john2255
07-20 04:35 PM
Kindly understand that
Yea- YES
Nay- NO
Not- Absent from voting.
Obama was absent from voting- A clever diplomacy.
Hilary Clinton- Nay(double talk)
Senators from California- both no ( Big Surprise)
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00266
Text of the amemdment.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r110:1:./temp/~r110xIKs1t:e32253:
Here is the Senators and their voting pattern.
Alabama: Sessions (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Nay Pryor (D-AR), Nay
California: Boxer (D-CA), Nay Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Colorado: Allard (R-CO), Yea Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Nay Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Florida: Martinez (R-FL), Yea Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Nay Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Yea Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Kansas: Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Nay Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Massachusetts: Kennedy (D-MA), Nay Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Nay Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Yea Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Missouri: Bond (R-MO), Yea McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Tester (D-MT), Nay
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Yea Reid (D-NV), Nay
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Yea Sununu (R-NH), Yea
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Nay Domenici (R-NM), Yea
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Dole (R-NC), Yea
North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Nay Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Nay Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Nay Specter (R-PA), Yea
Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Nay Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Nay Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Virginia: Warner (R-VA), Yea Webb (D-VA), Nay
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia: Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Wisconsin: Feingold (D-WI), Nay Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea
That means we have lost around 2,40,000 unused visas. I heard that there is a total amount of 3,00,000 unused employment visas of the previous years due to the great efficiency of USCIS. Out of this 61,000 is kept apart for Schedule A nurses and PT's and the remaining 2,40,000 thousand would have been divided amoung employment catagories if the amendment had passed,clearing lot of our backloggs.
REMEMBER, THE RECAPTURE OF UNUSED VISAS IS ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT PRIORITIES OF CORE AND THE DOOR IS SLAMMED ON OUR FACES AGAIN BY HYPOCRITES LIKE HILARY AND CALIFORNIA SENATORS.
Its the high time we convince the senators who said NAYS. Lets start SOME KIND OF CAMPAIN aiming these guys. I am sure that core's hands are there behind this amendment. Well done IV. Don't get dissappointed, keep trying for Skill bill or for similar amendments. Its really unfortunate that we lost a very very big chance. Lets do something immediately.
Following is the text of amendment.
`(ii) DISTRIBUTION OF VISAS.--The total number of visas made available under paragraph (1) from unused visas from fiscal years 1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006 shall be distributed as follows:
``(I) The total number of visas made available for immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor shall be 61,000.
``(II) The visas remaining from the total made available under subclause (I) shall be allocated equally among employment-based immigrants with approved petitions under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (and their family members accompanying or following to join).''.
(b) H-1B Visa Availability.--Section 214(g)(1)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(g)(1)(A)) is amended--
(1) in clause (vi), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) by redesignating clause (vii) as clause (ix); and
(3) by inserting after clause (vi) the following:
``(vii) 65,000 in each of fiscal years 2004 through 2007;
``(viii) 115,000 in fiscal year 2008; and''.
Yea- YES
Nay- NO
Not- Absent from voting.
Obama was absent from voting- A clever diplomacy.
Hilary Clinton- Nay(double talk)
Senators from California- both no ( Big Surprise)
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00266
Text of the amemdment.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r110:1:./temp/~r110xIKs1t:e32253:
Here is the Senators and their voting pattern.
Alabama: Sessions (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Nay Pryor (D-AR), Nay
California: Boxer (D-CA), Nay Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Colorado: Allard (R-CO), Yea Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Nay Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Florida: Martinez (R-FL), Yea Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Nay Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Yea Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Kansas: Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Nay Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Massachusetts: Kennedy (D-MA), Nay Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Nay Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Yea Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Missouri: Bond (R-MO), Yea McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Tester (D-MT), Nay
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Yea Reid (D-NV), Nay
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Yea Sununu (R-NH), Yea
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Nay Domenici (R-NM), Yea
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Dole (R-NC), Yea
North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Nay Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Nay Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Nay Specter (R-PA), Yea
Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Nay Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Nay Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Virginia: Warner (R-VA), Yea Webb (D-VA), Nay
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia: Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Wisconsin: Feingold (D-WI), Nay Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea
That means we have lost around 2,40,000 unused visas. I heard that there is a total amount of 3,00,000 unused employment visas of the previous years due to the great efficiency of USCIS. Out of this 61,000 is kept apart for Schedule A nurses and PT's and the remaining 2,40,000 thousand would have been divided amoung employment catagories if the amendment had passed,clearing lot of our backloggs.
