dhiruseh
08-17 03:10 PM
EB2I Oct 26 2005, Approved on Aug 16th, 2010 with ADIT request in email notification.
Nebraska Service Center
Filed on Aug 14th, 2008 and raised SR on Aug 1st, received standard reply in 7 days that I am in queue for review and will hear back in 30 days
Nebraska Service Center
Filed on Aug 14th, 2008 and raised SR on Aug 1st, received standard reply in 7 days that I am in queue for review and will hear back in 30 days
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
chanduv23
03-25 02:45 PM
This is a real problem. I got a letter from a prospective employer, who wanted proof that I was legally eligible to work in the US (alongwith transcripts, previous employment letters etc.) prior to scheduling an interview.:cool:
I believe employers are seeing a lot of candidates on EAD, and for whatever reasons they dont think EAD is good enough and would like to weed those candidates out beforehand.
We need to fight back against this discrimination.:mad:
I think h1b was considered as an initial filtering criteria where they do not have to deal with complexity. Now as they see more EAD trying to switch jobs, they are trying to apply the same filter. They do not understand that EAD is a valid document on the i 9 form.
So what if they find a lot of GC holders?
" Only Citizens please"
What if they find a lot of Citizens and very few h1b?
"Only h1b please" :)
I believe employers are seeing a lot of candidates on EAD, and for whatever reasons they dont think EAD is good enough and would like to weed those candidates out beforehand.
We need to fight back against this discrimination.:mad:
I think h1b was considered as an initial filtering criteria where they do not have to deal with complexity. Now as they see more EAD trying to switch jobs, they are trying to apply the same filter. They do not understand that EAD is a valid document on the i 9 form.
So what if they find a lot of GC holders?
" Only Citizens please"
What if they find a lot of Citizens and very few h1b?
"Only h1b please" :)
gc28262
09-04 03:26 PM
Here is the taxes for Lingo service for VA.
Federal Taxes & Fees: 0.36
Universal Services: 4.64
State Taxes & Surcharges: 3.37
County/Local Taxes: 0.00
Presubscribed Inter-exchange Carrier Chrg: 0.00
Regulatory Recovery Fee for XXXXX 1.99
Emergency Services Fee for XXXXXX 1.99
---------------------------------------------------
Total Fees, Taxes & Surcharges: 12.35
Talked to lingo Customer Service now.
When existing customers change to the new Max plan, they have to sign up for a new 2 year contract.
Also have to wait till the next billing cycle for the plan to take effect.
Federal Taxes & Fees: 0.36
Universal Services: 4.64
State Taxes & Surcharges: 3.37
County/Local Taxes: 0.00
Presubscribed Inter-exchange Carrier Chrg: 0.00
Regulatory Recovery Fee for XXXXX 1.99
Emergency Services Fee for XXXXXX 1.99
---------------------------------------------------
Total Fees, Taxes & Surcharges: 12.35
Talked to lingo Customer Service now.
When existing customers change to the new Max plan, they have to sign up for a new 2 year contract.
Also have to wait till the next billing cycle for the plan to take effect.
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
gc_on_demand
04-01 07:33 AM
Somebody please comment on this.
In order to utilize all visas under given category , NVC will start preparing application and forward to consulate. NVC is rarely wrong in their prediction, sometime they do start processing app in case USCIS fails act on enough cases in last quarter and in case if they have to forward date ahead they want to make sure consulates are ready with file to close.
Since this is June 2007 case , they might be expecting real GC allocation upto April 2007 but they want to keep buffer of 2 months.If person who posted this info is not making april fool joke then PD in last quarter will be defiantly up to June 2007.
In order to utilize all visas under given category , NVC will start preparing application and forward to consulate. NVC is rarely wrong in their prediction, sometime they do start processing app in case USCIS fails act on enough cases in last quarter and in case if they have to forward date ahead they want to make sure consulates are ready with file to close.
Since this is June 2007 case , they might be expecting real GC allocation upto April 2007 but they want to keep buffer of 2 months.If person who posted this info is not making april fool joke then PD in last quarter will be defiantly up to June 2007.
more...
