JeffDG
01-15 07:50 PM
I think IV should get a new law introduced which changes the surplus visa trickle down policy so that equal number or visas gets distributed between EB3 & EB2. This law will have maximum possibility of getting passed.
I find that highly unlikely.
The EB categories are set up in priority order. To cascade from EB1-EB2/EB3 equally would break this priortization. Regardless of our opinion, Congress has decided that certain categories of immigrants should be accorded priority for admission. Those immigrants can file in EB1 or EB2. The cascading of unused visas fits that scheme as it is intended to work.
I find that highly unlikely.
The EB categories are set up in priority order. To cascade from EB1-EB2/EB3 equally would break this priortization. Regardless of our opinion, Congress has decided that certain categories of immigrants should be accorded priority for admission. Those immigrants can file in EB1 or EB2. The cascading of unused visas fits that scheme as it is intended to work.
wallpaper Porsche 911 Carrera S 2005
i-luv-tofu
07-21 12:16 PM
Hi,
I made a ton money. Just give me your information - name, email, phone# & I will refer you. You will be very happy & make others as well!
My desi neighbor told me about it recently. What are your experience with Amway Quickstar. Have you guys made money from it?
I made a ton money. Just give me your information - name, email, phone# & I will refer you. You will be very happy & make others as well!
My desi neighbor told me about it recently. What are your experience with Amway Quickstar. Have you guys made money from it?
jungalee43
12-17 08:20 AM
Thanks for the update. No need to reveal any more details. At least I know the e-mails that I sent made their way to some one who matters.
We have taken these ideas to executive and legislative branches of the government. Our suggestions/proposals have been taken up at the top most level. This has been discussed more than few times with favorable consideration. Without being able to share the specifics, we have received extremely positive feedback for our suggestions. Specific events have to occur before this and similar ideas could possibly be considered in the new administration.
Thanks,
We have taken these ideas to executive and legislative branches of the government. Our suggestions/proposals have been taken up at the top most level. This has been discussed more than few times with favorable consideration. Without being able to share the specifics, we have received extremely positive feedback for our suggestions. Specific events have to occur before this and similar ideas could possibly be considered in the new administration.
Thanks,
2011 2009 Porsche 911 Carrera S
needhelp!
09-23 05:01 PM
FIRST lets just send out the emails as requested by IV (Yes, this is OFFICIALLY ENDORSED BY IV initiative)
We will have all the time in the world to discuss the details.
We will have all the time in the world to discuss the details.
more...
krishnam70
07-11 07:11 PM
Eom
r2i2009
01-18 08:11 PM
Still Desi companies are not following Labor laws.
I know a company in OHIO still exploiting H1Bs......but payroll being generated....
Hmmmmmm......USCIS this is not enough.
I know a company in OHIO still exploiting H1Bs......but payroll being generated....
Hmmmmmm......USCIS this is not enough.
more...
kaisersose
02-13 11:03 AM
Wake up, buddy. This is IV. Not !
Removal of Country caps was, is and will be one of the top agendas of IV , whether beneficiaries of a discriminatory system like you support it or not. It's morally and ethically repugnant to see discrimination based on country of birth in the 21st century. Just because it benefits some like you, it doesn't become right.
Employability has nothing to do with Country of Birth. When we are selected based on merit, skill and education by our employer, why should we suffer just because we are born in the wrong country?
It's time to throw away this last vestige of discrimination inherited from the previous centuries and move to a future where every individual is valued for what he/she is individually and not based on whether he was born in India or Sri Lanka.
Dude,
Read my post again.
I am not saying it is a bad thing (not for us desis). All I am saying is *every* country in ROW will oppose removing country cap and they have explicitly said so on . They would have said as much here too, if we had more diversity on this forum.
It is not about right or wrong, ti is just the way it is. The UK guy can come in to the US today for employment and can have a GC in a year or two. Why on earth will he support a change that will push him into a 10 year queue?
The point is, we should know where we stand when we are taking up removal of country cap. Unlike the other changes whic hare benefical to all GC aspirants, this is one change that will be opposed by several GC aspirants.
Removal of Country caps was, is and will be one of the top agendas of IV , whether beneficiaries of a discriminatory system like you support it or not. It's morally and ethically repugnant to see discrimination based on country of birth in the 21st century. Just because it benefits some like you, it doesn't become right.
