radhay
04-17 01:59 PM
I have closed on two mortgage loans recently and found that Loan Underwriters don't understand EAD/ AOS applications. For my original loan with Pulte Mortgage I explained them that AOS is a period authroized stay by Attorney General until Green card is approved. When they still didn't understand I had to bump my down payment to 20% which apparently puts less resrtictions (By Fannie Mae guidelines).
When I refinanced this week with PFCU (pentagan federal CU) I sent them EAD copies and they were OK with it.
When I refinanced this week with PFCU (pentagan federal CU) I sent them EAD copies and they were OK with it.
wallpaper gibbon hylobates fun facts
immigrationmatters30
07-11 02:52 PM
What do you guys think would be happen in SEP ? do you guys expect any forward movement.I still have not filed my I-485(yep, one of those unlucky ones who missed the boat).My PD is Aug-2007.
pappu
11-17 11:52 PM
Hi everyone,
I would like to have a conference call this Sunday between 3pm-3:30 pm. Please tell me if this will work out for you all? Please shoot me an e-mail at amitg_2000@hotmail.com with your availability, your phone number and most accessed e-mail account.
Once everyone confirms I will forward some discussion points for the call.
I look foward to hearing back from you.
Thanks,
JH
Thank you Jimi for taking the lead and starting the chaper work.
I would like to have a conference call this Sunday between 3pm-3:30 pm. Please tell me if this will work out for you all? Please shoot me an e-mail at amitg_2000@hotmail.com with your availability, your phone number and most accessed e-mail account.
Once everyone confirms I will forward some discussion points for the call.
I look foward to hearing back from you.
Thanks,
JH
Thank you Jimi for taking the lead and starting the chaper work.
2011 ARKive - Blond titi monkey
sanjay
07-06 11:08 AM
While IV is a big organization with 20K+ members, I haven't seen the transparency, All I have seen is tons of threads being created requesting members to donate money, However Is there any transparency in the way the money is being spent the answer is a Big NO.
Is IV a big organization ? Yes. Definitely. With more than 20K members it is a big org.
But what transparency do you or we need about contribution money ?
Overall I had not seen monthly contribution going more than 2 - 3 K per month in last 3 years. And I think that would be enough to maintain the server and software cost, that too if spend very carefully. Cause we have more threads than contributions and it does costs to maintain and keep servers / Software up.
Now ask yourself ! ! !
Do I need to know the expenditure report ? My answer would be NO.
Is IV a big organization ? Yes. Definitely. With more than 20K members it is a big org.
But what transparency do you or we need about contribution money ?
Overall I had not seen monthly contribution going more than 2 - 3 K per month in last 3 years. And I think that would be enough to maintain the server and software cost, that too if spend very carefully. Cause we have more threads than contributions and it does costs to maintain and keep servers / Software up.
Now ask yourself ! ! !
Do I need to know the expenditure report ? My answer would be NO.
more...
needhelp!
03-12 02:58 PM
reddog, please explain how you have supported IV in the past in non-monetary ways. For lobbying, there is not much you can do other than support monetarily,or make trips to DC yourself.
I am sure IV core will at least consider such non-monetary support on case-by-case basis.
So your definition of support is 'monetary support' only?
I am sure IV core will at least consider such non-monetary support on case-by-case basis.
So your definition of support is 'monetary support' only?
Libra
09-11 12:15 PM
thank you param_r, ritu_raj and kittu1991 for your contributions.
more...
WeldonSprings
05-02 04:17 PM
Just responding to my quote- This question was also raised by Honorable House Democrat from Illinois Mr. Guterriez.I know everyone has looked at the Visa Bulletin. Here is a quote from it-
2. Section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets an annual minimum family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000. The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 202 prescribes that the per-country limit for preference immigrants is set at 7% of the total annual family-sponsored and employment-based preference limits, i.e., 25,620. The dependent area limit is set at 2%, or 7,320.
So, don't you guys think that there more than 140,000 visas can be given away, if need me as it is this moment. So, I don't understand the retrogression???
2. Section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets an annual minimum family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000. The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 202 prescribes that the per-country limit for preference immigrants is set at 7% of the total annual family-sponsored and employment-based preference limits, i.e., 25,620. The dependent area limit is set at 2%, or 7,320.
So, don't you guys think that there more than 140,000 visas can be given away, if need me as it is this moment. So, I don't understand the retrogression???
2010 Female silvered leaf monkey
bp333
03-04 12:30 PM
My application is filed with Texas Service Centre.
Forgot to mention, my attorney did state that their office received an approval 2 weeks back whose priority date was not even close to current. She did not share the specifics.
I just checked my online status and it doesnt have any updates since 2007, states its received and pending... Not sure how current is the online info.
Forgot to mention, my attorney did state that their office received an approval 2 weeks back whose priority date was not even close to current. She did not share the specifics.