JulyFiler
01-26 01:22 PM
I dont understand why people even bother to fly through BA. As soon as they say "transit visa" which means additional hassle..bye bye BA. We get strained enough with this 35 hour flights..we dont need any more headaches..they have a right to impose rules.(based on what's happening in their country)..and we have our right to choose..I would rather spend an extra couple of hours and fly through Singapore airlines, hassle free.
desi3933
08-08 10:36 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
Good post!
Since GC is for the future job, any damage such as "I am losing current job" is legally immaterial and irrelevant.
____________________________
N-400 Oath Date on Aug 19th
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
Good post!
Since GC is for the future job, any damage such as "I am losing current job" is legally immaterial and irrelevant.
____________________________
N-400 Oath Date on Aug 19th
more...
addsf345
01-15 01:47 PM
Hi RajuSeattle--
You nailed it man. As i said in my post yesterday what you described so well is exactly what happened and so my explanation of just 140 substitution was not accurate.
Please note the response I got from the attorney of my previous employer (the one who revoked)
This is exactly what I previously explained and what XX verified for you. The I-140 was revoked/withdrawn and the labor certification was substituted. If only the I-140 had been revoked/withdrawn then you would still be portable. However, as XX confirmed, the company used the case to substitute another employee.
Clearly the ex-employer and USCIS are at fault. I have the approved I140 and to date on my uscis portfolio it states that my I140 was approved in Feb 2005. I changed jobs in June 2006.
I am so &^^%$#@ tired, that if this does not work....I am going back. Enough is enough.
Don't loose your heart. I know this is a serious situation but do not become emontional, just stay calm. This is clearly a confusing situation and a bad move by your employer. Have you got a good attorney? Just consult a good attorney and go with what s/he says. This is not your fault and before thinking of going back, fight for yourself and your family. Remember, tough time never lasts, tough people do. Our best wishes and prayers are with you.
You nailed it man. As i said in my post yesterday what you described so well is exactly what happened and so my explanation of just 140 substitution was not accurate.
Please note the response I got from the attorney of my previous employer (the one who revoked)
This is exactly what I previously explained and what XX verified for you. The I-140 was revoked/withdrawn and the labor certification was substituted. If only the I-140 had been revoked/withdrawn then you would still be portable. However, as XX confirmed, the company used the case to substitute another employee.
Clearly the ex-employer and USCIS are at fault. I have the approved I140 and to date on my uscis portfolio it states that my I140 was approved in Feb 2005. I changed jobs in June 2006.
I am so &^^%$#@ tired, that if this does not work....I am going back. Enough is enough.
Don't loose your heart. I know this is a serious situation but do not become emontional, just stay calm. This is clearly a confusing situation and a bad move by your employer. Have you got a good attorney? Just consult a good attorney and go with what s/he says. This is not your fault and before thinking of going back, fight for yourself and your family. Remember, tough time never lasts, tough people do. Our best wishes and prayers are with you.
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
hopefulgc
01-07 10:06 PM
i have nothing better to add..
i am just excited to see some action going ...
GO IV GO!!!
i am just excited to see some action going ...
GO IV GO!!!
more...
caliguy
10-26 03:51 PM
Called TSC using the POJ method. Office told me that my case was approved on 10/26 (today) and card production was ordered. Officer told me that I should recieve the card in 30 days or less.
I checked the online status, it still shows the same status as 09/15/2007. There are no LUDs either. I didnt get any emails or text message on my phone.
Has anyone experienced anything similar?
Why cant for once something be smooth sailing for me? I will call TSC again around 4 PM (just to confirm from some other officer).
I checked the online status, it still shows the same status as 09/15/2007. There are no LUDs either. I didnt get any emails or text message on my phone.
Has anyone experienced anything similar?
Why cant for once something be smooth sailing for me? I will call TSC again around 4 PM (just to confirm from some other officer).
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
Macaca
12-05 05:16 PM
AMY GOODMAN: OK, Lou, let�s talk about some of the guests you�ve had on your show.
LOU DOBBS: Sure.
AMY GOODMAN: For example, Barbara Coe, leader of the California Coalition for Immigration Reform,�
LOU DOBBS: She�s not a guest. You�re reading from the Southern Poverty Law Center�
AMY GOODMAN: �quoted�just one second�
LOU DOBBS: She was not a guest.
AMY GOODMAN: I am going to look at the�as you said, you actually felt that the Southern Poverty Law Center was so important�
LOU DOBBS: It�s a joke.