REMEMBER, THE RECAPTURE OF UNUSED VISAS IS ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT PRIORITIES OF CORE AND THE DOOR IS SLAMMED ON OUR FACES AGAIN BY HYPOCRITES LIKE HILARY AND CALIFORNIA SENATORS.
Its the high time we convince the senators who said NAYS. Lets start SOME KIND OF CAMPAIN aiming these guys. I am sure that core's hands are there behind this amendment. Well done IV. Don't get dissappointed, keep trying for Skill bill or for similar amendments. Its really unfortunate that we lost a very very big chance. Lets do something immediately.
Following is the text of amendment.
`(ii) DISTRIBUTION OF VISAS.--The total number of visas made available under paragraph (1) from unused visas from fiscal years 1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006 shall be distributed as follows:
``(I) The total number of visas made available for immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor shall be 61,000.
``(II) The visas remaining from the total made available under subclause (I) shall be allocated equally among employment-based immigrants with approved petitions under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (and their family members accompanying or following to join).''.
(b) H-1B Visa Availability.--Section 214(g)(1)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(g)(1)(A)) is amended--
(1) in clause (vi), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) by redesignating clause (vii) as clause (ix); and
(3) by inserting after clause (vi) the following:
``(vii) 65,000 in each of fiscal years 2004 through 2007;
``(viii) 115,000 in fiscal year 2008; and''.
wallpaper ROCKFORD FOSGATE T SERIES
yoda
09-13 05:32 PM
Last 24 hours had been more intense but fruitful ...
Sent to 30,000 press worldwide
Is there any media organization left to be notified? :)
Sent to 30,000 press worldwide
Is there any media organization left to be notified? :)
chanduv23
09-17 10:27 AM
Come on folks - we are doing everything we can till we start to DC
Milind - kudos for this effort
Come on folks - IV is doing so much for you - IV has provided you with sucha wonderful platform
Lets all payback by doing what we can
Milind - kudos for this effort
Come on folks - IV is doing so much for you - IV has provided you with sucha wonderful platform
Lets all payback by doing what we can
2011 Rockford Fosgate, Kenwood,
Raju
07-06 02:37 PM
More important is the last 48 hrs where they processed 25000 cases
AT-WILL.
Ohh this guy has a good first name - 485 granted.
Ohh this guy married twice,needs money - 485 granted.
Ooh this girl doesnt look good - 485 denied.
Ooh this girl has excellent looks - 485 granted.
Ooh This couple stayed EUROPE not so loyal - 485 denied.
and so on and so forth....
I doubt if anyone was denied. They have to approve anyone and everyone to meet the numbers.
AT-WILL.
Ohh this guy has a good first name - 485 granted.
Ohh this guy married twice,needs money - 485 granted.
Ooh this girl doesnt look good - 485 denied.
Ooh this girl has excellent looks - 485 granted.
Ooh This couple stayed EUROPE not so loyal - 485 denied.
and so on and so forth....
I doubt if anyone was denied. They have to approve anyone and everyone to meet the numbers.
more...
kamakya
09-15 05:36 PM
The thread started by an asshole like gctest should be deleted. This will divide our community
john2255
07-21 07:42 AM
What you should do.
If anyone lives in these Senators' jurisdictions, please call their offices and thank them for sponsoring the amendment, and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
SPONSOR: Senate Amendment 2339 Sen Cornyn, John [TX],
COSPONSORS(6):
Sen Enzi, Michael B. [WY]
Sen Gregg, Judd [NH]
Sen Smith, Gordon H. [OR]
Sen Sununu, John E. [NH]
Sen Coleman, Norm [MN]
Sen Voinovich, George V. [OH]
If anyone lives in Senators' jurisdictions who voted yes, please call their offices and thank them for understanding our problems and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
If you live in the jurisdiction of those who voted against the amendment, please call them and encourage them of the urgent need for similar amendments. Telephone is the best way to make your voice heard. Here is the link to the Senators' phone numbers and contact info.
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
See comments for the roll call of votes (the YEAS were the people who helped us, the NAYS were the people who hurt us).
