vxg
01-03 03:59 PM
Namecheck is done on everyone applying for any US visa at consulate. There is a database which i think called a lookout system and if you get a hit than you will go through further checks. It happened in 2004 and she has to pay $85 fee give full fingerprints at Delhi consulate and took about 6 weeks to get cleared.
vxg,
How come they are doing namechecks on women? That is supposed to only for male from 17-45 years of age? Can you please clarify? what is namecheck or TechnologyAlertList (this is the only check they can likely do on women as per my understaning).
What that namecheck on YOU or on your wife?
Thanks.
vxg,
How come they are doing namechecks on women? That is supposed to only for male from 17-45 years of age? Can you please clarify? what is namecheck or TechnologyAlertList (this is the only check they can likely do on women as per my understaning).
What that namecheck on YOU or on your wife?
Thanks.
wallpaper Tropical Island Diving Haven
hebbar77
03-15 02:14 PM
First thing is when u have higher salary , u got nothing to worry.
Next job tittle/description have to be similar in words not only in nature(becos USCIS officers are not tichnical folks, they just match words). Also it has to be in similar job code. This code is in the ETA* form filed during the labor phase by ur current employer.
But you can do AC21 with EAD or H1. H1 is safer than EAD.
Next job tittle/description have to be similar in words not only in nature(becos USCIS officers are not tichnical folks, they just match words). Also it has to be in similar job code. This code is in the ETA* form filed during the labor phase by ur current employer.
But you can do AC21 with EAD or H1. H1 is safer than EAD.
amitjoey
07-13 05:58 PM
Alright.. I had the power (zee.. I am so powerful) to give you some reputation in IV society and I did that because you sound like a very nice person. :D
Now go and do some good work for this society like donating money to IV or doing volunteer work.. something of that nature to build up more reputation. :D
It's good to find humor in difficult times like yesterday and today. I have seen so many funny posts today that I have been laughing my head off despite the uncertainty surrounding VB fiasco.
Thanks GCard_Dream
Now go and do some good work for this society like donating money to IV or doing volunteer work.. something of that nature to build up more reputation. :D
It's good to find humor in difficult times like yesterday and today. I have seen so many funny posts today that I have been laughing my head off despite the uncertainty surrounding VB fiasco.
Thanks GCard_Dream
2011 Tropical Island - beach, Ocean
Karthikthiru
06-11 01:45 PM
If Bush says anything this concrete - THEN HE WILL. Lot of times it looked very stupid when he said like this but finally it gets done. We should prepare to see what ammendments we can include
Karthik
Karthik
more...
arunmohan
05-07 02:39 PM
Yes I have same questions as coolduggar asked. I know lots of people are using AC21 right now and I am on same boat too.
tnite
09-30 11:31 AM
I also have soft LUD on 09/26 and 09/29...But i dont know what to read into it.
I did have a LUD on 09/05 and 09/08 and then RFE was issued. Responded to the RFE on 09/22 . LUD on 09/22, 09/23 ,09/29 and 09/30.
EB2 India Mar 2005 NSC
There were atleast 7-8 cases from NSC on this board who received RFE's.
I did have a LUD on 09/05 and 09/08 and then RFE was issued. Responded to the RFE on 09/22 . LUD on 09/22, 09/23 ,09/29 and 09/30.
EB2 India Mar 2005 NSC
There were atleast 7-8 cases from NSC on this board who received RFE's.
more...
purgan
11-09 11:09 AM
Now that the restrictionists blew the election for the Republicans, they're desperately trying to rally their remaining troops and keep up their morale using immigration scare tactics....
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
2010 tropical island escape
varshadas
02-10 05:31 PM
Guys its important to contact your local congressmen. There are a lot of congressmen in your state who are opposed to immigration. Please gather people to contact your local congressmen
more...
GC20??
08-24 04:47 PM
any updates on status of background processing for your 485 ?
No updates yet. Though I know its useless I am taking an infopass tomorrow and will have IO open a service request.
