unitednations
02-18 08:29 PM
start from the bottom as that was the first e-mail. I took off identifying information and financial info. for obvious purposes:
-------------------------------
Dear xxxx
Thank you very much for your quick reply. I talked to the family and advised them that the best way to proceed is you the doing the ability to pay part. They are talking to some people to get the money together. I will call them back after 4PM. Can we pay by debit card, or check or money order? Time is of the essence because of the B2 expiration on 2/11/07. I have the labor certification, (the one I printed off the website, we did not get the signed one from them yet, but it is the same). I have the 2005 tax return. I need to get the bank statements. Can I fax those to you? I also have something like a financial statement for 2006. If the numbers don't add up, you can still help us?
Thank you so much for helping us. I know you are very busy.
xxxx
xxxxwrote:
Most CPA�s don�t do audited financial statements. Reason is that there is a lot of things from a regulatory point of view that CPA�s have to keep up with in order to do audits. For this reason, most cpa�s won�t do them.
An audit is a big thing; it is not a small thing. I wouldn�t consider this as an option for you.
If you want me to do the ability to pay part then it will cost $xxxx.
I will need: Copy of labor certification, 2005 federal tax returns of company. Bank statements of company for October, November and December 2006. If the numbers aren�t the way they need to be then there are still remedies.
xxxx
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: xxx
Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2007 12:34 PM
To: xxx
Subject: RE:
Dear xxxxx
First of all, thank you very much for your help. It is really appreciated. I have been researching this subject and was not able to find anything valuable until I found your name. It is really great that you are helping these people.
I know your time is very valuable but I forgot to ask you whether or not we have to get the 2006 December bank statement certified or just send the original? If the CPA is not able to do audited financial statement for 2006 (which I doubt) are you available to do it? If we do that do we still need to send 2005 tax return? (Labor was filed on 12/26/06 and certified on 1/4/2007. )
You are the only one who can help us with this questions. I know you are extremely busy, but I am really trying to do this right for this family. They gave up everything in Hungary, (they made like $400.00 per month and life is more expensive than here), so it would be great hardship for them to go back. As I said they don't even have an attorney here. I don't know if that matters because most of them don't know half of what you guys know.
Anyways please, let me know how to proceed.
Thank you very much
xxxxx
You have to prove ability to pay from the date that labor was filed with state department of labor. Therefore, if you sent the labor in 2001 then you have to prove ability to pay for 2001 through 2006.
Audited financial statements are very expensive and probably do not suit your needs (At least $5,000 per year). Every year has to show ability to pay not just current year.
I can do it but it is pretty expensive. It will range from $xxxxx. You can give me a call with the details and I�ll let you know the chances of success.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: xxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 7:26 PM
To: ny.united@gmail.com
Subject:
Hi,
I heard about you on one of the immigration portals. I am the employer and ready to file I-140 for alien worker. He and his wife are here on B2 visas.
We are concerned about the ability to pay issue. I heard that you are the best on this.
The instructions are not clear at all. Do you have to send 3 years of tax returns. 2006 is not done yet, can we send audited financial statements? What is an audited financial statement exactly? What if the company did not have enough net income in 2005 and 2004 but has it in 2006. Can you please help us? As the employer we are willing to help the worker to get the I-140 approved.
Can you help us? Please, let me know and also how much do you charge.
Their visa expiring soon, please respond A.S.A.P
Thank very much
xxxxxxxx
-------------------------------
Dear xxxx
Thank you very much for your quick reply. I talked to the family and advised them that the best way to proceed is you the doing the ability to pay part. They are talking to some people to get the money together. I will call them back after 4PM. Can we pay by debit card, or check or money order? Time is of the essence because of the B2 expiration on 2/11/07. I have the labor certification, (the one I printed off the website, we did not get the signed one from them yet, but it is the same). I have the 2005 tax return. I need to get the bank statements. Can I fax those to you? I also have something like a financial statement for 2006. If the numbers don't add up, you can still help us?