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00266
Grouped by Home State
Alabama: (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Nay Pryor (D-AR), Nay
California: Boxer (D-CA), Nay Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Colorado: Allard (R-CO), Yea Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Nay Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Florida: Martinez (R-FL), Yea Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Nay Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Yea Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Kansas: Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Nay Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Massachusetts: Kennedy (D-MA), Nay Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Nay Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Yea Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Missouri: Bond (R-MO), Yea McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Tester (D-MT), Nay
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Yea Reid (D-NV), Nay
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Yea Sununu (R-NH), Yea
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Nay Domenici (R-NM), Yea
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Dole (R-NC), Yea
North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Nay Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Nay Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Nay Specter (R-PA), Yea
Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Nay Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Nay Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Virginia: Warner (R-VA), Yea Webb (D-VA), Nay
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia: Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Wisconsin: Feingold (D-WI), Nay Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea
If anyone lives in these Senators' jurisdictions, please call their offices and thank them for sponsoring the amendment, and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
SPONSOR: Senate Amendment 2339 Sen Cornyn, John [TX],
COSPONSORS(6):
Sen Enzi, Michael B. [WY]
Sen Gregg, Judd [NH]
Sen Smith, Gordon H. [OR]
Sen Sununu, John E. [NH]
Sen Coleman, Norm [MN]
Sen Voinovich, George V. [OH]
If anyone lives in Senators' jurisdictions who voted yes, please call their offices and thank them for understanding our problems and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
If you live in the jurisdiction of those who voted against the amendment, please call them and encourage them of the urgent need for similar amendments. Telephone is the best way to make your voice heard. Here is the link to the Senators' phone numbers and contact info.
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
See comments for the roll call of votes (the YEAS were the people who helped us, the NAYS were the people who hurt us).
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00266
Grouped by Home State
Alabama: (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Nay Pryor (D-AR), Nay
California: Boxer (D-CA), Nay Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Colorado: Allard (R-CO), Yea Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Nay Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Florida: Martinez (R-FL), Yea Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Nay Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Yea Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Kansas: Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Nay Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Massachusetts: Kennedy (D-MA), Nay Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Nay Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Yea Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Missouri: Bond (R-MO), Yea McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Tester (D-MT), Nay
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Yea Reid (D-NV), Nay
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Yea Sununu (R-NH), Yea
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Nay Domenici (R-NM), Yea
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Dole (R-NC), Yea
North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Nay Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Nay Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Nay Specter (R-PA), Yea
Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Nay Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Nay Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Virginia: Warner (R-VA), Yea Webb (D-VA), Nay
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia: Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Wisconsin: Feingold (D-WI), Nay Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea
more...
Mouns
04-30 03:29 PM
OK so here it is, it will get 2 years before the backlogs due to the surge clear and to get back to normal... :mad:
2010 old rockford fosgate punch
bigboy007
06-02 03:21 PM
But all this applies to New cases right [dual intent option ]???? i still wish its after oct 2008 but as it reads it May 15 2007.
BTw where does it say H1B is not dual intent ?
BTw where does it say H1B is not dual intent ?
more...
qasleuth
03-12 08:05 PM
ok...I am trying really hard to understand what you are trying to convey. What is your concern ? People will stop visiting IV and go to other websites ?
No need to be over-dramatic (did not read any one calling you a traitor). People talk about going back to their home countries too (but I actually see a small fraction of people actually doing it).
I am not sure you understand the concept of an organization offering 'services' to its members. X man hours to produce ? what are you talking about ?
My friend it is not just 'information'. Information is money. All you are talking about is 'forums/discussion boards'. I have mentioned this before as well. IV is more than a discussion board and you can make no comparison to other tracker websites.
Here is some additional info about non-profit orgs. You SHOULD read about non-profit orgs in the below link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-profit
So your definition of support is 'monetary support' only?
I am sorry for being so critical, but then someone has to.
If the idea of monetary only threads is to affirm the show of support, than am i a traitor to the greater good of retrogressed non-immigrants? This is not the right way to go.
Donors here on this very thread have already started talking about people spilling over to sites like and also if members might float other immigration websites.
why are we doing this? Why are we creating differences?
What is the Donor only thread? is it a commodity, that took 'x' man hours to produce, that you are charging money for it?
It is information. period. and as every hour passes, more organisations are providing or striving to provide information free of cost.
Also, what are we discussing in these threads, that we have to be paid members to view it?
Have you even thought about this legally?
Usually, a non-for-proft org has a fund raiser or a money raiser drive or event.
How are you even justifying asking for money to view threads, which is nothing but information that you do not own and have not worked to get it.
Believe me, this is walking on a very thin line.
No need to be over-dramatic (did not read any one calling you a traitor). People talk about going back to their home countries too (but I actually see a small fraction of people actually doing it).
I am not sure you understand the concept of an organization offering 'services' to its members. X man hours to produce ? what are you talking about ?
