gcbikari
11-18 10:06 AM
Response from GA Republican Senator Saxby Chambliss:
Dear Mr. xxx:
Thank you for contacting me regarding S. 729, the "Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act." It is good to hear from you.
S. 729 was introduced on March 26, 2009, and referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee. After meeting certain criteria, illegal aliens would be allowed to receive in-state tuition from the state in which they reside.
The legislative language establishes these requirements for an individual to qualify for the tuition benefit:
o must be under the age of 35,
o have entered the United States before the age of 16,
o resided in the United States for at least the last five years
o earned a high school diploma or GED in the United States
On September 21, 2010 I joined my Senate colleagues in defeating a procedural vote on the DREAM Act. I remain opposed to the bill as currently drafted and will continue to keep your thoughts in mind should this legislation come before the full Senate again.
If you would like to receive timely email alerts regarding the latest congressional actions and my weekly e-newsletter, please sign up via my web site at: www.chambliss.senate.gov . Please let me know whenever I may be of assistance.
Dear Mr. xxx:
Thank you for contacting me regarding S. 729, the "Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act." It is good to hear from you.
S. 729 was introduced on March 26, 2009, and referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee. After meeting certain criteria, illegal aliens would be allowed to receive in-state tuition from the state in which they reside.
The legislative language establishes these requirements for an individual to qualify for the tuition benefit:
o must be under the age of 35,
o have entered the United States before the age of 16,
o resided in the United States for at least the last five years
o earned a high school diploma or GED in the United States
On September 21, 2010 I joined my Senate colleagues in defeating a procedural vote on the DREAM Act. I remain opposed to the bill as currently drafted and will continue to keep your thoughts in mind should this legislation come before the full Senate again.
If you would like to receive timely email alerts regarding the latest congressional actions and my weekly e-newsletter, please sign up via my web site at: www.chambliss.senate.gov . Please let me know whenever I may be of assistance.
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
imconfused
07-02 11:08 PM
these things rrgood for movies not practical life. 2 days more and everyone will move on. just watch...
and now, here everyone comes bashing me for speaking the truth :)
and now, here everyone comes bashing me for speaking the truth :)
RSM1444
02-10 07:07 PM
Donated $100
Your transaction ID for this payment is: 0L503528GU222744P.
Your transaction ID for this payment is: 0L503528GU222744P.
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
vdixit
08-12 02:07 PM
I think we got our green cards.
Application Type: I485, APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Notice mailed welcoming the new permanent resident.
On August 12, 2008, we mailed you a notice that we had registered this customer's new permanent resident status. Please follow any instructions on the notice. Your new permanent resident card should be mailed within 60 days following this registration or after you complete any ADIT processing referred to in the welcome notice, whichever is later. If you move before you get your new card call customer service.
Only catch for us is that we are moving next weekend!! I am going to do change of address with USCIS immediately, but in the meanwhile what if they mail documents to my old address? Any suggestions?
Also whats ADIT.
BTW our case was at NSC and priority date is May 2004. Application mailed Aug7th 2007.
Application Type: I485, APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Notice mailed welcoming the new permanent resident.
On August 12, 2008, we mailed you a notice that we had registered this customer's new permanent resident status. Please follow any instructions on the notice. Your new permanent resident card should be mailed within 60 days following this registration or after you complete any ADIT processing referred to in the welcome notice, whichever is later. If you move before you get your new card call customer service.
Only catch for us is that we are moving next weekend!! I am going to do change of address with USCIS immediately, but in the meanwhile what if they mail documents to my old address? Any suggestions?
Also whats ADIT.
BTW our case was at NSC and priority date is May 2004. Application mailed Aug7th 2007.
more...
gcsucks
05-02 12:33 PM
Section 205. Retaining Workers Subject to Green Card Backlog.
Allows foreign workers who have started the green card process, but who are subject to green card backlogs, to pay a $500.00 supplemental fee to file an application to adjust status. This change would enable foreign workers to remain in the U.S. until the green card becomes available
Section 201 item two says exemption for all advanced degree holder who worked in US for atleast 3 years in a "related" field. I know there might be issues with definition of "related" but seems job can be EB2/EB3 as long as the beneficiary has an advanced degree and the job is in related field - they are exempt. Am I reading it correctly? I think is how its in STEM right now. A very good back bill for us (if CIR fails to materialize).
Allows foreign workers who have started the green card process, but who are subject to green card backlogs, to pay a $500.00 supplemental fee to file an application to adjust status. This change would enable foreign workers to remain in the U.S. until the green card becomes available
Section 201 item two says exemption for all advanced degree holder who worked in US for atleast 3 years in a "related" field. I know there might be issues with definition of "related" but seems job can be EB2/EB3 as long as the beneficiary has an advanced degree and the job is in related field - they are exempt. Am I reading it correctly? I think is how its in STEM right now. A very good back bill for us (if CIR fails to materialize).
rayen
07-21 01:31 PM
EAD - Paper filed
Filled on June 30th
Receipt Date July 8st.