Thank you so much for helping us. I know you are very busy.
xxxx
xxxxwrote:
Most CPA�s don�t do audited financial statements. Reason is that there is a lot of things from a regulatory point of view that CPA�s have to keep up with in order to do audits. For this reason, most cpa�s won�t do them.
An audit is a big thing; it is not a small thing. I wouldn�t consider this as an option for you.
If you want me to do the ability to pay part then it will cost $xxxx.
I will need: Copy of labor certification, 2005 federal tax returns of company. Bank statements of company for October, November and December 2006. If the numbers aren�t the way they need to be then there are still remedies.
xxxx
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: xxx
Sent: Sunday, January 07, 2007 12:34 PM
To: xxx
Subject: RE:
Dear xxxxx
First of all, thank you very much for your help. It is really appreciated. I have been researching this subject and was not able to find anything valuable until I found your name. It is really great that you are helping these people.
I know your time is very valuable but I forgot to ask you whether or not we have to get the 2006 December bank statement certified or just send the original? If the CPA is not able to do audited financial statement for 2006 (which I doubt) are you available to do it? If we do that do we still need to send 2005 tax return? (Labor was filed on 12/26/06 and certified on 1/4/2007. )
You are the only one who can help us with this questions. I know you are extremely busy, but I am really trying to do this right for this family. They gave up everything in Hungary, (they made like $400.00 per month and life is more expensive than here), so it would be great hardship for them to go back. As I said they don't even have an attorney here. I don't know if that matters because most of them don't know half of what you guys know.
Anyways please, let me know how to proceed.
Thank you very much
xxxxx
You have to prove ability to pay from the date that labor was filed with state department of labor. Therefore, if you sent the labor in 2001 then you have to prove ability to pay for 2001 through 2006.
Audited financial statements are very expensive and probably do not suit your needs (At least $5,000 per year). Every year has to show ability to pay not just current year.
I can do it but it is pretty expensive. It will range from $xxxxx. You can give me a call with the details and I�ll let you know the chances of success.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: xxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 7:26 PM
To: ny.united@gmail.com
Subject:
Hi,
I heard about you on one of the immigration portals. I am the employer and ready to file I-140 for alien worker. He and his wife are here on B2 visas.
We are concerned about the ability to pay issue. I heard that you are the best on this.
The instructions are not clear at all. Do you have to send 3 years of tax returns. 2006 is not done yet, can we send audited financial statements? What is an audited financial statement exactly? What if the company did not have enough net income in 2005 and 2004 but has it in 2006. Can you please help us? As the employer we are willing to help the worker to get the I-140 approved.
Can you help us? Please, let me know and also how much do you charge.
Their visa expiring soon, please respond A.S.A.P
Thank very much
xxxxxxxx
wallpaper Justin Bieber Goes Shirtless
vine93
09-23 05:12 PM
Nixtor,
This idea makes much sense and I am for it.
Only hitch is how fruitful it would be launching it now. Why not to wait for next season ( Probably Democrats ).
This idea makes much sense and I am for it.
Only hitch is how fruitful it would be launching it now. Why not to wait for next season ( Probably Democrats ).
roseball
07-10 12:35 PM
Can anyone recommend any good IT consulting companies in Canada?
I need a permanent job offer to qualify for the points but most of the jobs for my skill set are either contract jobs or for relocation to USA. Please help.
Try www.cgi.com.
Its one of the top consulting companies in Canada which hire for full time positions....One of my colleagues moved to Canada last year and got a decent offer from CGI in Toronto.........Keep in mind that salaries in Canada when compared to US are not that great, not to mention high taxes.....But the peace of mind and stress free life is priceless.....
I need a permanent job offer to qualify for the points but most of the jobs for my skill set are either contract jobs or for relocation to USA. Please help.
Try www.cgi.com.