My friend it is not just 'information'. Information is money. All you are talking about is 'forums/discussion boards'. I have mentioned this before as well. IV is more than a discussion board and you can make no comparison to other tracker websites.
Here is some additional info about non-profit orgs. You SHOULD read about non-profit orgs in the below link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-profit
So your definition of support is 'monetary support' only?
I am sorry for being so critical, but then someone has to.
If the idea of monetary only threads is to affirm the show of support, than am i a traitor to the greater good of retrogressed non-immigrants? This is not the right way to go.
Donors here on this very thread have already started talking about people spilling over to sites like and also if members might float other immigration websites.
why are we doing this? Why are we creating differences?
What is the Donor only thread? is it a commodity, that took 'x' man hours to produce, that you are charging money for it?
It is information. period. and as every hour passes, more organisations are providing or striving to provide information free of cost.
Also, what are we discussing in these threads, that we have to be paid members to view it?
Have you even thought about this legally?
Usually, a non-for-proft org has a fund raiser or a money raiser drive or event.
How are you even justifying asking for money to view threads, which is nothing but information that you do not own and have not worked to get it.
Believe me, this is walking on a very thin line.
hair Rockford fosgate 2400 watt amp
sj2273
06-11 07:05 PM
Dear Nitinboston,
I am in 100% agreement with you on the notion that Congress probably doesnt care about people who are not voters/citizens etc. But let me quote you an example from history. I am making an extra effort to be optimistic here, but in saying that, nothing can be done will not lead us anywhere either. If we try, then we can atleast go to bed in peace thinking we tried! Here is the example though:
Blacks in this country did not have any voting rights before 1965. In order to be a registered voter they had be recommended by a white person and go through an exam. they practically had no rights. no status. nothing! I am talking about Alabama in early 50s when blacks were not even allowed to board buses from the front door. The bus driver had the right to pull out a gun if a black person did not give up his/her seat. Rosa parks ignited the Montogomery bus boycott in 1955 December and that lasted for more than a year. The result was that blacks came together and held together persistently till people in higher ranks noticed it. It wasnt easy, black leaders were bombed, harrassed and threatened for doing so. In 1964 the civil rights act came about and 1965 voters right act. And today we have a black president. Unbelievable transition from a time when even the drinking water fountains were seperate for whites and blacks.
This is just an example but what I am really trying to get to is that the Government today is much different than it was several years ago. If they could make the congress hear at that time, why cant we.
It wouldnt be wrong to say that this country still is the most tolerant country in the world. Compare this to Australia or New Zealand or Canada.
People in the government will listen if the cause is right. Its just a matter of making enough noise in a decent manner that people hear.
Thats all I have to say! I hope we can take you in the stride of our optimism. You will make a terrific addition to our optimistic force!
Thank you for reading my post.
I am in 100% agreement with you on the notion that Congress probably doesnt care about people who are not voters/citizens etc. But let me quote you an example from history. I am making an extra effort to be optimistic here, but in saying that, nothing can be done will not lead us anywhere either. If we try, then we can atleast go to bed in peace thinking we tried! Here is the example though:
Blacks in this country did not have any voting rights before 1965. In order to be a registered voter they had be recommended by a white person and go through an exam. they practically had no rights. no status. nothing! I am talking about Alabama in early 50s when blacks were not even allowed to board buses from the front door. The bus driver had the right to pull out a gun if a black person did not give up his/her seat. Rosa parks ignited the Montogomery bus boycott in 1955 December and that lasted for more than a year. The result was that blacks came together and held together persistently till people in higher ranks noticed it. It wasnt easy, black leaders were bombed, harrassed and threatened for doing so. In 1964 the civil rights act came about and 1965 voters right act. And today we have a black president. Unbelievable transition from a time when even the drinking water fountains were seperate for whites and blacks.
This is just an example but what I am really trying to get to is that the Government today is much different than it was several years ago. If they could make the congress hear at that time, why cant we.
It wouldnt be wrong to say that this country still is the most tolerant country in the world. Compare this to Australia or New Zealand or Canada.
People in the government will listen if the cause is right. Its just a matter of making enough noise in a decent manner that people hear.
Thats all I have to say! I hope we can take you in the stride of our optimism. You will make a terrific addition to our optimistic force!
Thank you for reading my post.
more...
onemay
04-27 10:42 AM
In California they don't accept any other document for the renewal of your DL other than the new I94- I think someone said I 907 and they are right because I 94 is olnly a portion of the whole page.