Employability has nothing to do with Country of Birth. When we are selected based on merit, skill and education by our employer, why should we suffer just because we are born in the wrong country?
It's time to throw away this last vestige of discrimination inherited from the previous centuries and move to a future where every individual is valued for what he/she is individually and not based on whether he was born in India or Sri Lanka.
Dude,
Read my post again.
I am not saying it is a bad thing (not for us desis). All I am saying is *every* country in ROW will oppose removing country cap and they have explicitly said so on . They would have said as much here too, if we had more diversity on this forum.
It is not about right or wrong, ti is just the way it is. The UK guy can come in to the US today for employment and can have a GC in a year or two. Why on earth will he support a change that will push him into a 10 year queue?
The point is, we should know where we stand when we are taking up removal of country cap. Unlike the other changes whic hare benefical to all GC aspirants, this is one change that will be opposed by several GC aspirants.
2010 2009 Porsche 911 Carrera S
samay
08-25 02:54 PM
Hi,
I have an approved H1B petition, but was given 221(g) during consular interview due to lack of license to practice my proffession in US. They instructed me to submit the license within one year to stamp the H1B visa.
Now I am comming to US on a Visitors visa to write the licensing exam and to get licenced.
I am aware of the possibility of changing status from Visitors visa to H1B after getting licence without leaving US, since I already have an approved H1B.
But I came to know that USCIS will take around 90 days to approve status change from Visitors visa to H1B.
Kindly clarify whether I can start working for my H1B employer immediately after filing status change with USCIS, or do I need to wait till the approval, to start working.
Also do I need to include 221(g) I received after my H1B consulate interveiw for the status change application.
Thank you very much in advance...
You cannot start working till you get your H-1 B stamped. I think you misunderstood what the consular officer said to you. Please see a good attorney before you start working or contact me.
I have an approved H1B petition, but was given 221(g) during consular interview due to lack of license to practice my proffession in US. They instructed me to submit the license within one year to stamp the H1B visa.
Now I am comming to US on a Visitors visa to write the licensing exam and to get licenced.
I am aware of the possibility of changing status from Visitors visa to H1B after getting licence without leaving US, since I already have an approved H1B.
But I came to know that USCIS will take around 90 days to approve status change from Visitors visa to H1B.
Kindly clarify whether I can start working for my H1B employer immediately after filing status change with USCIS, or do I need to wait till the approval, to start working.
Also do I need to include 221(g) I received after my H1B consulate interveiw for the status change application.
Thank you very much in advance...
You cannot start working till you get your H-1 B stamped. I think you misunderstood what the consular officer said to you. Please see a good attorney before you start working or contact me.
more...
lazycis
02-18 01:30 PM
Neither of us are lawyers and I wouldn't even bother reading what you wrote. All I can say is, why don't you ask your immigration lawyer about this Class Action. Let's see what he says.
Did you ask you lawyer? It's so much easier to criticize.
My immigration lawyer laughed when I asked about a possibility of filing WOM to force action on my stalled I-485. So I proceeded myself. Yes, I did many mistakes but I ultimately prevailed. AILF lawyer and Assistant US Attorney could not believe that an ordinary programmer can write quality legal briefs and challenge the government. Some of my friends did not bother with WOM and are still waiting while others followed and received green cards. If you think outside of the box, you can achieve something others could not.
Did you ask you lawyer? It's so much easier to criticize.
My immigration lawyer laughed when I asked about a possibility of filing WOM to force action on my stalled I-485. So I proceeded myself. Yes, I did many mistakes but I ultimately prevailed. AILF lawyer and Assistant US Attorney could not believe that an ordinary programmer can write quality legal briefs and challenge the government. Some of my friends did not bother with WOM and are still waiting while others followed and received green cards. If you think outside of the box, you can achieve something others could not.
hair 2005 Porsche 911 Turbo 4 Coupe
bayarea07
07-27 06:42 PM
Kushal,
This whole conversation was not intended to be personal and if it hurt you in any way then we all apologize ,most of the people here might be in or against amway/quixter but they are all more pissed of by the way they are harassed by so called IBO's with the way they treat their prospective clients.