Its one of the top consulting companies in Canada which hire for full time positions....One of my colleagues moved to Canada last year and got a decent offer from CGI in Toronto.........Keep in mind that salaries in Canada when compared to US are not that great, not to mention high taxes.....But the peace of mind and stress free life is priceless.....
2011 to shirtless, hot justin
ujjwal_p
05-11 09:15 PM
Thanks for being the self-designated, unpaid spokesperson for "we indians" and keeping track of accountable indians :)
Nice one. I'll take that dig.
Nice one. I'll take that dig.
more...
greatguy
01-24 10:07 AM
I think, it is too light a sentence for the crook
sh2005
02-12 03:38 PM
I wish your hopes comes true. However, one thing you should remember. There are many guys with PD before 2005 got stuck due to name check, particularly in ROW catagory. This big jump in PD for ROW and new name check clearance rule, will makes tons of 485s become eligible for approval in March.
As they mentioned in their comment, they may freeze the PD for ROW in APril or move back to 2004, depending on how many EB3-ROW gets GC in March.
Ramba,
I see the comment where USCIS said date movement can slow down or stop, but didn't say anything about going back to an earlier cutoff date. Of course, I am pretty sure that State dept didn't take into consideration the new Name Check rule. So as we have seen before, anything is possible :)
As they mentioned in their comment, they may freeze the PD for ROW in APril or move back to 2004, depending on how many EB3-ROW gets GC in March.
Ramba,
I see the comment where USCIS said date movement can slow down or stop, but didn't say anything about going back to an earlier cutoff date. Of course, I am pretty sure that State dept didn't take into consideration the new Name Check rule. So as we have seen before, anything is possible :)
more...
eb3India
11-11 09:10 PM
I completely agree that Substitute labor is being used is the wrong sense. My husband is now in his 7th year of H1B and I am still on H4.
At the same time our friend who came in 2005 to USA through an Indian company joined Rapidigm in 2005, received a 1999 priority date Labor and received his Green card (& for his wife too) in 8 months time.
This iextremely unfair means of acquiring GC and should be blocked legally.Meanwhile Rapidigm has been acquired by Fujitsu .
simple question, given an opportunity, where someone offer you sub labour with PD prior to 2001 does any one here reject the offer, this is a classic story of "ship of crabs from ...."
we have much bigger fish to fry than worry about few smart crabs getting out of ship.
sub labour is not illegal nor it is a loop hole, itz a simple deal between employer and employee for their own benifit.
letz focus our effort on making new congresss and senate understand our situation and provide some relife thru bills such as SKILL.
At the same time our friend who came in 2005 to USA through an Indian company joined Rapidigm in 2005, received a 1999 priority date Labor and received his Green card (& for his wife too) in 8 months time.
This iextremely unfair means of acquiring GC and should be blocked legally.Meanwhile Rapidigm has been acquired by Fujitsu .
simple question, given an opportunity, where someone offer you sub labour with PD prior to 2001 does any one here reject the offer, this is a classic story of "ship of crabs from ...."
we have much bigger fish to fry than worry about few smart crabs getting out of ship.
sub labour is not illegal nor it is a loop hole, itz a simple deal between employer and employee for their own benifit.
letz focus our effort on making new congresss and senate understand our situation and provide some relife thru bills such as SKILL.
2010 Justin Bieber Shirtless With A
admin
12-31 07:22 PM
Very good find logiclife. Hope we can get such good points across to our legislators.
more...
ivar
08-15 03:47 AM
-- Deleted --
hair Sexiest Justin Bieber Picture
harsh
02-13 08:42 PM
I am following this discussion and it is interesting. Here is what I get so far.
USCIS is not allotting excess visa number horizontally. Unused visas from Eb1 and EB2 are not going to over subscribed countries but to EB3 ROW. The "total" visas in the law can be read as total visa across all categories. If this is true then it is likely that untill EB3 ROW becomes current, India and China will only get 7%. But here is what I do not get.