I just checked my online status and it doesnt have any updates since 2007, states its received and pending... Not sure how current is the online info.
more...
needhelp!
09-10 05:40 PM
Thank you singam, cirigadi, sirinme
Once again.. those who want to contribute smaller amounts.
Send them to:
Immigration Voice
PO Box 114
Dayton
New Jersey -08810
Telephone: (202) 386-6250
Once again.. those who want to contribute smaller amounts.
Send them to:
Immigration Voice
PO Box 114
Dayton
New Jersey -08810
Telephone: (202) 386-6250
hair The Flight of the Gibbon!
gctest
09-15 04:28 PM
Dude,
show me one link where i can go back and change the language in the poll?
All of you are making it very hard for me to keep the decorum of this forum.
So much name calling.. nasty PMs.... All i can say is God Bless y'all
Did you check the grammar of your polling question?
I support this. But might to be able to help with the fee
If this is EB2, I am glad/proud/honor to be EB3
:)
show me one link where i can go back and change the language in the poll?
All of you are making it very hard for me to keep the decorum of this forum.
So much name calling.. nasty PMs.... All i can say is God Bless y'all
Did you check the grammar of your polling question?
I support this. But might to be able to help with the fee
If this is EB2, I am glad/proud/honor to be EB3
:)
more...
mohanty99
07-18 10:56 PM
This seems very unfair to people who had earlier PDs (2004 & 2005) and who have waited so many years to file. Now, people with PDs in 2007 will jump ahead of them in the queue just because of this fiasco, juts because they filed earlier. :confused:
hot named Forobrien gibbons
john2255
07-20 12:20 PM
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00266
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r110:1:./temp/~r110f0ODXJ:e32253:
That means we have lost around 2,40,000 unused visas. I heard that there is a total amount of 3,00,000 unused employment visas of the previous years due to the great efficiency of USCIS. Out of this 61,000 is kept apart for Schedule A nurses and PT's and the remaining 2,40,000 thousand would have been divided amoung employment catagories if the amendment had passed,clearing lot of our backloggs.
REMEMBER, THE RECAPTURE OF UNUSED VISAS IS ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT PRIORITIES OF CORE AND THE DOOR IS SLAMMED ON OUR FACES AGAIN BY HYPOCRITES LIKE HILARY AND CALIFORNIA SENATORS.
Its the high time we convince the senators who said NAYS. Lets start SOME KIND OF CAMPAIN aiming these guys. I am sure that core's hands are there behind this amendment. Well done IV. Don't get dissappointed, keep trying for Skill bill or for similar amendments. Its really unfortunate that we lost a very very big chance. Lets do something immediately.
Following is the text of amendment.
`(ii) DISTRIBUTION OF VISAS.--The total number of visas made available under paragraph (1) from unused visas from fiscal years 1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006 shall be distributed as follows:
``(I) The total number of visas made available for immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor shall be 61,000.
``(II) The visas remaining from the total made available under subclause (I) shall be allocated equally among employment-based immigrants with approved petitions under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (and their family members accompanying or following to join).''.
(b) H-1B Visa Availability.--Section 214(g)(1)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(g)(1)(A)) is amended--
(1) in clause (vi), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) by redesignating clause (vii) as clause (ix); and
(3) by inserting after clause (vi) the following:
``(vii) 65,000 in each of fiscal years 2004 through 2007;
``(viii) 115,000 in fiscal year 2008; and''.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r110:1:./temp/~r110f0ODXJ:e32253:
That means we have lost around 2,40,000 unused visas. I heard that there is a total amount of 3,00,000 unused employment visas of the previous years due to the great efficiency of USCIS. Out of this 61,000 is kept apart for Schedule A nurses and PT's and the remaining 2,40,000 thousand would have been divided amoung employment catagories if the amendment had passed,clearing lot of our backloggs.
REMEMBER, THE RECAPTURE OF UNUSED VISAS IS ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT PRIORITIES OF CORE AND THE DOOR IS SLAMMED ON OUR FACES AGAIN BY HYPOCRITES LIKE HILARY AND CALIFORNIA SENATORS.
Its the high time we convince the senators who said NAYS. Lets start SOME KIND OF CAMPAIN aiming these guys. I am sure that core's hands are there behind this amendment. Well done IV. Don't get dissappointed, keep trying for Skill bill or for similar amendments. Its really unfortunate that we lost a very very big chance. Lets do something immediately.
Following is the text of amendment.
`(ii) DISTRIBUTION OF VISAS.--The total number of visas made available under paragraph (1) from unused visas from fiscal years 1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006 shall be distributed as follows:
``(I) The total number of visas made available for immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor shall be 61,000.
``(II) The visas remaining from the total made available under subclause (I) shall be allocated equally among employment-based immigrants with approved petitions under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (and their family members accompanying or following to join).''.