We filed premium for the extension and the company is paying for it, but it still takes 3-4 weeks until the lawyer is gonna prepare the package and send it to us. Unfortunately, I don't have a home country DL that I could use between the gaps and this is a great burden for my husband who has to deal with a very demanding job and take the kids everywhere.
I feel imprisoned for just wanting a better life for my family and my kids and I don't think the treatment that the legal immigrants get in US is fair. I was a legal immigrant in 2 diffrent countries in Europe and although you might not be able to get blended in the crowd as easy as here, you will be treated with more regard for human rights( like the right to work or to drive).-this is our 7th year here and I can't work.
Before belonging to a cultlure or a country, we all belong to the humankind, whith the same needs and dreams and people should remember that first - they are not talking about immigrants or legals or illegals or numbers EB3, H1B and other labels, but people whose time is ticking and gets away from them with every second that passes. We are here because this country was build by people like us and we belong here, so please, if someone who was lucky enough to be born here reads this message, consider our situation and let our voice reach the people who need to hear it.
We filed premium for the extension and the company is paying for it, but it still takes 3-4 weeks until the lawyer is gonna prepare the package and send it to us. Unfortunately, I don't have a home country DL that I could use between the gaps and this is a great burden for my husband who has to deal with a very demanding job and take the kids everywhere.
I feel imprisoned for just wanting a better life for my family and my kids and I don't think the treatment that the legal immigrants get in US is fair. I was a legal immigrant in 2 diffrent countries in Europe and although you might not be able to get blended in the crowd as easy as here, you will be treated with more regard for human rights( like the right to work or to drive).-this is our 7th year here and I can't work.
Before belonging to a cultlure or a country, we all belong to the humankind, whith the same needs and dreams and people should remember that first - they are not talking about immigrants or legals or illegals or numbers EB3, H1B and other labels, but people whose time is ticking and gets away from them with every second that passes. We are here because this country was build by people like us and we belong here, so please, if someone who was lucky enough to be born here reads this message, consider our situation and let our voice reach the people who need to hear it.
hot Rockford Fosgate speakers,
vaccine
09-11 09:13 AM
Count me in for $ 100 and I am coming to rally as well. See you all in DC
more...
house internals rockford fosgate
eb3july2003
04-17 07:55 AM
I have always been a passive reader of this post and multiple other similar posts. It helped me a lot and I thought sharing my positive porting experience will help/encourage others. Below are details of my long journey
1. Initial labor
a. Filed - July 8 2003 (no masters, no 5 years, Title: Systems Analyst)
b. Approved - August 31 2006
2. EB3 I140 (NSC)
a. Filed - October 11 2006
b. Approved - April 6 2007
3. I485 (NSC)
a. Filed - July 19 2007
b. RFE - April 2009 (Birth Certificate related for me and Medical related for my wife)
4. Perm
a. Same company. By 2011, I was promoted multiple times and currently managing multiple projects. Every H1b that was approved after 2003 clearly showed the growth and the promotion on the job title and salary.
b. Filed - Feb 9 2011 (Progressive growth within the same company, Title: Project Director)
c. Approved - Feb 15 2011
5. EB2 I140 (TSC)
a. Filed - March 9 2011, Premium Processing
b. Approved - March 21 2011 (A# and Priority Date retained)
6. Interfiling
a. March 24 2011 - Created a SR requesting the process I485 using the new EB2 140
b. March 29 2011 - Lawyer sent the official Interfile Request
c. April 5 2011 - Contacted both the senators and congressman. They were very prompt in responding back. Also sent emails to NSCFollowup and EBUpdate.
d. April 7 2011 - Went for an Infopass Appointment (Useless in my opinion)
e. April 14 2011 - Got the magic email at 9:15pm for both me and my wife. One of the happiest days in my life.
f. Waiting on the physical cards to take a long break :)
Wish the very best to everyone else waiting on the GC line.