AMY GOODMAN: �in getting information�
LOU DOBBS: It�s a joke.
AMY GOODMAN: �that you sent your producers down there to get information so that you wouldn�t represent hate groups on the air.
LOU DOBBS: In their responses, they�re nothing but a fundraising organization�
AMY GOODMAN: So let me�
LOU DOBBS: �and they�re indulging in pure BS.
AMY GOODMAN: OK. Now, let me just�
LOU DOBBS: And so are you, when you quote them.
AMY GOODMAN: Let me just talk about some of the guests that you have had on�
LOU DOBBS: Sure. They�re not guests.
AMY GOODMAN: �or quoted on the show.
LOU DOBBS: Barbara Coe was never a guest.
AMY GOODMAN: No. She was quoted on the show�
LOU DOBBS: That�s different.
AMY GOODMAN: �bitterly attacking Home Depot for betraying Americans, apparently because Hispanic day laborers often gather in front of the store looking for work. Not mentioned were her group, listed by the Southern Poverty Leadership Council as a hate group, or the fact that she routinely refers to Mexicans as �savages.� Coe recently described herself as a member of the Council of Conservative Citizens, the white pride group formed from the remnants�
LOU DOBBS: What year was that?
AMY GOODMAN: �of the segregationist White Citizens� Council of the �50s and �60s,�
LOU DOBBS: What year was she�
AMY GOODMAN: �which Thurgood Marshall called the �Uptown Klan.�
LOU DOBBS: My god, Amy, what year was that on our broadcast? What year?
AMY GOODMAN: Not clear. You can tell me what year was it on your broadcast.
LOU DOBBS: Well, actually, I can, but it was years ago. And it was before we knew what the heck was going on.
AMY GOODMAN: I�m going to talk about a few other people.
LOU DOBBS: Sure.
AMY GOODMAN: Glenn Spencer, head of the anti-immigration American Patrol, has been interviewed at least twice on the show in 2004, maybe many more times after�I don�t know. Spencer�s website is jammed with anti-Mexican vitriol. He pushes the idea the Mexican government is involved in a secret plot to take over the Southwest�
LOU DOBBS: OK.
AMY GOODMAN: �facts never mentioned on your show. His group is regarded as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Anti-Defamation League.
LOU DOBBS: You know, well, I really don�t care what�
AMY GOODMAN: Spencer has spoken at least twice to the white supremacist Council of Conservative Citizens.
LOU DOBBS: You know, I got to be honest with you. I have no knowledge of this fellow. I have no idea�and you�re not telling me when he was on the broadcast.
AMY GOODMAN: You had him on the show. I said�
LOU DOBBS: No, I did not have him on the show. He was quoted�
AMY GOODMAN: January 7th�
LOU DOBBS: He was either quoted in a piece�
AMY GOODMAN: No, no, no. No, no, Lou. On January 7, 2004, and June 4, 2004�
LOU DOBBS: Ah!
AMY GOODMAN: �he was interviewed on your broadcast.
LOU DOBBS: He was not on our broadcast. He may have been in a field report. He was not on our broadcast. And, Amy, let me ask you a question: have you checked to see how many guests we�ve had on our show in the course of�what is that?�
AMY GOODMAN: You have had many.
LOU DOBBS: �three-and-a-half years? No, I mean�
AMY GOODMAN: You have had many.
LOU DOBBS: �let�s get a number. What do you think? Why are you focusing on two or three?
AMY GOODMAN: I can go on and on.
LOU DOBBS: OK, keep going. How many?
AMY GOODMAN: But I think the important point here�
LOU DOBBS: Give us a total. Give us a total of the number of guests you object to.
AMY GOODMAN: Lou, I just want to say something here. You just said to Juan, can�t he take a joke, when you talk about the incursion, Mexico taking over the United States. Yet, it is a growing theme. It is a continuing thread in your broadcast. This guy, Glenn Spencer, whether he said this on your show or not, Dobbs has not�
LOU DOBBS: Oh, no, no.
AMY GOODMAN: Just one second�has not mentioned his ties to American�
LOU DOBBS: Now I�m supposed to be�
AMY GOODMAN: Yes, you have to know who�
LOU DOBBS: I�m supposed to be responsible for what he says off my broadcast?