1) From november 2005 bulletin, USCIS is saying that they are going to suspend AC21. Why did they decide to suspend ac21? Can they decide on their own when they are going to apply to AC21 and when they are not? Is AC21 not a law?
2) Why or how did USCIS allocate large number of visas to over subscribed countries India and China before? Like in the November bulletin, USCIS says india used up around 44000 visas. Were they allocating more visas by following AC21? If yes, then why did they decide to suspend AC21? If no, then how they allocated so many numbers?
I am trying to understand the how the USCIS decides to allocate visa numbers. And it is very complex.
USCIS is not allotting excess visa number horizontally. Unused visas from Eb1 and EB2 are not going to over subscribed countries but to EB3 ROW. The "total" visas in the law can be read as total visa across all categories. If this is true then it is likely that untill EB3 ROW becomes current, India and China will only get 7%. But here is what I do not get.
1) From november 2005 bulletin, USCIS is saying that they are going to suspend AC21. Why did they decide to suspend ac21? Can they decide on their own when they are going to apply to AC21 and when they are not? Is AC21 not a law?
2) Why or how did USCIS allocate large number of visas to over subscribed countries India and China before? Like in the November bulletin, USCIS says india used up around 44000 visas. Were they allocating more visas by following AC21? If yes, then why did they decide to suspend AC21? If no, then how they allocated so many numbers?
I am trying to understand the how the USCIS decides to allocate visa numbers. And it is very complex.
more...
gimmeacard
07-28 03:54 PM
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!!
can you share your Tax stmts from Amway? you can hide the key Taxid # and address, leaving your name there... lets see it?
I don't need to share my thoughts here...its like talking to anti-immigrants on legal/illegal immigration.
Peace OUT!!
can you share your Tax stmts from Amway? you can hide the key Taxid # and address, leaving your name there... lets see it?
hot Justin Bieber makes #1
samay
07-22 11:41 AM
Hi Forum,
I have come to USA last year and was getting paid consistently till May31. Now, on July 2nd new employer (not a desi, but a big company) applied for transfer on premium processing. I'm continuing with my old employer, and they are marketing me, and have all such emails. Just wanted to know whether the paystub will be an issue for transfer? And how soon can I join them, and what is the risk if I join them now, before I wait for response from INS?
Any response in this regard will be highly appreciated.
Normally the last two pay stubs are required and it become an issue and you may get a RFE.
I have come to USA last year and was getting paid consistently till May31. Now, on July 2nd new employer (not a desi, but a big company) applied for transfer on premium processing. I'm continuing with my old employer, and they are marketing me, and have all such emails. Just wanted to know whether the paystub will be an issue for transfer? And how soon can I join them, and what is the risk if I join them now, before I wait for response from INS?
Any response in this regard will be highly appreciated.
Normally the last two pay stubs are required and it become an issue and you may get a RFE.
more...
house justin bieber shirtless
fide_champ
08-17 01:59 PM
Due respect Chanduv23 - I believe there are a million and more who've done better and fought tougher battles. I'd think some of them are here on this very forum. I may not have had an opportunity to grow up in India - however, I'm pretty sure - in fact quite certain, the sort of b'wood trash dished out, is nothing representative of Indian culture and ways of life. Most of the stuff encourages ills of American pop culture and feels desperate to the point of being foolish wannabees - and you know what's really sad -- that people from a nation with such incredibly history & culture need the feel to ape ills of American pop culture and the likes. As for Shahrook Khan - the man CAN'T act - unless you think some sort of speech disability, lip-synching songs (sung by folks with actual talent) and running around foolish women in skirts is talent and form art?! I wish the admins would remove the silly post from the forum.
It doesn't matter. The topic is about what the immigration officers are doing to the innocent civilians. In this case it happened to be SRK who everyone knows but it is happening to everybody. Just because his last name spelled as khan, can they interrogate every khan in this world?