Why not just move on if somebody says no or gives a excuse to the IBO's, if anybody does
really feel interested they will ultimately come back to you guys but why harass them with multiple calls and personal visits.
Note - I would be intersted to see your tax returns :-) email me please since you agreed to.
Since you are in bay area I will reply to you. I don't need to see his tax papers, as long I can see mine. IF you are happy with your thinking so be it...stay where you are...and you can google froogle whatever you want. You will find your like minded people there too.
I don't need to share my thoughts here...its like talking to anti-immigrants on legal/illegal immigration.
Peace OUT!!
This whole conversation was not intended to be personal and if it hurt you in any way then we all apologize ,most of the people here might be in or against amway/quixter but they are all more pissed of by the way they are harassed by so called IBO's with the way they treat their prospective clients.
Why not just move on if somebody says no or gives a excuse to the IBO's, if anybody does
really feel interested they will ultimately come back to you guys but why harass them with multiple calls and personal visits.
Note - I would be intersted to see your tax returns :-) email me please since you agreed to.
Since you are in bay area I will reply to you. I don't need to see his tax papers, as long I can see mine. IF you are happy with your thinking so be it...stay where you are...and you can google froogle whatever you want. You will find your like minded people there too.
I don't need to share my thoughts here...its like talking to anti-immigrants on legal/illegal immigration.
Peace OUT!!
more...
saketkapur
07-09 05:22 PM
Hi
I filed my I-485 in July last year. My PD is EB2-Feb 2007. I could not file for my wife since she is pursuing her medical residency on a J1 visa with the 2 year HRR requirement.
My queries are as follows:
1. Will I be able to interfile for her once my PD is current and she has completed her J1 waiver?
2. For the interfiling to happen does she need to be done with her J1 waiver or even when she is pursuing it as that is a H1B visa?
3. If I get my green card before she is done with her waiver then can I still file for her later or will her case then be treated as a family based petition?
I will really appreciate if you can provide some insight regarding the same.
regards
Saket Kapur
I filed my I-485 in July last year. My PD is EB2-Feb 2007. I could not file for my wife since she is pursuing her medical residency on a J1 visa with the 2 year HRR requirement.
My queries are as follows:
1. Will I be able to interfile for her once my PD is current and she has completed her J1 waiver?
2. For the interfiling to happen does she need to be done with her J1 waiver or even when she is pursuing it as that is a H1B visa?
3. If I get my green card before she is done with her waiver then can I still file for her later or will her case then be treated as a family based petition?
I will really appreciate if you can provide some insight regarding the same.
regards
Saket Kapur
hot Porsche 911 Carrera S 2005
thomachan72
03-27 03:11 PM
people went to see another guy taking oath too, who caused recent genocide in Iraq.. Indian PMs are way better than that asshole. Atleast they are only corrupt and dont cause genocide.
:mad:
are you sure?? or did you mean that they did not have the means to make that much damage??? US could afford Bush because, see what is happening now... an almost perfect young and highly motivated guy is cleaning up the mess. but that is not the case in india. each one leaves the office with more mess.
:mad:
are you sure?? or did you mean that they did not have the means to make that much damage??? US could afford Bush because, see what is happening now... an almost perfect young and highly motivated guy is cleaning up the mess. but that is not the case in india. each one leaves the office with more mess.
more...
house 2007 Porsche 911 Carrera S
girishvar
07-16 10:38 PM
According to there are 15 pages X 50 Eb-2 India I-485 is pending with priority date before 6/1/2006. If we assume 5% of Eb-2 India is registered with , total visas to be issued in EB-2 for India would be 19000 just upto June 1, 2006. Between June 1, 2006 to July 2007 this number simply more than double. Probably 50% of this 19000 Eb-2's may be processed upto September 30, 2008 leaving another 9500 visas compete for next year. Again 60% of Eb-2 485 is pending with NSC and 40% is pending with TSC. Therefore TSC people's share of I-485 will be more till September compared to NSC Eb-2 India.
My prediction is EB-2 India will start in October 2008 with April 2004 and in April 2009 it can go back to June 2006.
Any Legislative relief from congress will make the situation lot better.
My prediction is EB-2 India will start in October 2008 with April 2004 and in April 2009 it can go back to June 2006.