1. Initial labor
a. Filed - July 8 2003 (no masters, no 5 years, Title: Systems Analyst)
b. Approved - August 31 2006
2. EB3 I140 (NSC)
a. Filed - October 11 2006
b. Approved - April 6 2007
3. I485 (NSC)
a. Filed - July 19 2007
b. RFE - April 2009 (Birth Certificate related for me and Medical related for my wife)
4. Perm
a. Same company. By 2011, I was promoted multiple times and currently managing multiple projects. Every H1b that was approved after 2003 clearly showed the growth and the promotion on the job title and salary.
b. Filed - Feb 9 2011 (Progressive growth within the same company, Title: Project Director)
c. Approved - Feb 15 2011
5. EB2 I140 (TSC)
a. Filed - March 9 2011, Premium Processing
b. Approved - March 21 2011 (A# and Priority Date retained)
6. Interfiling
a. March 24 2011 - Created a SR requesting the process I485 using the new EB2 140
b. March 29 2011 - Lawyer sent the official Interfile Request
c. April 5 2011 - Contacted both the senators and congressman. They were very prompt in responding back. Also sent emails to NSCFollowup and EBUpdate.
d. April 7 2011 - Went for an Infopass Appointment (Useless in my opinion)
e. April 14 2011 - Got the magic email at 9:15pm for both me and my wife. One of the happiest days in my life.
f. Waiting on the physical cards to take a long break :)
Wish the very best to everyone else waiting on the GC line.
tattoo Rockford fosgate T2 Sony Xplod
venkygct
07-14 02:49 PM
$10 07/18/2008 Boa 7yb62-jgbgk
more...
pictures Re Sx/Fi, Rockford Fosgate,
eb3_nepa
04-25 11:47 AM
Guys what about the type of visa? I mean shud the start date be ur H1B start date or ur F1 entry date? Coz if some people start on an H1 a lot of us also started on an F1. In that case doesnt it make more sense to root for the clause that says the immigrant can apply for his own GC that is employer independant? If i am not mistaken, is that not already a part of the PACE act?
Besides a lot of people are not sure for a while, if they even want to apply for their GCs or not initially. I personally know of atleast 3 such people. By putting the responsibility of application of the GC into the immigrant's hands, and empowering the applicant to apply for himself/herself, the process becomes a lot more transparent and fair. That way the day the immigrant decides to apply and applies is their PD. That way if someone does not start it as soon as he/she can, it is now up to them. Since the applicant Can apply for himself instead of being sponsored for a GC by an employer, it is no longer employer based, so no one can fault the employer saying that, "They didnt file for me for a year".
In my opinion, just pushing ur PD to the date u entered will not really help a lot. Coz say ur current PD is Feb 2002 EB3 but u had entered in 1998. DOL/UCSIS will say, ok lets do that, and the next day they will say, Now the Retrogression goes back to the year 1996. Is that not possible? Currently what we need is the immigrant to be in total control of his/her GC process. That way the GC can take even 10 years, so long as the applicant and dependants can avail of EADs and Travel permits which are longer than just 1 year increments. If we are thinking long term, then shudnt we be looking at this aspect? The GC itself represents nothing more than total freedom in ur career and it's choices. If we can achieve the same thing without the actual GC, isint that our goal?
Besides a lot of people are not sure for a while, if they even want to apply for their GCs or not initially. I personally know of atleast 3 such people. By putting the responsibility of application of the GC into the immigrant's hands, and empowering the applicant to apply for himself/herself, the process becomes a lot more transparent and fair. That way the day the immigrant decides to apply and applies is their PD. That way if someone does not start it as soon as he/she can, it is now up to them. Since the applicant Can apply for himself instead of being sponsored for a GC by an employer, it is no longer employer based, so no one can fault the employer saying that, "They didnt file for me for a year".
In my opinion, just pushing ur PD to the date u entered will not really help a lot. Coz say ur current PD is Feb 2002 EB3 but u had entered in 1998. DOL/UCSIS will say, ok lets do that, and the next day they will say, Now the Retrogression goes back to the year 1996. Is that not possible? Currently what we need is the immigrant to be in total control of his/her GC process. That way the GC can take even 10 years, so long as the applicant and dependants can avail of EADs and Travel permits which are longer than just 1 year increments. If we are thinking long term, then shudnt we be looking at this aspect? The GC itself represents nothing more than total freedom in ur career and it's choices. If we can achieve the same thing without the actual GC, isint that our goal?
dresses 2 Rockford Fostgate Punch
JazzByTheBay
06-11 03:42 PM
Although I can think of better drinks, and Goa isn't what it used to be any more. :)
jazz
seriously , I have seen a couple of people who day dream unrealistic thing and for some time
thinks thats true. This normally happens, when you normally facing a lot of negative things then your mind things of all the good things,( in your shit load of money on stocks and investments). This actually helps keeping one out of depression in the illusional state. but unfortunately fact is fact.