It doesn't matter. The topic is about what the immigration officers are doing to the innocent civilians. In this case it happened to be SRK who everyone knows but it is happening to everybody. Just because his last name spelled as khan, can they interrogate every khan in this world?
tattoo 2010 tattoo Justin Bieber
apb
12-14 02:24 PM
I really don't see how removing the per country ceilings alone without increasing the anual quota will help the entire comminity. If you do that alone all it will do is make the date retrogressed for all the countries even further. So where's the gain?
Getting the anual quota increased, not counting dependents in the quota and recapturing visas from passed years will help EVERYBODY.
If people want to think that something petty as removing the per country quota is going to solve all our problms then all the best (and God bless us all) ! :cool:
PS - Pardon me if this sounds harsh but this is how I see it.
We need to understand that the basic premise of the removing the per country limit uses the assumption that there is enough visa for all of us. But sadly this is not true. We have ask for increasing the GC limit from 140000 to xyz. The last increase was in 1990 which was after 14 years. Now 18 years have passed and there is no change in that direction.
Increasing limit cannot be fought in the court. It requires changes in law. Removing dependents from EB based GC consumption also cannot be decided in court. But removing per country limit for EB/GC can be decided in court. Just because we are fighting for one does not mean we are ignoring other agendas of IV.
Getting the anual quota increased, not counting dependents in the quota and recapturing visas from passed years will help EVERYBODY.
If people want to think that something petty as removing the per country quota is going to solve all our problms then all the best (and God bless us all) ! :cool:
PS - Pardon me if this sounds harsh but this is how I see it.
We need to understand that the basic premise of the removing the per country limit uses the assumption that there is enough visa for all of us. But sadly this is not true. We have ask for increasing the GC limit from 140000 to xyz. The last increase was in 1990 which was after 14 years. Now 18 years have passed and there is no change in that direction.
Increasing limit cannot be fought in the court. It requires changes in law. Removing dependents from EB based GC consumption also cannot be decided in court. But removing per country limit for EB/GC can be decided in court. Just because we are fighting for one does not mean we are ignoring other agendas of IV.
more...
pictures Justin Bieber Shirtless
okuzmin
08-31 07:11 PM
We applied for Canadian immigration through Buffalo, NY in December 2005. I got a letter later in February 2006 stating that the principal applicant (me) must take IELTS. Yes, I sent all the experience letters and a letter of explanation that I have enough English proficiency having stayed in the US for about 11 years, with two bachelor's degrees from a US university, many years of experience, blah-blah-blah. Apparently, that was not enough. So, you better plan on taking IELTS. :)
dresses Shirtless Justin Bieber
ramus
07-03 04:29 PM
I digged it..
Lets digg this please..
Lets digg this please..
more...
makeup Justin Bieber is the perfect
kaisersose
02-13 01:20 PM
WDude, Googler, I am not against removing per country limits. But we need to have a cool head, think straight, objective and use facts. I just think it will be next to impossible to change the INA to remove those quotas so it's better to concentrate efforts on 1) visa recapture; 2) EB quota increase. Visas were lost mostly because of NC issue.
I think visa recapture is the most likely bet. There is really no reason why anyone would think twice about it.
EB Quota increase is next to impossible. The word "increase" will have many people tune out which will also affect any bundled propositions. One way to avoid this problem is to avoid using the word "increase"; by asking to not count family numbers in the EB quota or to count them in the FB quota. That will result in a huge increase in EB Quota without directly calling it quota increase.
The other provision of allowing 485 applications without current PDs is a bad idea in my opinion. Anyone who enters the country will be eligible for AC21 in 8 months which is about 80% of a GC. Such a provision will result in huge abuse like the L visa and/or Labor substitution.
I think visa recapture is the most likely bet. There is really no reason why anyone would think twice about it.
EB Quota increase is next to impossible. The word "increase" will have many people tune out which will also affect any bundled propositions. One way to avoid this problem is to avoid using the word "increase"; by asking to not count family numbers in the EB quota or to count them in the FB quota. That will result in a huge increase in EB Quota without directly calling it quota increase.