LUD on July 11th
Thanks.
Filled on June 30th
Receipt Date July 8st.
LUD on July 11th
Thanks.
more...
chanduv23
06-26 10:06 AM
The way i understand this, not all companies are bound by the EOE laws.
Certain conditions have to be met to be considered an EOE.
Not every employer is an equal opp employer, so those guys can hire whoever they want.
Besides hiring folks on h1b, etc could add to costs for employers. So they choose not to employ such folks.
I am working on EAD after filing AC21. When I requested for EVL more than once because of NOID situation, my HR was not happy about it. She said she cannot keep giving letters all the time and she also expressed such concern to my manager. My manager in turn told me "This is why we do not get into this stuff, we were not aware of all this when we hired you and we have a policy to hire only Green card and USC" - all of it was oral. When I went into our HR website - it clearly states that hiring needs to have "i9" compliance and thats it.
One thing we have to understand - employer can decide to hire who they want but must not discriminate.
Basically if employers are not willing to sponser they must have ads as "Non restrictive work authorization" required and if the job needs security clearance they must say "nly security clearance"
Looks like most HRs or companies may not be following such pattern because they may not know. When my wife was applying for jobs - some reqruiters did not understand EAD and she explained and they said "We need to learn more about this"
Certain conditions have to be met to be considered an EOE.
Not every employer is an equal opp employer, so those guys can hire whoever they want.
Besides hiring folks on h1b, etc could add to costs for employers. So they choose not to employ such folks.
I am working on EAD after filing AC21. When I requested for EVL more than once because of NOID situation, my HR was not happy about it. She said she cannot keep giving letters all the time and she also expressed such concern to my manager. My manager in turn told me "This is why we do not get into this stuff, we were not aware of all this when we hired you and we have a policy to hire only Green card and USC" - all of it was oral. When I went into our HR website - it clearly states that hiring needs to have "i9" compliance and thats it.
One thing we have to understand - employer can decide to hire who they want but must not discriminate.
Basically if employers are not willing to sponser they must have ads as "Non restrictive work authorization" required and if the job needs security clearance they must say "nly security clearance"
Looks like most HRs or companies may not be following such pattern because they may not know. When my wife was applying for jobs - some reqruiters did not understand EAD and she explained and they said "We need to learn more about this"
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
mqualique
05-01 02:14 PM
Applying EB PD but using Visa number from FB Quota would be a awesome. Not sure what complications this may cause on the FB side. This seems like a visa-leak (like memory leak) scenario from FB. This will put GC Holders dependents at a disadvantaged position as compared to us who don't have GC yet because EB PD will always be ahead to FB PD due to 'Visa-Leak'.
more...
ravish_kaipa
12-10 01:48 PM
Hi Proud American
I just feel so sorry about your understanding of the modern economics. If you think , by asking foreign born workers to go back you can get more access to the so called "wealth" you are talking about , its time you enroll for an Economics 101 . It is your proud America that has long been shouting from the rooftops about the need to have more open borders, facilitate global transfer of knowledge and commodities . Anyway , I dont think I have to even argue with you as you need lots of orientation before I get into a meaningful debate with you . I am happy for one thing thou , that inspite of zealots like you America has had great visionaries in tha past that made this country the only existing super power in the world , else it would have been like another Eastern European country .
Thanks!
I just feel so sorry about your understanding of the modern economics. If you think , by asking foreign born workers to go back you can get more access to the so called "wealth" you are talking about , its time you enroll for an Economics 101 . It is your proud America that has long been shouting from the rooftops about the need to have more open borders, facilitate global transfer of knowledge and commodities . Anyway , I dont think I have to even argue with you as you need lots of orientation before I get into a meaningful debate with you . I am happy for one thing thou , that inspite of zealots like you America has had great visionaries in tha past that made this country the only existing super power in the world , else it would have been like another Eastern European country .
Thanks!
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
nixstor
07-08 11:24 AM
no it will not be voilation of the law at all. consider this scenario thats been going on for the last 30+ years. For example July 2006 visa bulletin for EB2 india was jan 2003 and the August 2006 visa bulletin for EB2 india was unavailable. EB2 india visa numbers might have already been used up when the August 2006 visa bulletin was released but they still accepted the AOS petitions filed until the end of July 2006, they did not issue an updated visa bulletin or a revised visa bulletin saying eb2 india numbers are used up and they will not accept eb2 india aos applications, they continued accpeting AOS applications until the end of july 2006.