As far as I know, I am pretty aggressive in investment and I am getting @15% right now.. which too in a very unconventional ways.. by investing in forex and start ups with a risk of loosing nearly 80% of the investment in a day. when you 100K-200K and get returns like 100k.. dude that 100%-50% investment.. please let me know where can I do that.
I promise I gonna leave everything and go back with my money make investment in that and live the rest sipping feni by goa beach.
jazz
seriously , I have seen a couple of people who day dream unrealistic thing and for some time
thinks thats true. This normally happens, when you normally facing a lot of negative things then your mind things of all the good things,( in your shit load of money on stocks and investments). This actually helps keeping one out of depression in the illusional state. but unfortunately fact is fact.
As far as I know, I am pretty aggressive in investment and I am getting @15% right now.. which too in a very unconventional ways.. by investing in forex and start ups with a risk of loosing nearly 80% of the investment in a day. when you 100K-200K and get returns like 100k.. dude that 100%-50% investment.. please let me know where can I do that.
I promise I gonna leave everything and go back with my money make investment in that and live the rest sipping feni by goa beach.
more...
makeup Rockford Fosgate Discussion
raj7480
08-01 02:21 PM
When you have these news articles ready...one of the easiest way to circulate them is using a news wire agency.
I have used http://www.prweb.com/ before for my company news releases. It is free and if you want a broader reach pay $80. It is very effective.
It is a good idea to release it when something related to immigration is going on in senate or house. During this time, all major news network pickup articles from these wires based on keywords like "immigration, border issue etc"
So make sure you add appropriate keywords when you do the release.
I have used http://www.prweb.com/ before for my company news releases. It is free and if you want a broader reach pay $80. It is very effective.
It is a good idea to release it when something related to immigration is going on in senate or house. During this time, all major news network pickup articles from these wires based on keywords like "immigration, border issue etc"
So make sure you add appropriate keywords when you do the release.
girlfriend a Rockford Fosgate Punch
xyzgc
02-09 09:49 PM
My stand is based on the premise that a man is financially responsible for his wife and his kids and not to wife's parents! The point I was making is about a completely non working spouse. It is not about a wife that leaves workforce for medical reason temporarily.
Let us not confuse the responsibility towards a man's wife and kids with that of in-laws!
Using the same token, a man shouldn't expect/demand any property/cash from in-laws!
I'm perfectly OK with humanitarian and need based help. What crosses the line, according to me, is that 'taking for granted' attitude!
If the brother in OP's story is taking care of his parents, then this situation wouldn't have occurred. Look at it other way. If the man's parents are in need of money, it is better to ask the man instead of their son-in-law!
A man taking a stand and be done with it has a better chance of saving a marriage than a man caving to the demand and building resentment. Hey, if a man is willing to please his in-laws in all possible ways, then who are we to stop him! Let him enjoy!!
I think, gcisadawg, the problem is the structure of the indian society. This is true with westerners too but as much true.
An Indian/asian guy has to earn because he is perceived to be a bread winner. Unless he is properly settled he is not eligible for marriage.
On the other hand, if a girl is not career-oriented she can still get good husbands depending on her personality and so on.
And such girls invariably forfeit the right to send money to their parents. In such cases, one should not expect girl's parents to give her a share in their property. Its all clean.
You have Indian house wives (many of them) but you have fewer house husbands. Even if your wife works, it is supplementary income and not the main.
This is a complex equation and husbands and wives must understand the social structure we live in and adjust with each other.
Let us not confuse the responsibility towards a man's wife and kids with that of in-laws!
Using the same token, a man shouldn't expect/demand any property/cash from in-laws!
I'm perfectly OK with humanitarian and need based help. What crosses the line, according to me, is that 'taking for granted' attitude!
If the brother in OP's story is taking care of his parents, then this situation wouldn't have occurred. Look at it other way. If the man's parents are in need of money, it is better to ask the man instead of their son-in-law!
A man taking a stand and be done with it has a better chance of saving a marriage than a man caving to the demand and building resentment. Hey, if a man is willing to please his in-laws in all possible ways, then who are we to stop him! Let him enjoy!!
I think, gcisadawg, the problem is the structure of the indian society. This is true with westerners too but as much true.
An Indian/asian guy has to earn because he is perceived to be a bread winner. Unless he is properly settled he is not eligible for marriage.
On the other hand, if a girl is not career-oriented she can still get good husbands depending on her personality and so on.