AMY GOODMAN: No. You should know that he was tied to American Renaissance, the group that says blacks are genetically inferior to whites. You didn�t report those ties or mention Spencer�s�
LOU DOBBS: Do you think we knew it?
AMY GOODMAN: �more wild-eyed contentions�
LOU DOBBS: Do you think we knew it?
AMY GOODMAN: �such as his�
LOU DOBBS: Amy, do you really think we knew it?
AMY GOODMAN: Just listen to this�such as his prediction�
LOU DOBBS: Do you really believe we knew that?
AMY GOODMAN: �that thousands will die in a supposedly forthcoming Mexican invasion.
LOU DOBBS: Oh, come on! You�re giving Glenn Spencer and other detestable people who would make such comments about more air time than anybody.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, Lou�
LOU DOBBS: You have just given him more air�
AMY GOODMAN: But, Lou�
LOU DOBBS: �than I would have ever, and I�
AMY GOODMAN: But, Lou, let me make a final point.
LOU DOBBS: Go back and look at the quotes.
AMY GOODMAN: Let me make a final point.
LOU DOBBS: Who�s giving him more air time? You.
AMY GOODMAN: Your colleague, Wolf Blitzer�
LOU DOBBS: Yeah?
AMY GOODMAN: �on the other hand, also featured Spencer on his own show, but reported Mexico�s official response that SPLC, Southern Poverty Leadership Council�s hate group designation, said that he was a member of a hate group, as designated by the Southern Poverty Law Center. So we�re not�
LOU DOBBS: What year was that?
AMY GOODMAN: What I�m saying is that Wolf�
LOU DOBBS: What year was Wolf Blitzer?
AMY GOODMAN: �Blitzer identified him; you did not.
LOU DOBBS: What year? What year?
AMY GOODMAN: Well, I just know when you had him on your show, and you may have had him on since then.
LOU DOBBS: But do you know when Wolf Blitzer had him on?
AMY GOODMAN: Well, soon after that, I suppose. I don�t know.
LOU DOBBS: OK. After we found out that there was a problem.
AMY GOODMAN: But you know what the fact is? I don�t know. And I admit when I don�t know. And I try to get my facts straight.
LOU DOBBS: Sure. Sure. So do we.
LOU DOBBS: Sure.
AMY GOODMAN: For example, Barbara Coe, leader of the California Coalition for Immigration Reform,�
LOU DOBBS: She�s not a guest. You�re reading from the Southern Poverty Law Center�
AMY GOODMAN: �quoted�just one second�
LOU DOBBS: She was not a guest.
AMY GOODMAN: I am going to look at the�as you said, you actually felt that the Southern Poverty Law Center was so important�
LOU DOBBS: It�s a joke.
AMY GOODMAN: �in getting information�
LOU DOBBS: It�s a joke.
AMY GOODMAN: �that you sent your producers down there to get information so that you wouldn�t represent hate groups on the air.
LOU DOBBS: In their responses, they�re nothing but a fundraising organization�
AMY GOODMAN: So let me�
LOU DOBBS: �and they�re indulging in pure BS.
AMY GOODMAN: OK. Now, let me just�
LOU DOBBS: And so are you, when you quote them.
AMY GOODMAN: Let me just talk about some of the guests that you have had on�
LOU DOBBS: Sure. They�re not guests.
AMY GOODMAN: �or quoted on the show.
LOU DOBBS: Barbara Coe was never a guest.
AMY GOODMAN: No. She was quoted on the show�
LOU DOBBS: That�s different.
AMY GOODMAN: �bitterly attacking Home Depot for betraying Americans, apparently because Hispanic day laborers often gather in front of the store looking for work. Not mentioned were her group, listed by the Southern Poverty Leadership Council as a hate group, or the fact that she routinely refers to Mexicans as �savages.� Coe recently described herself as a member of the Council of Conservative Citizens, the white pride group formed from the remnants�
LOU DOBBS: What year was that?
AMY GOODMAN: �of the segregationist White Citizens� Council of the �50s and �60s,�
LOU DOBBS: What year was she�
AMY GOODMAN: �which Thurgood Marshall called the �Uptown Klan.�
LOU DOBBS: My god, Amy, what year was that on our broadcast? What year?
AMY GOODMAN: Not clear. You can tell me what year was it on your broadcast.
