other words physical greencard order)"
7% + 2% = 9% country specific limit is meant for "Granting the visa - Ordering Physical Green card" out of "Applications which have been assigned a visa number"
Number 2) and hence number 3) are definitely wrong.
As I mentioned in my other post, the categorisation for I,P,C,M and ROW is based on the fact that I,P,C,M are the only countries with demand exceeding the annual limit.
ROW = All countries not hitting the 7%(or 9%) country limit. That doesn't mean they are capped at X/5. What would be the basis of that cap.
Assuming USCIS acts like it is supposed to, follows all rules etc........They start using new numbers on Oct1st of the new FY with a fresh slate of 140k available.
Now by law, they will first divide the cap into the 5 EB categories -EB1, EB2, EB3, EB4 and EB5. Now once they reach the 7%(or 9) cap in any of the categories, they will have to stop assigning numbers for that country. So for EB3, once they reach the 7 or 9% quota for I,C,M,P - they will need to stop. The rest of the countries(ROW) will get the 100 - (7 x 4) = 72% of the quota. This could be divied up between UK, France, Pak, Germany etc etc. As none of them are going over the 7%, the country cap doesn't affect them. But Since there are a lot of apps under EB3-ROW, there's never any number to spill over to the capped countries.
In case of EB2, only 2 countries hit the cap - India and China. In this case even P and M are part of ROW. But since the apps from ROW is less than the remaining quota of (100 - 7 x 2)% of the EB2 quota, the remaining will be spilled over. The spillover rules will determine who these go to.
The way the current spillover rules stand, your final calculations will still hold true for EB2 due to the spillover ultimately remaining the same to EB2. But not for EB3.
2) 5 subscription cataegories under each EB category: I,P,C,M,ROW
3) Assumption - USCIS distributes equal share among these 5 different subscription categories = 40040/5 =8008 in each EB category for a particular subscription category.
Example:
EB3 All = 40040 ( 0.286 x 140000)
EB3 ALL = EB3 I + EB3 C + EB3 M + EB3 P + EB3 ROW
Assuming equal share of all of these 5 subscription categories - 40040/5 = 8008 applications to be worked for "Assigning the visa number" not " for granting the visa (IN other words physical greencard order)"
7% + 2% = 9% country specific limit is meant for "Granting the visa - Ordering Physical Green card" out of "Applications which have been assigned a visa number"
Number 2) and hence number 3) are definitely wrong.
As I mentioned in my other post, the categorisation for I,P,C,M and ROW is based on the fact that I,P,C,M are the only countries with demand exceeding the annual limit.
ROW = All countries not hitting the 7%(or 9%) country limit. That doesn't mean they are capped at X/5. What would be the basis of that cap.
Assuming USCIS acts like it is supposed to, follows all rules etc........They start using new numbers on Oct1st of the new FY with a fresh slate of 140k available.
Now by law, they will first divide the cap into the 5 EB categories -EB1, EB2, EB3, EB4 and EB5. Now once they reach the 7%(or 9) cap in any of the categories, they will have to stop assigning numbers for that country. So for EB3, once they reach the 7 or 9% quota for I,C,M,P - they will need to stop. The rest of the countries(ROW) will get the 100 - (7 x 4) = 72% of the quota. This could be divied up between UK, France, Pak, Germany etc etc. As none of them are going over the 7%, the country cap doesn't affect them. But Since there are a lot of apps under EB3-ROW, there's never any number to spill over to the capped countries.
In case of EB2, only 2 countries hit the cap - India and China. In this case even P and M are part of ROW. But since the apps from ROW is less than the remaining quota of (100 - 7 x 2)% of the EB2 quota, the remaining will be spilled over. The spillover rules will determine who these go to.
The way the current spillover rules stand, your final calculations will still hold true for EB2 due to the spillover ultimately remaining the same to EB2. But not for EB3.
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
walking_dude
08-08 10:12 AM
Here's a very good recent example
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&taxonomyId=13&articleId=9111963&intsrc=hm_topic
Point to be noted is that this case was not dismissed on merit, but that plaintiff's have not been able to prove significant damages resulting from the rule. A general 'dissatisfaction' with the rule ( for e.g. my wait times will increase if porting continues) doesnot translate into significant damages ( such as I'm losing the job). The merit of the case was never discussed!.