Any Legislative relief from congress will make the situation lot better.
tattoo 2008 Porsche 911 Carrera S
BharatPremi
12-13 01:22 PM
Hello All,
First and foremost, i must thank everyone from IV, who is working tirelessly to resolve the issues of retrogression in the GC process. As an affected individual I am very grateful that leaders of IV are ready to contribute so much effort for its goals. And even though I do not actively work for the IV agenda, I have contributed money to some IV action items.
I have a question/suggestion regarding the IV agenda. On IV's about page, pt number 2 asserts amongst other things,
The Discriminatory Per-Country Rationing of Green Cards That Exacerbates the Delays.
and further in the same point
We do not allow employers to discriminate hiring based on their nationality or country of origin. Therefore, the employment-based immigration, which is a derivative benefit of employment, should also be free from rationing based on nationality or country of birth.
I am curious to know what is the "legal" strength of these assertions is. Are they just "moral" statements or can the validity of these statements be tested in the legal framework of this country? In other words, my question is what is the constitutionality of the "Per Country Caps" in Employment / Family Based Immrigration procedures.
A lot of Laws and Statutes have been challenged in the Judicial System of USA. And many more are challenged every year. And if the laws are not constitutional then they can be repealed.
I am sure the leaders of IV must have thought about this argument however a quick search of the forums with 'constitutionality' as the search term did not return any results.
IV's efforts to utilize Lobbying to bring about change to alleviate/eliminate retrogression are certainly beneficial. However, if IV has not already considered and eliminated this legal argument, then it should explore whether there is any substance to this approach.
Hence this post. Below are some of the links that might be relevant.
wikipedia article on constitutionality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutionality)
wikipedia category on US immigration case law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_immigration_and_naturalizat ion_case_law)
thanks and sincerely,
--soljabhai
I am not a lawyer. Here is my understanding as a lay man:
What is constitution?
A: At some point of time, group of people, with having confidence from
majority of people, with a centralizing tone of some common
philosophy/ethics, create the framework of regulations with a goal to make
society orderely, to make sure that common good of people remains
prevalent and maintained and assures the penalty for deed done agianst
common good and breaking the common order of the society. Wise ones,
accepting the limit of individual capabilities, understanding the different
needs of the society at different time, keep windows opened to improve
the "base" constitution with making sure all checks and balances do not
allow the misuse and hecnce the word "Amendment/s" have the existence.
Now there has to be some base ground when base consitution is prepared.
What that could be? During the process of human evolution, with accumulated experience of centuries, human societies have established some common practices which we now name "Ethics" and amazingly many are similar across many culture. For example, Burglary is considered crime in each and every society without any question or difference. Why?.. I do not like somebody snatches away my chain as in my mind I have established my ownership to that chain. You also do not like it somebody snatches away your car.If there are only two humans on earth, things might have been simpler considering one is burglar of those two. But here in society now every body has to establish the proof that s/he is aowner of something and somebody else snatches that away then it is not good. So wise ones decided (to keep
controlled and organized society) made a rule : "From today we will call the act of snatching something away from somebody an act of crime if the person can prove that s/he is the original owner of that thing and let's call that person a "burglar" because he snatched away the thing" Now it was suited to everybody because it was protecting their belonging so that was established as "Ethics" and stories of "criminal behaviour"were created by every society for snatching away the thing from somebody. That make every human understand the fact that snatching away is bad thing
(if done openly:), If lawyer snatches away big money from your pocket .. no it is not a crime or that matter USCIS... just kidding :))
Now making story short, after 200/300 years of evolution, USA has legally decided to push the "Ethics" of employment: "Equivalent Oppertunity to all Citizens without race, creed, color, country of origin" and "Skill is the criteria of an employment" Now when these ethical and progressive principals are already implemented for common good of citizens, it should be implemented for foreign labor (non immigrants/immigrants).
Can we "constitutionally" label some person that, hey you will be called burglar if you snatches thing away from US born person but you will not be called burglar if you snatches away the thing from pakistani or Sweedish or Chiense who has just arrived in this country?
So bootmline: If at all constitution is permitting "per country based ceilings" then
we will have to fight to change that because it is not right.