No updates yet. Though I know its useless I am taking an infopass tomorrow and will have IO open a service request.
hair suitable tropical island
arihant
02-14 02:26 PM
Hi iptel,
Thanks for the find. I have provided the link to the 2005 report referred in the 2006 document.
http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/17feb20051700/www.gpoaccess.gov/eop/2005/2005_erp.pdf
Look at Chapter 4 in the 2005 report. It does cover more about the TWP (temporary worker program). However, it does have some interesting statistics on the labor market and fiscal impact of immigrants, and other statistics.
Folks preparing material to present may find some useful statistics here.
Thanks for the find. I have provided the link to the 2005 report referred in the 2006 document.
http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/17feb20051700/www.gpoaccess.gov/eop/2005/2005_erp.pdf
Look at Chapter 4 in the 2005 report. It does cover more about the TWP (temporary worker program). However, it does have some interesting statistics on the labor market and fiscal impact of immigrants, and other statistics.
Folks preparing material to present may find some useful statistics here.
more...
chanduv23
06-30 07:59 AM
Chanduv23,
What about RFE without being current? Can it also be taken as Pre-adjudicated? Pls advise.
Thank you
Yes, RFEs could be a part of preadjudication. But at times people do receive random RFEs too. If you are lucky, you can get the answer from a officer on whether your case is preadjudicated or not.
What about RFE without being current? Can it also be taken as Pre-adjudicated? Pls advise.
Thank you
Yes, RFEs could be a part of preadjudication. But at times people do receive random RFEs too. If you are lucky, you can get the answer from a officer on whether your case is preadjudicated or not.
hot Tropical Island
GCWhru
08-20 11:41 AM
We are also in the same situation. Mine got approved on Aug 11th but no LUD on spouse's case.
We had a Infopass appointment today, very nice IO informed us that NC and BC are cleared and case is still pending at TSC.
He asked me to call 1800 and open a status inquiry (SR), but I requested him to open one for me, since I have/had very tough time with 1800. He was kind enough to open a SR and gave me the reference number too. He also informed me that I will be receiving a mail from USCIS within 30 days explaining the status of the case.
We had a Infopass appointment today, very nice IO informed us that NC and BC are cleared and case is still pending at TSC.
He asked me to call 1800 and open a status inquiry (SR), but I requested him to open one for me, since I have/had very tough time with 1800. He was kind enough to open a SR and gave me the reference number too. He also informed me that I will be receiving a mail from USCIS within 30 days explaining the status of the case.
more...
house Bawe Tropical Island, Zanzibar
kevinkris
04-21 01:53 PM
Hi greeta,
I am not sure about time frame for GC but FREEDOM is more important for me. The market is not good, if you loose the job in L1 then you have to leave
to your home country and cannot transfer your visa. If it's H1 you can always do that.
If at all there is a difference in processing times for GC for L1, i don't see any drastic difference. Instead of 6 years it may be 5 years (6 years for GC? Are you kidding me?). No big deal.
Good luck.
Rgds,
Kris
Hi,
I am working in US on L1 and my company would start my green card filling in next few months.
I also have valid H1B pettion stamped and can switch to H1B which would mean that I can work freely here at US.
But many of my friends told me that green card processing is faster on L1.
I am not able to make decision whether I should continue working on L1 or change my status to H1 to get better hike and more opportunity.
Pls can anyone tell me which would be wise choice. Is green card processing for L1 visa is faster?
Thanks in advance.
~Greeta
I am not sure about time frame for GC but FREEDOM is more important for me. The market is not good, if you loose the job in L1 then you have to leave
to your home country and cannot transfer your visa. If it's H1 you can always do that.
If at all there is a difference in processing times for GC for L1, i don't see any drastic difference. Instead of 6 years it may be 5 years (6 years for GC? Are you kidding me?). No big deal.
Good luck.
Rgds,
Kris
Hi,
I am working in US on L1 and my company would start my green card filling in next few months.