(b) H-1B Visa Availability.--Section 214(g)(1)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(g)(1)(A)) is amended--
(1) in clause (vi), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) by redesignating clause (vii) as clause (ix); and
(3) by inserting after clause (vi) the following:
``(vii) 65,000 in each of fiscal years 2004 through 2007;
``(viii) 115,000 in fiscal year 2008; and''.
more...
house white-cheeked gibbon
satyasaich
08-14 06:55 PM
"""The Mexico F2A and Employment Third preference cut-off dates are �unavailable� for both August and September, since those FY-2008 annual limits have been reached. The Visa Office had originally anticipated that this would be a temporary situation. Then with the start of the new fiscal year in October the cut-off dates would have returned to those which had applied during June. However, continued heavy demand in those categories may require the establishment of cut-off dates which are earlier than those which had applied in June. A formal decision determination of the October cut-off dates will not be possible until early September. """
Let's understand it ! I'm sure you are aware about July 2007 Visa Bulletin fiasco. It made every category "C". Before that in June 2007 bulletin - they moved dates for EB3 & EB2 singnificantly. For EB3 India - it moved from May 2001 to Jun 2003 - People who filed their AOS are 'June' applicants and People who filed because of July 2007 bulletin are 'July/Aug' applicants
DOS refering to these June applicants means having PD earlier than Jun 2003. I hope its clear to you.
If one thinks with cool head, what you said makes sense. also if you remember when EB3 (I) was actually retrgoressed on Jan1/2005, the PD was jun/2002. Then it was retrogressed all the way back to 1999 or something. Later on, slowly it came up to March/2001 & stopped there for a while due to the so called 'Hump' (due to 245i cases, i think)
AND slowly but steadily PD for EB-I crawled up to Nov/2001 until May2007.
Suddenly in June'07, the PD was advanced to June/2003 and i know so many pending cases were cleared around july and august of 2007.
So far what i've mentioned are all facts only.
Now looking forward for fiscal year allocations starting from Oct'2008, i can say the PD for EB-I will begin atleast Jun'2002. May be even a better PD but i'm not sure. For sure there is a good chance of making progress to end of 2003 when it comes to Sep'2009. This is based on availability of only those visa numbers as mandated by law as of today.
Any comments
Let's understand it ! I'm sure you are aware about July 2007 Visa Bulletin fiasco. It made every category "C". Before that in June 2007 bulletin - they moved dates for EB3 & EB2 singnificantly. For EB3 India - it moved from May 2001 to Jun 2003 - People who filed their AOS are 'June' applicants and People who filed because of July 2007 bulletin are 'July/Aug' applicants
DOS refering to these June applicants means having PD earlier than Jun 2003. I hope its clear to you.
If one thinks with cool head, what you said makes sense. also if you remember when EB3 (I) was actually retrgoressed on Jan1/2005, the PD was jun/2002. Then it was retrogressed all the way back to 1999 or something. Later on, slowly it came up to March/2001 & stopped there for a while due to the so called 'Hump' (due to 245i cases, i think)
AND slowly but steadily PD for EB-I crawled up to Nov/2001 until May2007.
Suddenly in June'07, the PD was advanced to June/2003 and i know so many pending cases were cleared around july and august of 2007.
So far what i've mentioned are all facts only.
Now looking forward for fiscal year allocations starting from Oct'2008, i can say the PD for EB-I will begin atleast Jun'2002. May be even a better PD but i'm not sure. For sure there is a good chance of making progress to end of 2003 when it comes to Sep'2009. This is based on availability of only those visa numbers as mandated by law as of today.
Any comments
tattoo Endangered+monkeys+facts
vvicky72
07-15 10:28 AM
Thanks.
more...
pictures Gibbon vs Tiger
champu
02-13 09:22 PM
i am going to marry my sister's daughter.. Sweet girl
All the girls are not like that. ;)
anyway my comments are about the crazy, career oriented, tradition less girls. And most of teh US girls are like that. Ofcourse not 100%, there may be few jewels..
Isn't it incest
All the girls are not like that. ;)
anyway my comments are about the crazy, career oriented, tradition less girls. And most of teh US girls are like that. Ofcourse not 100%, there may be few jewels..
Isn't it incest
dresses Black-crested gibbon male
GCard_Dream
09-10 01:00 PM
The discrepancy is due to the fact that you are looking at visa bulletin from 2 different month. The bulletin on State department's website is for September and the one on Mumbai consulate's website is supposed to be for October.
Please help me understand this:
The Dept. of State's web site has the visa bulletin for SEpt 2008 as:
EB INDIA
--------------------
1st C
2nd 01AUG06
3rd U
And the US Consulate's web site at Mumbai has:
EB INDIA
------------
E1 Current
E2 1 April 2003
So, how come Consulates got the latest information? Why not post this on the DOS page too by the DOS?