LOU DOBBS: Well, actually, I can, but it was years ago. And it was before we knew what the heck was going on.
AMY GOODMAN: I�m going to talk about a few other people.
LOU DOBBS: Sure.
AMY GOODMAN: Glenn Spencer, head of the anti-immigration American Patrol, has been interviewed at least twice on the show in 2004, maybe many more times after�I don�t know. Spencer�s website is jammed with anti-Mexican vitriol. He pushes the idea the Mexican government is involved in a secret plot to take over the Southwest�
LOU DOBBS: OK.
AMY GOODMAN: �facts never mentioned on your show. His group is regarded as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Anti-Defamation League.
LOU DOBBS: You know, well, I really don�t care what�
AMY GOODMAN: Spencer has spoken at least twice to the white supremacist Council of Conservative Citizens.
LOU DOBBS: You know, I got to be honest with you. I have no knowledge of this fellow. I have no idea�and you�re not telling me when he was on the broadcast.
AMY GOODMAN: You had him on the show. I said�
LOU DOBBS: No, I did not have him on the show. He was quoted�
AMY GOODMAN: January 7th�
LOU DOBBS: He was either quoted in a piece�
AMY GOODMAN: No, no, no. No, no, Lou. On January 7, 2004, and June 4, 2004�
LOU DOBBS: Ah!
AMY GOODMAN: �he was interviewed on your broadcast.
LOU DOBBS: He was not on our broadcast. He may have been in a field report. He was not on our broadcast. And, Amy, let me ask you a question: have you checked to see how many guests we�ve had on our show in the course of�what is that?�
AMY GOODMAN: You have had many.
LOU DOBBS: �three-and-a-half years? No, I mean�
AMY GOODMAN: You have had many.
LOU DOBBS: �let�s get a number. What do you think? Why are you focusing on two or three?
AMY GOODMAN: I can go on and on.
LOU DOBBS: OK, keep going. How many?
AMY GOODMAN: But I think the important point here�
LOU DOBBS: Give us a total. Give us a total of the number of guests you object to.
AMY GOODMAN: Lou, I just want to say something here. You just said to Juan, can�t he take a joke, when you talk about the incursion, Mexico taking over the United States. Yet, it is a growing theme. It is a continuing thread in your broadcast. This guy, Glenn Spencer, whether he said this on your show or not, Dobbs has not�
LOU DOBBS: Oh, no, no.
AMY GOODMAN: Just one second�has not mentioned his ties to American�
LOU DOBBS: Now I�m supposed to be�
AMY GOODMAN: Yes, you have to know who�
LOU DOBBS: I�m supposed to be responsible for what he says off my broadcast?
AMY GOODMAN: No. You should know that he was tied to American Renaissance, the group that says blacks are genetically inferior to whites. You didn�t report those ties or mention Spencer�s�
LOU DOBBS: Do you think we knew it?
AMY GOODMAN: �more wild-eyed contentions�
LOU DOBBS: Do you think we knew it?
AMY GOODMAN: �such as his�
LOU DOBBS: Amy, do you really think we knew it?
AMY GOODMAN: Just listen to this�such as his prediction�
LOU DOBBS: Do you really believe we knew that?
AMY GOODMAN: �that thousands will die in a supposedly forthcoming Mexican invasion.
LOU DOBBS: Oh, come on! You�re giving Glenn Spencer and other detestable people who would make such comments about more air time than anybody.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, Lou�
LOU DOBBS: You have just given him more air�
AMY GOODMAN: But, Lou�
LOU DOBBS: �than I would have ever, and I�
AMY GOODMAN: But, Lou, let me make a final point.
LOU DOBBS: Go back and look at the quotes.
AMY GOODMAN: Let me make a final point.
LOU DOBBS: Who�s giving him more air time? You.
AMY GOODMAN: Your colleague, Wolf Blitzer�
LOU DOBBS: Yeah?
AMY GOODMAN: �on the other hand, also featured Spencer on his own show, but reported Mexico�s official response that SPLC, Southern Poverty Leadership Council�s hate group designation, said that he was a member of a hate group, as designated by the Southern Poverty Law Center. So we�re not�
LOU DOBBS: What year was that?
AMY GOODMAN: What I�m saying is that Wolf�
LOU DOBBS: What year was Wolf Blitzer?