The other provision of allowing 485 applications without current PDs is a bad idea in my opinion. Anyone who enters the country will be eligible for AC21 in 8 months which is about 80% of a GC. Such a provision will result in huge abuse like the L visa and/or Labor substitution.
girlfriend BRAND NEW Justin Bieber
walking_dude
02-14 09:37 AM
hopefulgc - also make the commitments clear! Its not just sufficient to support ( as in moral support) the cause. Its important to participate in it.
I think someone should change the Poll question to -
Q) Do you commit to participate in a class action lawsuit against USCIS?
1) Yes. I am willing to commit $500
2) Yes. I'm willing to be a plaintiff ( full name and full contact info required)
3) Yes. I'm willing to commit $500 and become a plaintiff as well
4) No. I don't think it will work
It will make it clear to everyone voting 'Yes' what's expected of them.
hopefulgc - please dedicate some time and update your first post with more information on lawsuit, you may want to quote lazycis 's posts and other information.
A lot of people may not be very knowledgable and may backoff when they see the word "lawsuit".
Those who are saying YES on the poll - it is assumed that you will not backoff - if you have not yet updated your profile on IV - please update your complete profile - this will show that you can be counted on.
I think someone should change the Poll question to -
Q) Do you commit to participate in a class action lawsuit against USCIS?
1) Yes. I am willing to commit $500
2) Yes. I'm willing to be a plaintiff ( full name and full contact info required)
3) Yes. I'm willing to commit $500 and become a plaintiff as well
4) No. I don't think it will work
It will make it clear to everyone voting 'Yes' what's expected of them.
hopefulgc - please dedicate some time and update your first post with more information on lawsuit, you may want to quote lazycis 's posts and other information.
A lot of people may not be very knowledgable and may backoff when they see the word "lawsuit".
Those who are saying YES on the poll - it is assumed that you will not backoff - if you have not yet updated your profile on IV - please update your complete profile - this will show that you can be counted on.
hairstyles Justin Bieber shirtless in
paskal
02-13 08:33 PM
I don't think there is much I disagree with you. You are right about most things. Especiallly, that it is not an exact science. A lot depends upon how many applicants there are, and how many numbers are increased, and how much the country limits are increased by.
I also don't think that the country limits will go away totally. They will probably just increase them. But you never know. Espeically, because at some point, they will go to the point system, and then who knows whats going to happen to us.
Also, its not that I am concerned about what is GOOD JUST FOR ME. (BTW, its not just me, its about a third of IV) I am more worried about what is bad for me.
i think it's pretty clear that increasing GC numbers is the first priority for iv. removing country limits would be a thin band aid of sorts if the GC numbers do not change. GC numbers have to increase, the rest comes after that.
hence in my view this argument is moot.
we need to come together and work on this, otherwise we all fail.
I also don't think that the country limits will go away totally. They will probably just increase them. But you never know. Espeically, because at some point, they will go to the point system, and then who knows whats going to happen to us.
Also, its not that I am concerned about what is GOOD JUST FOR ME. (BTW, its not just me, its about a third of IV) I am more worried about what is bad for me.
i think it's pretty clear that increasing GC numbers is the first priority for iv. removing country limits would be a thin band aid of sorts if the GC numbers do not change. GC numbers have to increase, the rest comes after that.
hence in my view this argument is moot.
we need to come together and work on this, otherwise we all fail.
whatamidoinghere
02-13 10:47 PM
I am following this discussion and it is interesting. Here is what I get so far.
USCIS is not allotting excess visa number horizontally. Unused visas from Eb1 and EB2 are not going to over subscribed countries but to EB3 ROW. The "total" visas in the law can be read as total visa across all categories. If this is true then it is likely that untill EB3 ROW becomes current, India and China will only get 7%. But here is what I do not get.