I am so sick and tired of this whole process of GC. I am starting to question myself if this entire process of wait, is worth at all? If you are illegal, you are free in this country, if you are legal they scrutiny your papers with a microscope....I am sick, totally sick. There is a limit to patience, too.:mad::mad::mad:
Please help me understand this:
The Dept. of State's web site has the visa bulletin for SEpt 2008 as:
EB INDIA
--------------------
1st C
2nd 01AUG06
3rd U
And the US Consulate's web site at Mumbai has:
EB INDIA
------------
E1 Current
E2 1 April 2003
So, how come Consulates got the latest information? Why not post this on the DOS page too by the DOS?
I am so sick and tired of this whole process of GC. I am starting to question myself if this entire process of wait, is worth at all? If you are illegal, you are free in this country, if you are legal they scrutiny your papers with a microscope....I am sick, totally sick. There is a limit to patience, too.:mad::mad::mad:
more...
makeup Gibbons are not monkeys.
jayleno
07-14 03:11 PM
Just dropped a check for $5. I hope all of the remaining members do the same.
girlfriend Captive grey snub-nosed monkey
SFSweta
07-11 02:12 PM
Just out of curiosity, what's stopping you from doing some of these things now? You probably cannot spend 3 months with your family in India and Dubai or go to culinary school full-time but you can definitely do all the rest while on H-1B/AOS.
- that's all and thanks for pointing it out :)
- that's all and thanks for pointing it out :)
hairstyles Tonkin snub-nosed monkey
BharatPremi
04-16 02:22 PM
Yes, my status is changed to 'RIR-In Process' from 'TR-In Process' on 04/13/2007. Victim of PBEC
- BharatPremi
EB3-state:MA-PD:July'2003- Original TR-NowRIR
Anyone has their case converted to RIR recently at PBEC ?
Mine pending since Jan 2007.
- BharatPremi
EB3-state:MA-PD:July'2003- Original TR-NowRIR
Anyone has their case converted to RIR recently at PBEC ?
Mine pending since Jan 2007.
nlssubbu
10-01 12:25 PM
Macaca, thanks for the analysis.
My question is, is IV paying enough attention to this?
What I have seen is that IV is spending 80% of its energy to change the current immigration law (increase the EB visa numbers in some fashion etc.). As far as I can see, this is not going any where due to a variety of reasons.
Is it time to rethink our priorities? If we put more of our collective energy to force USCIS to do a better job, will we get better results? Sure, the immigration law needs fixing. But our predicament is not due to immigration law. Our predicament is that the USCIS is not doing a good job. They are only working 4 hours a day. (I saw a post from a person who went and looked around the USCIS parking lot on a Friday :D. He/She says the parking lot was empty in the afternoon.).
I suggest that the IV core spend 80% of energy in fixing the USCIS bottleneck. We should have another rally infront of the USCIS doorsteps (or a flower campaign or a card campaign or a degree copy sending campaign). 20% of the energy can still be spent on fixing immigration law.
I do not think that USCIS bottleneck alone could cause such a huge retrogression. I do agree that USCIS should increase their efficiency and should not waste visa every year. Though it is definite that using all the visas allocated efficiently will help, this alone do not reduce retrogression to a greater extent.
IV is looking in the right direction in the long term. I am of the opinion that, we as affected by the USCIS, can take it up to make them accountable for the loss.
Thanks
My question is, is IV paying enough attention to this?
What I have seen is that IV is spending 80% of its energy to change the current immigration law (increase the EB visa numbers in some fashion etc.). As far as I can see, this is not going any where due to a variety of reasons.
Is it time to rethink our priorities? If we put more of our collective energy to force USCIS to do a better job, will we get better results? Sure, the immigration law needs fixing. But our predicament is not due to immigration law. Our predicament is that the USCIS is not doing a good job. They are only working 4 hours a day. (I saw a post from a person who went and looked around the USCIS parking lot on a Friday :D. He/She says the parking lot was empty in the afternoon.).
I suggest that the IV core spend 80% of energy in fixing the USCIS bottleneck. We should have another rally infront of the USCIS doorsteps (or a flower campaign or a card campaign or a degree copy sending campaign). 20% of the energy can still be spent on fixing immigration law.
I do not think that USCIS bottleneck alone could cause such a huge retrogression. I do agree that USCIS should increase their efficiency and should not waste visa every year. Though it is definite that using all the visas allocated efficiently will help, this alone do not reduce retrogression to a greater extent.
IV is looking in the right direction in the long term. I am of the opinion that, we as affected by the USCIS, can take it up to make them accountable for the loss.
Thanks
ragz4u
03-09 10:53 AM
Provides an exception for refugees and asylees in Document Fraud Exception!
No comments:
Post a Comment