AMY GOODMAN: �Blitzer identified him; you did not.
LOU DOBBS: What year? What year?
AMY GOODMAN: Well, I just know when you had him on your show, and you may have had him on since then.
LOU DOBBS: But do you know when Wolf Blitzer had him on?
AMY GOODMAN: Well, soon after that, I suppose. I don�t know.
LOU DOBBS: OK. After we found out that there was a problem.
AMY GOODMAN: But you know what the fact is? I don�t know. And I admit when I don�t know. And I try to get my facts straight.
LOU DOBBS: Sure. Sure. So do we.
more...
Ramba
08-22 04:34 PM
"...after further review, additional legislation, and consultation with Congress, they concluded that they have to allocate the fall across within individual preference petitions first..."
I wonder what additional legislation he is talking about here.
-----It is AC21 Act.
Was there anything new we know about? If consultation means finding the intent of congress I wonder how much of it is BS.
This whole thing does not look objective. Even if it is, in all likelihood we are getting screwed by something that can possibly be changed again under the right circumstances.
--
I wonder what additional legislation he is talking about here.
-----It is AC21 Act.
Was there anything new we know about? If consultation means finding the intent of congress I wonder how much of it is BS.
This whole thing does not look objective. Even if it is, in all likelihood we are getting screwed by something that can possibly be changed again under the right circumstances.
--
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
gcfriend65
01-08 08:52 AM
Can we remove the clause- 'Allow filing of Adjustment of Status (Form I-485) when a visa number is not available' from the letter. I think this statement is not as per Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).
Massive IV campaign for Administrative fixes
Dear Members,
Immigration Voice is starting a massive campaign to get administrative relief for our community. We have had several fruitful meeting with the administration in 2007, some of these meetings were scheduled in September, November and then in December. In these meetings, we were able to convince the administration about the implication and hardship due to current broken system. Since Congress has not been able to address our issues in 2006-07, we were successful in creating a case for administrative fixes that would give much needed interim relief to EB community. These meetings helped us start a conversation on possible administrative fixes like 3 year EAD-AP, clearly defining �same or similar� if AC-21 is invoked, and we are hearing favorable feedback.
Due to lack of action on legislative front our community�s patience is running out and we want some relief urgently to get out of probationary status. We are thus starting this nationwide campaign that will help our advocacy efforts and get administration to act quickly. There are several components to this campaign.
1) Support from lawmaker offices: We urge all our members to meet their lawmaker offices and get them to write to The President in support of administrative fixes and urging for an immediate administrative relief. The template of the letter is attached. Letters from lawmaker offices to administration get far more attention as compared to anybody else writing the same letter. The template of the letter is posted below. Please request lawmakers to give you a copy of the letter or lawmakers could copy IV on their letter to The President.
2) Support from employers: We urge all members to approach their employer and have them send a letter to The President expressing support for our administrative fixes and appealing for an immediate relief. The template of the letter is attached below. Please request your employer to give you copy iof the letter so that you could provide IV with the copy of the letter.
3) Plea from our community: We urge all our members to write personalized letters to The President directly and convey their plight. If you would like to write your own personalized letter, please do so with your own story. Make sure to stick to the administrative fixes we have listed in the letter template and how these fixes could help you and your family. Please put your name and address in your letter. Anonymous letters will not be delivered and will be discarded. We request that you create 2 copies of your letter. One copy should be posted to The President and the second copy should be sent to Immigration Voice mailbox address at �
Immigration Voice
P O Box 1372
Arcadia, CA 91077-1372
The deadline for receiving all the letters is 9th February 2008. Our plan is to collect thousands of letters that we will also receive in IV mailbox and deliver them, along with the letters from employers and lawmakers across the country, during our meeting with the administration. We believe that this will make a necessary impact to strengthen our case and gather the necessary political will required for administrative fixes. We will also try to get media coverage for this campaign and draw national attention.
Please inform all your friends stuck in greencard retrogression and have them participate in this effort. Please post information about this campaign and link to this thread to as many sites, blogs you can so that we can get extraordinary scale of participation. The success of this effort will depend on the collective sincerity of the entire EB community to get letters from lawmakers, employers and members of the community. Immigration voice is counting on each and every member and it is in up to each member to make this campaign a success and help us to improve our and our families� lives.