First and foremost, i must thank everyone from IV, who is working tirelessly to resolve the issues of retrogression in the GC process. As an affected individual I am very grateful that leaders of IV are ready to contribute so much effort for its goals. And even though I do not actively work for the IV agenda, I have contributed money to some IV action items.
I have a question/suggestion regarding the IV agenda. On IV's about page, pt number 2 asserts amongst other things,
The Discriminatory Per-Country Rationing of Green Cards That Exacerbates the Delays.
and further in the same point
We do not allow employers to discriminate hiring based on their nationality or country of origin. Therefore, the employment-based immigration, which is a derivative benefit of employment, should also be free from rationing based on nationality or country of birth.
I am curious to know what is the "legal" strength of these assertions is. Are they just "moral" statements or can the validity of these statements be tested in the legal framework of this country? In other words, my question is what is the constitutionality of the "Per Country Caps" in Employment / Family Based Immrigration procedures.
A lot of Laws and Statutes have been challenged in the Judicial System of USA. And many more are challenged every year. And if the laws are not constitutional then they can be repealed.
I am sure the leaders of IV must have thought about this argument however a quick search of the forums with 'constitutionality' as the search term did not return any results.
IV's efforts to utilize Lobbying to bring about change to alleviate/eliminate retrogression are certainly beneficial. However, if IV has not already considered and eliminated this legal argument, then it should explore whether there is any substance to this approach.
Hence this post. Below are some of the links that might be relevant.
wikipedia article on constitutionality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutionality)
wikipedia category on US immigration case law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_immigration_and_naturalizat ion_case_law)
thanks and sincerely,
--soljabhai
I am not a lawyer. Here is my understanding as a lay man:
What is constitution?
A: At some point of time, group of people, with having confidence from
majority of people, with a centralizing tone of some common
philosophy/ethics, create the framework of regulations with a goal to make
society orderely, to make sure that common good of people remains
prevalent and maintained and assures the penalty for deed done agianst
common good and breaking the common order of the society. Wise ones,
accepting the limit of individual capabilities, understanding the different
needs of the society at different time, keep windows opened to improve
the "base" constitution with making sure all checks and balances do not
allow the misuse and hecnce the word "Amendment/s" have the existence.
Now there has to be some base ground when base consitution is prepared.
What that could be? During the process of human evolution, with accumulated experience of centuries, human societies have established some common practices which we now name "Ethics" and amazingly many are similar across many culture. For example, Burglary is considered crime in each and every society without any question or difference. Why?.. I do not like somebody snatches away my chain as in my mind I have established my ownership to that chain. You also do not like it somebody snatches away your car.If there are only two humans on earth, things might have been simpler considering one is burglar of those two. But here in society now every body has to establish the proof that s/he is aowner of something and somebody else snatches that away then it is not good. So wise ones decided (to keep
controlled and organized society) made a rule : "From today we will call the act of snatching something away from somebody an act of crime if the person can prove that s/he is the original owner of that thing and let's call that person a "burglar" because he snatched away the thing" Now it was suited to everybody because it was protecting their belonging so that was established as "Ethics" and stories of "criminal behaviour"were created by every society for snatching away the thing from somebody. That make every human understand the fact that snatching away is bad thing
(if done openly:), If lawyer snatches away big money from your pocket .. no it is not a crime or that matter USCIS... just kidding :))
Now making story short, after 200/300 years of evolution, USA has legally decided to push the "Ethics" of employment: "Equivalent Oppertunity to all Citizens without race, creed, color, country of origin" and "Skill is the criteria of an employment" Now when these ethical and progressive principals are already implemented for common good of citizens, it should be implemented for foreign labor (non immigrants/immigrants).
Can we "constitutionally" label some person that, hey you will be called burglar if you snatches thing away from US born person but you will not be called burglar if you snatches away the thing from pakistani or Sweedish or Chiense who has just arrived in this country?
So bootmline: If at all constitution is permitting "per country based ceilings" then
we will have to fight to change that because it is not right.
more...
pictures Minichamps Porsche 911 Carrera
we_r_d_world
03-27 05:07 PM
Love to see narendra modi as PM but I know that's far from happening. I would bet on LK for now.