It would be interesting to see how many of the 'Yes' are going to remain 'Yes' when it comes to having their names on a lawsuit filed against USCIS (the whole list will be going to USCIS). It will be interesting to see how many of you stridently remaining anonymous on a (relatively) harmless public forum such as IV are going to come out in public to fight the USCIS. Good luck guys.
And happy nightmares whenver your cases get (not so) Soft LUDs. Is it because you joined the case? you never know.
Good luck once more
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&taxonomyId=13&articleId=9111963&intsrc=hm_topic
Point to be noted is that this case was not dismissed on merit, but that plaintiff's have not been able to prove significant damages resulting from the rule. A general 'dissatisfaction' with the rule ( for e.g. my wait times will increase if porting continues) doesnot translate into significant damages ( such as I'm losing the job). The merit of the case was never discussed!.
It would be interesting to see how many of the 'Yes' are going to remain 'Yes' when it comes to having their names on a lawsuit filed against USCIS (the whole list will be going to USCIS). It will be interesting to see how many of you stridently remaining anonymous on a (relatively) harmless public forum such as IV are going to come out in public to fight the USCIS. Good luck guys.
And happy nightmares whenver your cases get (not so) Soft LUDs. Is it because you joined the case? you never know.
Good luck once more
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
apnair2002
01-19 06:14 PM
James Rogers was on the Bill O'Rielly show. They oppose HR 4437
http://www.jesuit.org/sections/sub.asp?SECTION_ID=193&SUBSECTION_ID=633&PARENT_ID=
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/19/politics/19immig.html
http://www.jesuit.org/sections/sub.asp?SECTION_ID=193&SUBSECTION_ID=633&PARENT_ID=
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/19/politics/19immig.html
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
gc_on_demand
08-21 10:54 AM
I tend to agree with both.
You need strong arguments and they need to have legal basis. Laws cannot be changed by an agency that only follows laws.
If you are eligible for EB2 and cannot file in Eb2 and your employer filed in Eb3, it is not a strong argument. Likewise you cannot change the spillover rule without strong legal justification. You need change of law.
Visa recapture is the best option.
Any big action iteam coming for VISA RECAPTURE FROM IV CORE ?
should't we start aggressive calling campaign for HR 5882 ? like one we did for sub committe hearing.. or may be big event like rally in DC ..
You need strong arguments and they need to have legal basis. Laws cannot be changed by an agency that only follows laws.
If you are eligible for EB2 and cannot file in Eb2 and your employer filed in Eb3, it is not a strong argument. Likewise you cannot change the spillover rule without strong legal justification. You need change of law.
Visa recapture is the best option.
Any big action iteam coming for VISA RECAPTURE FROM IV CORE ?
should't we start aggressive calling campaign for HR 5882 ? like one we did for sub committe hearing.. or may be big event like rally in DC ..
girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14%
Macaca
10-17 07:28 AM
Lou Dobbs Crusades Against Spitzer�s Driver�s License Plan for Illegal Immigrants (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/17/nyregion/17dobbs.html) By NICHOLAS CONFESSORE | New York Times, October 17, 2007
ALBANY, Oct. 16 � The CNN anchor Lou Dobbs calls Gov. Eliot Spitzer �a genius.� But not in a nice way.
�I was being about as facetious as one could be,� Mr. Dobbs said in an interview Tuesday as he prepared for his nightly broadcast, �Lou Dobbs Tonight.� For the last nine days, the show has included discussion of Mr. Spitzer�s plan to allow illegal immigrants to apply for driver�s licenses.
Mr. Dobbs, a pinstriped journalist turned populist crusader against illegal immigration, is not a fan.
�It�s an abuse of power!� Mr. Dobbs thundered. �He is being absolutely irresponsible. When the governor of New York embarks on this kind of irresponsibility, it is national news as far as I�m concerned.�
And when Mr. Dobbs � whose broadcast is CNN�s second-highest-rated show � speaks, many people listen. His relentless mockery of Mr. Spitzer�s decision has thrust the driver�s license policy onto the national stage, helping fuel an uproar not only among New Yorkers, but among national groups opposed to illegal immigration as well.