Letter Template:
Massive IV campaign for Administrative fixes
Dear Members,
Immigration Voice is starting a massive campaign to get administrative relief for our community. We have had several fruitful meeting with the administration in 2007, some of these meetings were scheduled in September, November and then in December. In these meetings, we were able to convince the administration about the implication and hardship due to current broken system. Since Congress has not been able to address our issues in 2006-07, we were successful in creating a case for administrative fixes that would give much needed interim relief to EB community. These meetings helped us start a conversation on possible administrative fixes like 3 year EAD-AP, clearly defining �same or similar� if AC-21 is invoked, and we are hearing favorable feedback.
Due to lack of action on legislative front our community�s patience is running out and we want some relief urgently to get out of probationary status. We are thus starting this nationwide campaign that will help our advocacy efforts and get administration to act quickly. There are several components to this campaign.
1) Support from lawmaker offices: We urge all our members to meet their lawmaker offices and get them to write to The President in support of administrative fixes and urging for an immediate administrative relief. The template of the letter is attached. Letters from lawmaker offices to administration get far more attention as compared to anybody else writing the same letter. The template of the letter is posted below. Please request lawmakers to give you a copy of the letter or lawmakers could copy IV on their letter to The President.
2) Support from employers: We urge all members to approach their employer and have them send a letter to The President expressing support for our administrative fixes and appealing for an immediate relief. The template of the letter is attached below. Please request your employer to give you copy iof the letter so that you could provide IV with the copy of the letter.
3) Plea from our community: We urge all our members to write personalized letters to The President directly and convey their plight. If you would like to write your own personalized letter, please do so with your own story. Make sure to stick to the administrative fixes we have listed in the letter template and how these fixes could help you and your family. Please put your name and address in your letter. Anonymous letters will not be delivered and will be discarded. We request that you create 2 copies of your letter. One copy should be posted to The President and the second copy should be sent to Immigration Voice mailbox address at �
Immigration Voice
P O Box 1372
Arcadia, CA 91077-1372
The deadline for receiving all the letters is 9th February 2008. Our plan is to collect thousands of letters that we will also receive in IV mailbox and deliver them, along with the letters from employers and lawmakers across the country, during our meeting with the administration. We believe that this will make a necessary impact to strengthen our case and gather the necessary political will required for administrative fixes. We will also try to get media coverage for this campaign and draw national attention.
Please inform all your friends stuck in greencard retrogression and have them participate in this effort. Please post information about this campaign and link to this thread to as many sites, blogs you can so that we can get extraordinary scale of participation. The success of this effort will depend on the collective sincerity of the entire EB community to get letters from lawmakers, employers and members of the community. Immigration voice is counting on each and every member and it is in up to each member to make this campaign a success and help us to improve our and our families� lives.
Letter Template:
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
Libra
09-09 08:45 AM
Yes, USCIS works backwards, dont you see, mar 2005 is still waiting while May 2006 getting approved? There is no pattern even to the approval statuses, god only knows how they work.
I was wondering why the status went backwards (from CPO to Decision) and if that that is a normal process.
Thanks,
I was wondering why the status went backwards (from CPO to Decision) and if that that is a normal process.
Thanks,
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
jchan
08-07 11:03 AM
As a US Educated Master and originally EB2 filer. I think this is one of the most stupid action ever within the EB community. So you think we are not weak enough and want to divide us more?
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
srikondoji
06-29 04:54 PM
Let us call rumors as pure rumors, even if they are from individuals here on IV or from aila until the official agency release their report.
Let us step back a bit and analyse it with just common sense.
USCIS and whatever that other agency is, is not a fool to release a july bulletin and make everybody current. If they have made all categories current in the hope that they want to utilize all visa numbers then this is the height of stupidity. If that was their intent, they could have moved dates 2-3 months each month starting july till September.
They should have prepared themselves for the flood of applications starting july 1st, and that is the reason for suspending the premium processing.
Make PD's current and then goingback in just couple of weeks doesn't make sense at all.
If someone has done this in haste then i doubt the overal integrity of this organization and its continuity.
When i started the rumor of possible mid july retrogression, then that was based on the flood of applications that would go by july 2nd week. I am surprised that people are now talking monday or tuesday retrogression and a possible fresh bulleting from USCIS.