NaMo will certainly CHANGE India for sure in a positive way in all aspects. In my opinion, he has another 10 more years to go before he becomes PM. I have very high hopes for him.
A politically active friend once told me (The quote touched me very much), if NaMo manages to stay alive for another 10-15 years, he will certainly be PM of India and that will be the start of India returning to golden ages.
NaMo will certainly CHANGE India for sure in a positive way in all aspects. In my opinion, he has another 10 more years to go before he becomes PM. I have very high hopes for him.
A politically active friend once told me (The quote touched me very much), if NaMo manages to stay alive for another 10-15 years, he will certainly be PM of India and that will be the start of India returning to golden ages.
dresses Porsche 911 Carrera 4 S Coupe
rayoflight
08-15 02:00 PM
Well it is a big deal for all Indians. I am not talking per se about SRK but as a fellow Indian. Does it take 2 hrs to ascertain his identity when he was here as a guest to the Indian Embassy as a Cultural Ambassador of India to participate in the Indian Independence Day Celebrations!!!
Some of you raised excellent points like would the US Media keep quiet if a Hollywood star is treated out this kinda treatment in India or any country?
Would it keep quiet if:
1) Their ex-president is searched by an airline staff
Our ex-president Shri Abdul Kalaam was searched by Continental
2) Hollywood star is strip searched in a foreign country
Amir Khan was strip searched in Toronto Airport
3) Hollywood star is questioned about their nationality because they dont like American
Neil Nitin Mukesh was questioned in 2008 whether he was Indian since he didn't have features.
and many more incidents...
- Rayoflight
Some of you raised excellent points like would the US Media keep quiet if a Hollywood star is treated out this kinda treatment in India or any country?
Would it keep quiet if:
1) Their ex-president is searched by an airline staff
Our ex-president Shri Abdul Kalaam was searched by Continental
2) Hollywood star is strip searched in a foreign country
Amir Khan was strip searched in Toronto Airport
3) Hollywood star is questioned about their nationality because they dont like American
Neil Nitin Mukesh was questioned in 2008 whether he was Indian since he didn't have features.
and many more incidents...
- Rayoflight
more...
makeup 2007 Porsche 911 Carrera S
akred
06-12 12:04 PM
Now to prove my point that we had all of today's similar issues then. Here is my after GC post.
http://forums.immigration.com/showthread.php?t=84252
I hope you people wouldn't simply jump to a conclusion that I was lucky. I went through all the travails of layoffs, GC backlogs etc.
Peace !!
You benefited from ISN (IV predecessor)'s efforts to get AC21 passed with a visa recapture. That visa recapture lifted the retrogression that had set in by 2000. Without that recapture (worth 100K+ visas) it is doubtful your PD would be current today.
http://forums.immigration.com/showthread.php?t=84252
I hope you people wouldn't simply jump to a conclusion that I was lucky. I went through all the travails of layoffs, GC backlogs etc.
Peace !!
You benefited from ISN (IV predecessor)'s efforts to get AC21 passed with a visa recapture. That visa recapture lifted the retrogression that had set in by 2000. Without that recapture (worth 100K+ visas) it is doubtful your PD would be current today.
girlfriend 2009 Porsche 911 Carrera S
BharatPremi
12-14 02:23 PM
O.K. Forget for a moment about IN,China,MX and Philipines. Let me understand the "Quota" witihin "ROW"
Example: Britain, Pakistan.
Let's say next year tons of nationals of Britain Choose to apply under EB.
Let's say total is more than 7% of Total 1,40,000 limit.
Is that allowed?
Same question for Pakistan...
Example: Britain, Pakistan.
Let's say next year tons of nationals of Britain Choose to apply under EB.
Let's say total is more than 7% of Total 1,40,000 limit.
Is that allowed?
Same question for Pakistan...
hairstyles 2005 Porsche 911 Carrera
mbartosik
02-13 04:45 PM
The level of commitment for those that would be plaintiffs, unlike the MI DL case would be a lot more, because USCIS could attempt to adjudicate their cases aggressively. The level of money would be significant. Think $200 per hour, for many man months of work. Without at least $50K in the pot with plenty more available I wouldn't even entertain it.
The level of time commitment is probably equivalent to obtaining 500 letters to the president.