As it happens, Mr. Dobbs was recovering from a tonsillectomy when Mr. Spitzer announced the policy on Sept. 21. But the anchorman went on the attack almost immediately after going back on the air Oct. 8, saying it was �hard to imagine what this governor is thinking.�
It only took him another week to conclude that Mr. Spitzer, in fact, was not thinking at all. �This governor is a genius,� he proclaimed disgustedly on Monday. �An overwhelming majority of New York voters oppose the governor, but he refuses to back down.�
With the television set on mute, the scrunch alone of Mr. Dobbs�s brow conveys his belief that Mr. Spitzer�s new policy is, possibly, the dumbest idea in the history of dumb ideas.
�I think he�s definitely had an effect,� said State Senator Martin J. Golden, a Brooklyn Republican who was on Mr. Dobbs�s show on Sunday to denounce the plan. �Everybody�s chiming in. I get e-mails from across the country because of Lou Dobbs. I got an e-mail from a soldier in Iraq saying, �Go for it, Golden, keep it up.��
Mr. Golden is one of several New York elected officials � most of them with more experience on New York 1 than on CNN � who have been recent guests on Mr. Dobbs�s show. Many have expressed support for proposals by state lawmakers to overturn the license policy or to deny funding for it.
But not everyone who goes on gets supportive e-mail messages.
Jos� M. Serrano, a Democratic state senator who represents parts of Manhattan and the Bronx, appeared with Mr. Golden to defend Mr. Spitzer�s policy, but found himself under a verbal barrage from both the host and his fellow guest. �Oh my goodness, that was something else,� Mr. Serrano said. �I think it was my first time on national television. I wound up debating both of them � Lou paid very little attention to Marty Golden and instead just kind of dug in on me.�
This next morning, Mr. Serrano said, his office was bombarded with angry e-mail messages from around the country.
�One guy wrote, �We will derail the illegal gravy train from within,�� he said. �I don�t really know what that means. Another person said, �Go back to Mexico, you�re obviously Mexican.�� (Mr. Serrano is from Puerto Rico.) �I�m not na�ve, but I was still surprised at the level of ignorance,� Mr. Serrano said.
(Mr. Dobbs�s correspondents have also stated on the air that illegal immigrants will need only a foreign passport to obtain a driver�s license, and that Mr. Spitzer�s policy was instituted through executive order, neither of which is true.)
Mr. Dobbs�s guests and interviewees are typically opponents of the policy. A segment that Mr. Dobbs pitched on Thursday as �a lively debate� on the issue, for example, featured the host and two members of the State Assembly who oppose the governor�s plan, along with a viewers� poll on whether Mr. Spitzer should be recalled. (Ninety-seven percent said yes.)
One person who has not made an appearance on Mr. Dobbs�s show, despite repeated invitations, is the governor himself. Christine Anderson, a spokeswoman for Mr. Spitzer, said scheduling problems had prevented the governor from appearing. The administration had made other officials available to Mr. Dobbs�s bookers, she said, including Michael A. L. Balboni, the governor�s top Homeland Security aide. But the show�s producers had declined.
�We don�t really have a position about his show,� Ms. Anderson said. �That said, facts matter, and what we have endeavored to do throughout this entire debate is to make an argument about the safety and security benefits to doing this.�
But Mr. Dobbs said that Mr. Spitzer, and Mr. Spitzer alone, is responsible for defending his new policy.
�The man hasn�t shown the gumption to come on the air and debate the issue with me,� Mr. Dobbs said.
ALBANY, Oct. 16 � The CNN anchor Lou Dobbs calls Gov. Eliot Spitzer �a genius.� But not in a nice way.
�I was being about as facetious as one could be,� Mr. Dobbs said in an interview Tuesday as he prepared for his nightly broadcast, �Lou Dobbs Tonight.� For the last nine days, the show has included discussion of Mr. Spitzer�s plan to allow illegal immigrants to apply for driver�s licenses.