I also have valid H1B pettion stamped and can switch to H1B which would mean that I can work freely here at US.
But many of my friends told me that green card processing is faster on L1.
I am not able to make decision whether I should continue working on L1 or change my status to H1 to get better hike and more opportunity.
Pls can anyone tell me which would be wise choice. Is green card processing for L1 visa is faster?
Thanks in advance.
~Greeta
tattoo the best tropical islands
nixstor
06-28 02:13 PM
I am not sure if I am reading this right or not, go this page
http://www.imminfo.com/resources/cis-sop-aos/3-7.html
and read the first para. It says G-325A has to be processed only if the applicant has entered the US in non immigrant status less than one year prior to current calendar date of review.
So any one who has entered US before (07/02/07) will have their G-325A trashed? I was under the impression that USCIS does use the biographic information to check with local law enforcement for the the past 5 years as stated in the G-325A. Any ideas?
http://www.imminfo.com/resources/cis-sop-aos/3-7.html
and read the first para. It says G-325A has to be processed only if the applicant has entered the US in non immigrant status less than one year prior to current calendar date of review.
So any one who has entered US before (07/02/07) will have their G-325A trashed? I was under the impression that USCIS does use the biographic information to check with local law enforcement for the the past 5 years as stated in the G-325A. Any ideas?
more...
pictures tropical islands scattered
admin
04-02 03:08 PM
Rajatish,
Please take a look at our National Interest Fact Sheet.
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=71&Itemid=36
Please take a look at our National Interest Fact Sheet.
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=71&Itemid=36
dresses Since This tropical island
h1techSlave
09-27 09:56 AM
I watch anxiously hoping they might mention somewhere for atleast for 10 sec about legal immigrant...but they never...!!!Jsu tjsut keep mentioning about illigal immigrants whole hour of the show.
Even our efforts to spread the hardships of legal immigrants gets washed out in the big noise on illegals.
Like we did in the rally, we have to specifically and forcefully mention that we are legals. Only with our efforts that the American public and the politicians will start noticing about this neglected section of legal immigration.
Even our efforts to spread the hardships of legal immigrants gets washed out in the big noise on illegals.
Like we did in the rally, we have to specifically and forcefully mention that we are legals. Only with our efforts that the American public and the politicians will start noticing about this neglected section of legal immigration.
more...
makeup thing, it is sold in any
pd052009
08-20 02:40 PM
Ron says, The USCIS teleconference concerning implementation of PL 111-230 provided the following information:
* The new tax DOES NOT apply to extensions or amendments
This will help the people like me who are stuck in GC process...
* The new tax DOES NOT apply to extensions or amendments
This will help the people like me who are stuck in GC process...
girlfriend your own tropical island
BMS1
11-08 12:50 PM
It appears that this 655K includes family based I485 cases too who are in a different queue.
hairstyles tropical island pictures.
kumar1305
09-23 08:12 AM
As long as greedy corporations like microsoft exist noting will happen to H1B program..its the economy that's it ..once it start moving up h1b will become l1b and the import of cheap labor starts once again .....you guys are just spreading fear nothing else ....
It�s not India or China who asked for globalization. It was America who wants to sell their products throughout the world.
No matter how many bills these Senators may make they are not going to stop outsourcing.
America didn�t develop because of protectionist policies, it grow because it was a free market.
It�s not India or China who asked for globalization. It was America who wants to sell their products throughout the world.
No matter how many bills these Senators may make they are not going to stop outsourcing.
America didn�t develop because of protectionist policies, it grow because it was a free market.
paskal
12-19 04:55 PM
midwest folks- where are you
please post your availability
the more the merrier....
please post your availability
the more the merrier....
suresh_la
11-30 12:10 PM
I have Labor (PERM) and I140 approved from my current employer.
can I apply trasfer and extension with new employer.
Advice is highly appreciated.
can I apply trasfer and extension with new employer.
Advice is highly appreciated.
No comments:
Post a Comment