If you have the patience you can go through the visa bulletin archieves and find many such examples. The point is for the last 30+ years USCIS\DOS accepted applications according to the visa bulletin even when visa numbers were used up, they could have just followed the same precedent that they themselves set for the last 30+ years and accepted the applications this time as well without issuing a revised visa bulletin. I am no legal expert but that is how i see it.
Absolutely, Those who filed in June 2006 had a visa number available which were exhausted by the month of Aug 2006. I am not saying that there is a one to one match between availability of visa number and adjudication of visa number. To be more clear, DOS and USCIS might have took 30K applications when there were 20k visa numbers. I am totally aware of this. How ever, all these went unnoticed because there was not a deluge of applications like this and USCIS did not care much about the extra 10K, who will wait until they are available. It could also be possible that they were doing this so randomly like they have done right now, with out proper communication and have not hurt each other. But the deluge of applications sure did bothered USCIS and hence they worked over time to exhaust numbers. As we all know, there is no rule to say that if there are 20K visa numbers, stop accepting applications once you reach 20K, they have to honor the VB for that month even though they get 200k applications. Thats why they exhausted the number by July 1st and when they could not complete by Jun 30th. I feel that USCIS will have a tough time answering
a) How USCIS used the numbers before the start of the quarter, even though they are not authorized to?
b) How USCIS approved some folks on July 1st , when the July VB is already effective?
c) lastly the poor communication between agencies and the grievances suffered by every one involved, if at all.
If you have the patience you can go through the visa bulletin archieves and find many such examples. The point is for the last 30+ years USCIS\DOS accepted applications according to the visa bulletin even when visa numbers were used up, they could have just followed the same precedent that they themselves set for the last 30+ years and accepted the applications this time as well without issuing a revised visa bulletin. I am no legal expert but that is how i see it.
Absolutely, Those who filed in June 2006 had a visa number available which were exhausted by the month of Aug 2006. I am not saying that there is a one to one match between availability of visa number and adjudication of visa number. To be more clear, DOS and USCIS might have took 30K applications when there were 20k visa numbers. I am totally aware of this. How ever, all these went unnoticed because there was not a deluge of applications like this and USCIS did not care much about the extra 10K, who will wait until they are available. It could also be possible that they were doing this so randomly like they have done right now, with out proper communication and have not hurt each other. But the deluge of applications sure did bothered USCIS and hence they worked over time to exhaust numbers. As we all know, there is no rule to say that if there are 20K visa numbers, stop accepting applications once you reach 20K, they have to honor the VB for that month even though they get 200k applications. Thats why they exhausted the number by July 1st and when they could not complete by Jun 30th. I feel that USCIS will have a tough time answering
a) How USCIS used the numbers before the start of the quarter, even though they are not authorized to?
b) How USCIS approved some folks on July 1st , when the July VB is already effective?
c) lastly the poor communication between agencies and the grievances suffered by every one involved, if at all.
more...
delax
07-27 07:58 PM
Seems like You are not waiting for GC for more than 8 years. You have not been separated from ur family for more than 3 years. Thats why you don't agree with EB3-I fight. Look at the PD for last 3 years. EB3-I is stuck in 2001 since early 2005. It has not moved in last 3 years and you are saying People should keep quiet about it. How selfish of you.
I never said we should keep quiet about it. I was only responding to an earlier post reagarding 'EB2 - elitist protectionism'. Just like you are within your rights to look after yourself, so is everybody else - welcome to capitalism. I have always maintained that going down the road of EB3 versus EB2 is detrimental to this group. Your post only adds to this.
In anycase I dont know how splitting visas equally between EB2I and EB3I can pass the smell test even if DOS were to implement it - there is a categorization that is already established AFTER the initial handout is made on an equal basis. The split completely negates it - at least to the extent any EB2ROW spill over is directed to EB3 when EB2 I and C are already retrogressed.
Lets not swear by capitalism but selectively resort to socialism.
I never said we should keep quiet about it. I was only responding to an earlier post reagarding 'EB2 - elitist protectionism'. Just like you are within your rights to look after yourself, so is everybody else - welcome to capitalism. I have always maintained that going down the road of EB3 versus EB2 is detrimental to this group. Your post only adds to this.
In anycase I dont know how splitting visas equally between EB2I and EB3I can pass the smell test even if DOS were to implement it - there is a categorization that is already established AFTER the initial handout is made on an equal basis. The split completely negates it - at least to the extent any EB2ROW spill over is directed to EB3 when EB2 I and C are already retrogressed.
Lets not swear by capitalism but selectively resort to socialism.
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
aka
06-18 12:23 PM
I-140 already approved, I-485 details (same for both me and my wife):
Mailed to NSC on May 31st.
Received at NSC on June 1st (I think... never took tracking# from attorney).