Mr. Dobbs, a pinstriped journalist turned populist crusader against illegal immigration, is not a fan.
�It�s an abuse of power!� Mr. Dobbs thundered. �He is being absolutely irresponsible. When the governor of New York embarks on this kind of irresponsibility, it is national news as far as I�m concerned.�
And when Mr. Dobbs � whose broadcast is CNN�s second-highest-rated show � speaks, many people listen. His relentless mockery of Mr. Spitzer�s decision has thrust the driver�s license policy onto the national stage, helping fuel an uproar not only among New Yorkers, but among national groups opposed to illegal immigration as well.
As it happens, Mr. Dobbs was recovering from a tonsillectomy when Mr. Spitzer announced the policy on Sept. 21. But the anchorman went on the attack almost immediately after going back on the air Oct. 8, saying it was �hard to imagine what this governor is thinking.�
It only took him another week to conclude that Mr. Spitzer, in fact, was not thinking at all. �This governor is a genius,� he proclaimed disgustedly on Monday. �An overwhelming majority of New York voters oppose the governor, but he refuses to back down.�
With the television set on mute, the scrunch alone of Mr. Dobbs�s brow conveys his belief that Mr. Spitzer�s new policy is, possibly, the dumbest idea in the history of dumb ideas.
�I think he�s definitely had an effect,� said State Senator Martin J. Golden, a Brooklyn Republican who was on Mr. Dobbs�s show on Sunday to denounce the plan. �Everybody�s chiming in. I get e-mails from across the country because of Lou Dobbs. I got an e-mail from a soldier in Iraq saying, �Go for it, Golden, keep it up.��
Mr. Golden is one of several New York elected officials � most of them with more experience on New York 1 than on CNN � who have been recent guests on Mr. Dobbs�s show. Many have expressed support for proposals by state lawmakers to overturn the license policy or to deny funding for it.
But not everyone who goes on gets supportive e-mail messages.
Jos� M. Serrano, a Democratic state senator who represents parts of Manhattan and the Bronx, appeared with Mr. Golden to defend Mr. Spitzer�s policy, but found himself under a verbal barrage from both the host and his fellow guest. �Oh my goodness, that was something else,� Mr. Serrano said. �I think it was my first time on national television. I wound up debating both of them � Lou paid very little attention to Marty Golden and instead just kind of dug in on me.�
This next morning, Mr. Serrano said, his office was bombarded with angry e-mail messages from around the country.
�One guy wrote, �We will derail the illegal gravy train from within,�� he said. �I don�t really know what that means. Another person said, �Go back to Mexico, you�re obviously Mexican.�� (Mr. Serrano is from Puerto Rico.) �I�m not na�ve, but I was still surprised at the level of ignorance,� Mr. Serrano said.
(Mr. Dobbs�s correspondents have also stated on the air that illegal immigrants will need only a foreign passport to obtain a driver�s license, and that Mr. Spitzer�s policy was instituted through executive order, neither of which is true.)
Mr. Dobbs�s guests and interviewees are typically opponents of the policy. A segment that Mr. Dobbs pitched on Thursday as �a lively debate� on the issue, for example, featured the host and two members of the State Assembly who oppose the governor�s plan, along with a viewers� poll on whether Mr. Spitzer should be recalled. (Ninety-seven percent said yes.)
One person who has not made an appearance on Mr. Dobbs�s show, despite repeated invitations, is the governor himself. Christine Anderson, a spokeswoman for Mr. Spitzer, said scheduling problems had prevented the governor from appearing. The administration had made other officials available to Mr. Dobbs�s bookers, she said, including Michael A. L. Balboni, the governor�s top Homeland Security aide. But the show�s producers had declined.
�We don�t really have a position about his show,� Ms. Anderson said. �That said, facts matter, and what we have endeavored to do throughout this entire debate is to make an argument about the safety and security benefits to doing this.�
But Mr. Dobbs said that Mr. Spitzer, and Mr. Spitzer alone, is responsible for defending his new policy.
�The man hasn�t shown the gumption to come on the air and debate the issue with me,� Mr. Dobbs said.
hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11%
subh21
10-01 12:23 PM
Received the CPO email on the 30th :). Here is my details:
Category: EB2
Country: India
Priority Date: 28th March 2006
Interviewed last September (2009), when I was told that my case is approved and waiting for visa number.