So how about we have a pole.
First question is how much you are willing to contribute?
Are you willing to be a plaintiff with a $10K penalty for withdrawing?
Let's make that last question only open to those who have obtained or will obtain at least a 100 letters, and have already demonstrated willingness to travel to court hearings and depositions (like attending the DC rally and meeting law makers etc.).
I suspect that less than 10 people are qualified to vote to be plaintiffs, based on my commitment criteria and some of them already have GC or will likely have soon.
To put the effort into context both Walking_Dude and myself put a lot of effort into MI DL issue. We needed people with legal standing to sue. The two we had dropped out late, one on the day before filing complaint. I had put at least 40 hours working on this (but being in NY I don't have legal standing).
I've done litigation before, and done some Pro Se (latin on behalf of self - no attorney), believe me the litigation that you are talking of requires considerable time and commitment (unlike the MI DL issue which only required a few hours of the plaintiffs).
It would cut us off from USCIS. Once litigation starts you are burning your bridges. I can see only one practical way to do litigation, that is for an small group with no clear IV affiliation to do it, that instantly eliminates any committed members.
So let's stop talking about this and invest in letters.
The level of time commitment is probably equivalent to obtaining 500 letters to the president.
So how about we have a pole.
First question is how much you are willing to contribute?
Are you willing to be a plaintiff with a $10K penalty for withdrawing?
Let's make that last question only open to those who have obtained or will obtain at least a 100 letters, and have already demonstrated willingness to travel to court hearings and depositions (like attending the DC rally and meeting law makers etc.).
I suspect that less than 10 people are qualified to vote to be plaintiffs, based on my commitment criteria and some of them already have GC or will likely have soon.
To put the effort into context both Walking_Dude and myself put a lot of effort into MI DL issue. We needed people with legal standing to sue. The two we had dropped out late, one on the day before filing complaint. I had put at least 40 hours working on this (but being in NY I don't have legal standing).
I've done litigation before, and done some Pro Se (latin on behalf of self - no attorney), believe me the litigation that you are talking of requires considerable time and commitment (unlike the MI DL issue which only required a few hours of the plaintiffs).
It would cut us off from USCIS. Once litigation starts you are burning your bridges. I can see only one practical way to do litigation, that is for an small group with no clear IV affiliation to do it, that instantly eliminates any committed members.
So let's stop talking about this and invest in letters.
angelfire76
06-02 12:27 PM
country quota is not racial discrimination...u must be a fool to say that.
To change the country quota..they have to change the whole philosophy of immigration in this country... Equal opportunity for all...
Its absurd to try to change the country quota..we must try for recapture..instead..
The US immigration system is the only immigration system which has per country quota, last time I checked. If you are arguing equal opportunity then denying somebody from applying for permanent residency because on their country of origin is denying equal opportunity.
In fact the per country quota actually violates the philosophy of equal opportunity by providing benefits to people who entered much later into the game and ignoring people waiting for the same benefits, just because they are from a particular country.
If they were really interested in "equalizing" the ethnic mix of employees in the country, they shouldn't have made H1B dual intent or they should impose this 7% at the H1B level (I don't want to give anybody bright ideas considering the witch-hunt of H1Bs going on now).
To change the country quota..they have to change the whole philosophy of immigration in this country... Equal opportunity for all...
Its absurd to try to change the country quota..we must try for recapture..instead..
The US immigration system is the only immigration system which has per country quota, last time I checked. If you are arguing equal opportunity then denying somebody from applying for permanent residency because on their country of origin is denying equal opportunity.
In fact the per country quota actually violates the philosophy of equal opportunity by providing benefits to people who entered much later into the game and ignoring people waiting for the same benefits, just because they are from a particular country.
If they were really interested in "equalizing" the ethnic mix of employees in the country, they shouldn't have made H1B dual intent or they should impose this 7% at the H1B level (I don't want to give anybody bright ideas considering the witch-hunt of H1Bs going on now).
alterego
12-14 04:40 PM
I know what I am about to say will trigger a lot of reaction and some resentment, but it has to be said on behalf of those who are not Indian. I think the per country limit is to ensure that people of all nationalities and races have an equal opportunity to obtain a green card and to ensure that no one nationality, group, or even sector (i.e. IT) monopolizes the so few visas that are available. In fact, in the visa lottery, countries become excluded when the number of immigrants from them reach a certain point, so we are lucky they do not do that in the Employment-based system!