And such girls invariably forfeit the right to send money to their parents. In such cases, one should not expect girl's parents to give her a share in their property. Its all clean.
You have Indian house wives (many of them) but you have fewer house husbands. Even if your wife works, it is supplementary income and not the main.
This is a complex equation and husbands and wives must understand the social structure we live in and adjust with each other.
hairstyles 2 Rockford Fosgate 12quot; punch
Libra
09-11 10:43 PM
thank you GTGC and vunlucky for contributions.
ind_game
05-18 04:19 PM
Hi ind_game, attorney and all readers,
After reading ind_game last quote "God save AC21.....". I have following questions:
1. Do you know any one (your friend, client) used AC21 and faced same problem? Es
2. Is it true that AC-21 info don't get updated in the USCIS records?
3. If yes (2 question), then x-employer I-140 revocation will ALWAYS result in THIS kind of problems (as ind-game is facing)?
4. To attorneys only: Is AC-21 really helpful or misleading? Asking because if it don't update in USCIS records.
Please reply.
thanks,
waitingmygc
waitingmygc,
I am really sorry if my message has festered you. That was not my intention. After three months of slog and surge in frustration, I was not ready for another 2 months.
1.
I have found some case studies and I am still in touch with them...........but everybody got thru this with a good ending........I have a series of case studies in another website's forum who have faced similar issue (of course, not 2 MTRs but just 1 MTR)...........I do not think it would be wise to post them here.........
2&3.
This is not in every case. One of the members contacted me today and said he got NOID for not submitting AC21, which is according to the guidance. One of my other friend did not submit any AC 21 and he got laid off from the changed company and he did not get any notification from USCIS. He is just moving ahead without filing any AC21.
One of my other friend changed jobs twice using AC 21 and he got NOIDs both times. NOID is common and according to the guidance in the memo (Yates memo). Trust me, I have contacted so many people in the past three months, I have enough case studies in my laptop now.
After reading ind_game last quote "God save AC21.....". I have following questions:
1. Do you know any one (your friend, client) used AC21 and faced same problem? Es
2. Is it true that AC-21 info don't get updated in the USCIS records?
3. If yes (2 question), then x-employer I-140 revocation will ALWAYS result in THIS kind of problems (as ind-game is facing)?
4. To attorneys only: Is AC-21 really helpful or misleading? Asking because if it don't update in USCIS records.
Please reply.
thanks,
waitingmygc
waitingmygc,
I am really sorry if my message has festered you. That was not my intention. After three months of slog and surge in frustration, I was not ready for another 2 months.
1.
I have found some case studies and I am still in touch with them...........but everybody got thru this with a good ending........I have a series of case studies in another website's forum who have faced similar issue (of course, not 2 MTRs but just 1 MTR)...........I do not think it would be wise to post them here.........
2&3.
This is not in every case. One of the members contacted me today and said he got NOID for not submitting AC21, which is according to the guidance. One of my other friend did not submit any AC 21 and he got laid off from the changed company and he did not get any notification from USCIS. He is just moving ahead without filing any AC21.
One of my other friend changed jobs twice using AC 21 and he got NOIDs both times. NOID is common and according to the guidance in the memo (Yates memo). Trust me, I have contacted so many people in the past three months, I have enough case studies in my laptop now.
hazishak
07-18 10:37 PM
Obviously if a guy with PD 2002 or 2003 does not apply there is no way he can get the AOS approved.
But do you mean a guy with PD '2007 May' applies now and a guy with PD '2000 March' (for some unkown reason) applies in 'Oct 2007'. Assuming that the PD cut off date retrogressed to '2000 March' then the guy with '2007 May' PD but with RD '2007 July' would be in a better shape than a guy with '2000 March' PD but with RD '2007 Oct'.
You guys are mistaken one thing. No matter what PD has to be current at the time of I-485 processing. But if both applicant have PD current than RD comes into play. Other than that RD does not play any role at all.
But do you mean a guy with PD '2007 May' applies now and a guy with PD '2000 March' (for some unkown reason) applies in 'Oct 2007'. Assuming that the PD cut off date retrogressed to '2000 March' then the guy with '2007 May' PD but with RD '2007 July' would be in a better shape than a guy with '2000 March' PD but with RD '2007 Oct'.
You guys are mistaken one thing. No matter what PD has to be current at the time of I-485 processing. But if both applicant have PD current than RD comes into play. Other than that RD does not play any role at all.
No comments:
Post a Comment