Second fingerprint on September 20th 2010
Lawyer was told that my case is being "held" since there was no visa number available after my 2nd fingerprint cleared, so I wasn't expecting anything until Oct 1st, so was obviously pleasantly surprised.
Category: EB2
Country: India
Priority Date: 28th March 2006
Interviewed last September (2009), when I was told that my case is approved and waiting for visa number.
Second fingerprint on September 20th 2010
Lawyer was told that my case is being "held" since there was no visa number available after my 2nd fingerprint cleared, so I wasn't expecting anything until Oct 1st, so was obviously pleasantly surprised.
485Mbe4001
09-24 02:49 PM
no...
You are assuming that the spillover from remaining countries in EB3 will be allocated to EB3 I/C/P/M. The spillover rules that changed in 2007 will ensure that those visas will first go to E1 -> EB2 and then fall to us if there is an overflow. Unfortunately that will not happen because there are many retrogressed individuals in EB2 and they will get the visas first.
If there are 140K visas then EB3 category will get 140,000%28.7 = 40180
NACARA program = 40180-5000=35180
(refer Visa Bulletin October 2009 (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4575.html)
Employment Third Preference Other Workers Category: Section 203(e) of the NACARA, as amended by Section 1(e) of Pub. L. 105-139, provides that once the Employment Third Preference Other Worker (EW) cut-off date has reached the priority date of the latest EW petition approved prior to November 19, 1997, the 10,000 EW numbers available for a fiscal year are to be reduced by up to 5,000 annually beginning in the following fiscal year. This reduction is to be made for as long as necessary to offset adjustments under the NACARA program. Since the EW cut-off date reached November 19, 1997 during Fiscal Year 2001, the reduction in the EW annual limit to 5,000 began in Fiscal Year 2002)
deduct 15% for consular processing = 29903
again consider 5 different Chargeability Areas
such as CHINA mainland born, INDIA, MEXICO, PHILIP-PINES and rest = 29903/5= 5980
Worst case scenario, USCIS will have 5980 visas available for FY 2010.
Now, if you compare data published by USCIS on pending cases can we guess
we should see forward movement for EB3I at least July-2002 by end of FY 2010 ?
Is it fair assessment?
You are assuming that the spillover from remaining countries in EB3 will be allocated to EB3 I/C/P/M. The spillover rules that changed in 2007 will ensure that those visas will first go to E1 -> EB2 and then fall to us if there is an overflow. Unfortunately that will not happen because there are many retrogressed individuals in EB2 and they will get the visas first.
If there are 140K visas then EB3 category will get 140,000%28.7 = 40180
NACARA program = 40180-5000=35180
(refer Visa Bulletin October 2009 (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4575.html)
Employment Third Preference Other Workers Category: Section 203(e) of the NACARA, as amended by Section 1(e) of Pub. L. 105-139, provides that once the Employment Third Preference Other Worker (EW) cut-off date has reached the priority date of the latest EW petition approved prior to November 19, 1997, the 10,000 EW numbers available for a fiscal year are to be reduced by up to 5,000 annually beginning in the following fiscal year. This reduction is to be made for as long as necessary to offset adjustments under the NACARA program. Since the EW cut-off date reached November 19, 1997 during Fiscal Year 2001, the reduction in the EW annual limit to 5,000 began in Fiscal Year 2002)
deduct 15% for consular processing = 29903
again consider 5 different Chargeability Areas
such as CHINA mainland born, INDIA, MEXICO, PHILIP-PINES and rest = 29903/5= 5980
Worst case scenario, USCIS will have 5980 visas available for FY 2010.
Now, if you compare data published by USCIS on pending cases can we guess
we should see forward movement for EB3I at least July-2002 by end of FY 2010 ?
Is it fair assessment?
vishwak
03-29 09:04 AM
I read the news too at The Oh Law Firm (http://www.immigration-law.com/)
Hope this hold and comes true. All the best to my brothers and me.
Hope this hold and comes true. All the best to my brothers and me.