I think that by wanting to remove the per country limit so more Indians can avail of the green card quota is both asking for "special treatment" and a slap in the face for all the non-Indian IV members. The more I read the threads on this site, the more I feel that this organization is geared just to one ethnic group. I am sure that Indians probably make up the majority of members, but the founders of IV (I hope) did not want this organization to become one-sided! Please be considerate of ALL members and try to come up with suggestions that would benefit ALL members!!!:mad:
Mostly agree with you about not wanting to alienate non Indian IV members. However you need to understand that any change won, however small or large will have some winners and some losers in it. Earlier this year, when IV was pushing for 485 filing without visa numbers, it was not very comfortable for those who had already filed 485. In fact, some even cancelled their membership over that.
Some of us, who filed 485s years ago couldn't have felt good about that. In the end, the flower power campaign was done and worked, allowing 320K filers to join the 485 queue and those of us who we were floating merrily along, felt like we got hit with a tsunami.
Yet we, each and everyone of us has to learn to look at the bigger picture and not look for our individual goals to come first. When we look at the stated objectives of the organisation, everyone of us has something positive to gain from it and should contribute in our own way, just find something to add your little weight to the effort. That is the kind of spirit we need. The collective force of everyone(guided by the core leadership) is what gets things done.
In a way, it is about each individual taking some action to help himself/herself by helping the organisation. Whatever little you have done, think to yourself, if this action is multiplied by 25K what would be the outcome. Then you get a sense for our collective power.
If you gave $100, then 25K*100= $2.5 million. Now thats a warchest!
On the other hand, if all you have ever done is to come to this board and whine, then I sincerely doubt 25K people whining in private ever got a thing done. Now if 25K people were to whine to their congressman...................
If each of those 320K 485 filers in July/Aug were to add just 10 Bucks to IV, imagine the impact. One can only wish. Of course a greater burden falls on the shoulders of an enlightened few, but hopefully as more poeple find ways to contribute, things become stronger. I'm impressed by the success of the 30K funding drive.
I think that by wanting to remove the per country limit so more Indians can avail of the green card quota is both asking for "special treatment" and a slap in the face for all the non-Indian IV members. The more I read the threads on this site, the more I feel that this organization is geared just to one ethnic group. I am sure that Indians probably make up the majority of members, but the founders of IV (I hope) did not want this organization to become one-sided! Please be considerate of ALL members and try to come up with suggestions that would benefit ALL members!!!:mad:
Mostly agree with you about not wanting to alienate non Indian IV members. However you need to understand that any change won, however small or large will have some winners and some losers in it. Earlier this year, when IV was pushing for 485 filing without visa numbers, it was not very comfortable for those who had already filed 485. In fact, some even cancelled their membership over that.
Some of us, who filed 485s years ago couldn't have felt good about that. In the end, the flower power campaign was done and worked, allowing 320K filers to join the 485 queue and those of us who we were floating merrily along, felt like we got hit with a tsunami.
Yet we, each and everyone of us has to learn to look at the bigger picture and not look for our individual goals to come first. When we look at the stated objectives of the organisation, everyone of us has something positive to gain from it and should contribute in our own way, just find something to add your little weight to the effort. That is the kind of spirit we need. The collective force of everyone(guided by the core leadership) is what gets things done.
In a way, it is about each individual taking some action to help himself/herself by helping the organisation. Whatever little you have done, think to yourself, if this action is multiplied by 25K what would be the outcome. Then you get a sense for our collective power.
If you gave $100, then 25K*100= $2.5 million. Now thats a warchest!
On the other hand, if all you have ever done is to come to this board and whine, then I sincerely doubt 25K people whining in private ever got a thing done. Now if 25K people were to whine to their congressman...................
If each of those 320K 485 filers in July/Aug were to add just 10 Bucks to IV, imagine the impact. One can only wish. Of course a greater burden falls on the shoulders of an enlightened few, but hopefully as more poeple find ways to contribute, things become stronger. I'm impressed by the success of the 30K funding drive.
No comments:
Post a Comment