1) From november 2005 bulletin, USCIS is saying that they are going to suspend AC21. Why did they decide to suspend ac21? Can they decide on their own when they are going to apply to AC21 and when they are not? Is AC21 not a law?
2) Why or how did USCIS allocate large number of visas to over subscribed countries India and China before? Like in the November bulletin, USCIS says india used up around 44000 visas. Were they allocating more visas by following AC21? If yes, then why did they decide to suspend AC21? If no, then how they allocated so many numbers?
I am trying to understand the how the USCIS decides to allocate visa numbers. And it is very complex.
Another thing that is hard to understand is that if EB3 ROW is getting all the unused visas, how did EB2 move forward two years in 2006? It was moving 6 months at a time till May-06. Did USCIS change the way they interpret the law in May-06? That would be weird, they should have done it when they declared in Nov-05 bulletin that AC21 provisions are not expected to apply.
It is possible that USCIS is allocating unused EB2 visas to EB2 India and China after all, and it is not moving forward only because of backlogged EB2 Labors getting approved. We will know for sure in a few months. There are still several 2001 EB2 Non-RIR cases in the backlog as per
http://www..com/usa-immigration-trackers/dallas-backlog-tracker/
USCIS is not allotting excess visa number horizontally. Unused visas from Eb1 and EB2 are not going to over subscribed countries but to EB3 ROW. The "total" visas in the law can be read as total visa across all categories. If this is true then it is likely that untill EB3 ROW becomes current, India and China will only get 7%. But here is what I do not get.
1) From november 2005 bulletin, USCIS is saying that they are going to suspend AC21. Why did they decide to suspend ac21? Can they decide on their own when they are going to apply to AC21 and when they are not? Is AC21 not a law?
2) Why or how did USCIS allocate large number of visas to over subscribed countries India and China before? Like in the November bulletin, USCIS says india used up around 44000 visas. Were they allocating more visas by following AC21? If yes, then why did they decide to suspend AC21? If no, then how they allocated so many numbers?
I am trying to understand the how the USCIS decides to allocate visa numbers. And it is very complex.
Another thing that is hard to understand is that if EB3 ROW is getting all the unused visas, how did EB2 move forward two years in 2006? It was moving 6 months at a time till May-06. Did USCIS change the way they interpret the law in May-06? That would be weird, they should have done it when they declared in Nov-05 bulletin that AC21 provisions are not expected to apply.
It is possible that USCIS is allocating unused EB2 visas to EB2 India and China after all, and it is not moving forward only because of backlogged EB2 Labors getting approved. We will know for sure in a few months. There are still several 2001 EB2 Non-RIR cases in the backlog as per
http://www..com/usa-immigration-trackers/dallas-backlog-tracker/
snram4
01-18 12:39 PM
There is no doubt Everyone knows that H1b and GC laws are crazy. For that we need to fight to change the law but should not encourage to violate the law. If USCIS violates law lawsuit should be filed. That is the rightway.
Isn't that the point what all anti-consulting folks are making here ? They want all existing laws (plus all laws they themselves created to satisfy their sadistic self) to be strictly followed. If that is the case snram4's relative should have been deported.
What many do not understand is H1B laws are insane and irrational. Many from our country doesn't have the guts to fight crazy laws. All they are good at is screwing their own fellow country men out of jealousy or selfishness.
Do all these folks follow law judiciously in their life ? I don't think so. Some of the folks here acting like bhagat singh came to this stage of life climbing over loads of corruption.
Isn't that the point what all anti-consulting folks are making here ? They want all existing laws (plus all laws they themselves created to satisfy their sadistic self) to be strictly followed. If that is the case snram4's relative should have been deported.
What many do not understand is H1B laws are insane and irrational. Many from our country doesn't have the guts to fight crazy laws. All they are good at is screwing their own fellow country men out of jealousy or selfishness.
Do all these folks follow law judiciously in their life ? I don't think so. Some of the folks here acting like bhagat singh came to this stage of life climbing over loads of corruption.
No comments:
Post a Comment