Who would know the fresh july bulletin updates from USCIS other than USCIS and why would they leak that information before hand?
Why should we beleive aila?
Do an independent and individual assesment of this issue and go have a beer for the weekend.
Let us step back a bit and analyse it with just common sense.
USCIS and whatever that other agency is, is not a fool to release a july bulletin and make everybody current. If they have made all categories current in the hope that they want to utilize all visa numbers then this is the height of stupidity. If that was their intent, they could have moved dates 2-3 months each month starting july till September.
They should have prepared themselves for the flood of applications starting july 1st, and that is the reason for suspending the premium processing.
Make PD's current and then goingback in just couple of weeks doesn't make sense at all.
If someone has done this in haste then i doubt the overal integrity of this organization and its continuity.
When i started the rumor of possible mid july retrogression, then that was based on the flood of applications that would go by july 2nd week. I am surprised that people are now talking monday or tuesday retrogression and a possible fresh bulleting from USCIS.
Who would know the fresh july bulletin updates from USCIS other than USCIS and why would they leak that information before hand?
Why should we beleive aila?
Do an independent and individual assesment of this issue and go have a beer for the weekend.
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
peer123
05-15 12:31 PM
Do I have to have 140 approved for getting EAD, I can file jointly now --- which I will be - So will i get my EAD before 140 is approved.
Thanks
Thanks
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
andycool
08-18 09:37 AM
...is getting approved. My case is with an IO since Aug 3 and going by the trend, I should have received an update by now (within 2 weeks of getting assigned to the IO). Not sure whats going on :( This is the worst ever wait in my life. Wonder when its going to end???
Same here
SR: on Aug 02 ...Got a Reply wait for 60 Days case under review
Info pass on Aug 05 : Got Reply case with officer wait 30 Days
Just waiting ..GOD ....Give me Green :rolleyes:
Same here
SR: on Aug 02 ...Got a Reply wait for 60 Days case under review
Info pass on Aug 05 : Got Reply case with officer wait 30 Days
Just waiting ..GOD ....Give me Green :rolleyes:
girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14%
SunJoshi
12-30 03:52 PM
Starting this thread to discuss bills and proposals for 2006. Open for public.
The dabate will help formulate strategies.
The dabate will help formulate strategies.
hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11%
SunnySurya
08-07 11:07 AM
May be but when I do the math the benefit of getting GC in time outweighs the pain taken now.
Height of selfishness....
It is amazing that how these people are ready to spend tons of money and time for such selfish causes.
And how do you know , I have not?
If this kind of enthusiasm is displayed on IV action items and contributions then there would be better chances of achieving the goals of this community.
What damage can it cause to others, I am the victim here...
But, if you are so hell bent on putting your GC first, irrespective of the damage to the cause of the community, if you are so mad about yourself.. why do you care about polling.. Go alone.. just focus on "you and your GC" .. achieve something alone.. You can then keep all the benefits to yourself.. all yours..Go ahead!
There are no supportes only plaintiffs.
Just like your campaign, the fundamentals on which you run it, cannot be trusted.. because if it suits you, you'll sell you supporter's interests for your own GC.
I got time...
That's why you get support from very few....
Whereas those who created this forum have support of thousands!
Height of selfishness....
It is amazing that how these people are ready to spend tons of money and time for such selfish causes.
And how do you know , I have not?
If this kind of enthusiasm is displayed on IV action items and contributions then there would be better chances of achieving the goals of this community.
What damage can it cause to others, I am the victim here...
But, if you are so hell bent on putting your GC first, irrespective of the damage to the cause of the community, if you are so mad about yourself.. why do you care about polling.. Go alone.. just focus on "you and your GC" .. achieve something alone.. You can then keep all the benefits to yourself.. all yours..Go ahead!
There are no supportes only plaintiffs.
Just like your campaign, the fundamentals on which you run it, cannot be trusted.. because if it suits you, you'll sell you supporter's interests for your own GC.
I got time...
That's why you get support from very few....
Whereas those who created this forum have support of thousands!
niklshah
08-23 12:40 AM
every one is saying we should do that we should do this but how many are doing it actually........it looks like convention of smart people just planning but no implementation...
santb1975
01-11 12:17 AM
anyone?
No comments:
Post a Comment