Receipt Date - June 04
Notice date - June 07
Mailed to NSC on May 31st.
Received at NSC on June 1st (I think... never took tracking# from attorney).
Receipt Date - June 04
Notice date - June 07
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
cr52401
06-11 10:07 PM
All checks cashed June 8th. It was sent to Nebrasks. I hardy just could read the SRC letters in back of my check. Online image in not good. I guess it has gone to Texas sercice center.
Do you know how long for receipt letter?
Thanks.
Do you know how long for receipt letter?
Thanks.
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
kumar1
01-31 07:59 PM
Desi3933 - Thank you for sharing this link. Now I totally believe it.
As promised before, now after looking at DOL web site, I will shut up.
Since you asked -
Here is link from Department of Labor website. Read for yourself and I have included relevant quote.
Link (http://www.dol.gov/dol/allcfr/title_20/Part_655/20CFR655.731.htm)
(ii) Even if the H-1B nonimmigrant has not yet "entered into employment" with the employer (as described in paragraph (c)(6)(i) of this section), the employer that has had an LCA certified and an H-1B petition approved for the H-1B nonimmigrant shall pay the nonimmigrant the required wage beginning 30 days after the date the nonimmigrant first is admitted into the U.S. pursuant to the petition, or, if the nonimmigrant is present in the United States on the date of the approval of the petition, beginning 60 days after the date the nonimmigrant becomes eligible to work for the employer. For purposes of this latter requirement, the H-1B nonimmigrant is considered to be eligible to work for the employer upon the date of need set forth on the approved H-1B petition filed by the employer, or the date of adjustment of the nonimmigrant's status by INS, whichever is later.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
As promised before, now after looking at DOL web site, I will shut up.
Since you asked -
Here is link from Department of Labor website. Read for yourself and I have included relevant quote.
Link (http://www.dol.gov/dol/allcfr/title_20/Part_655/20CFR655.731.htm)
(ii) Even if the H-1B nonimmigrant has not yet "entered into employment" with the employer (as described in paragraph (c)(6)(i) of this section), the employer that has had an LCA certified and an H-1B petition approved for the H-1B nonimmigrant shall pay the nonimmigrant the required wage beginning 30 days after the date the nonimmigrant first is admitted into the U.S. pursuant to the petition, or, if the nonimmigrant is present in the United States on the date of the approval of the petition, beginning 60 days after the date the nonimmigrant becomes eligible to work for the employer. For purposes of this latter requirement, the H-1B nonimmigrant is considered to be eligible to work for the employer upon the date of need set forth on the approved H-1B petition filed by the employer, or the date of adjustment of the nonimmigrant's status by INS, whichever is later.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
ink_123
08-30 06:37 PM
Application Sent on June 30th. Recd in NSC on July 2nd. I had applied only 485 at that time. Sent the other forms later with the Fedex receipt no. Waiting for EAD/AP receipt now!!
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
gcwait2007
04-20 12:36 PM
I work for company A which sent me to client C through company B(Prefered vendor). After working with the same client for 1.5 yrs, transfered my h1b to company B(PF) due to issues with the pay with company A. Company A has deducted huge sum of money($4000) from my last months pay towards PERM filing(Still under process). Upon demanding them to reimburse my money saying that its against law, they r threatening me saying that based on non-compete agreement they will take legal action against me.
I am not actually aware of the clauses in the agreement. company B(PF) told me that it does not have any clauses in its agreement with company A prohibiting them from taking me.Though i requested company A to provide me a copy of non-compete, they said i signed with them, they haven�t. The company is located in NJ and not sure how non-competes work under NJ state law.
I am really frustated upon this blackmail and going thru lot of pressure. The amount is too big too leave and cannot afford to hire a lawyer in case they file suit based on non-compete. even if i had signed a non compete agreement how does it stand as it is conflicting the agreement which company a signed with PF sayign tht upon my termination of the emplyment with them, Pf can take me without any gap period... what can i do to get my money. they also refused to provide me with experience letter which i need for my future GC filing.
Plz give me ur valuable inputs
I work for a company which recovers expenses incurred for relocation, training, certification exam fee paid, GC expenses, etc if I choose to leave them with in one year of incurring expenses. It seems to be a common practice. Many times, these recovery is waived at the discretion of the managers.
I am not actually aware of the clauses in the agreement. company B(PF) told me that it does not have any clauses in its agreement with company A prohibiting them from taking me.Though i requested company A to provide me a copy of non-compete, they said i signed with them, they haven�t. The company is located in NJ and not sure how non-competes work under NJ state law.
I am really frustated upon this blackmail and going thru lot of pressure. The amount is too big too leave and cannot afford to hire a lawyer in case they file suit based on non-compete. even if i had signed a non compete agreement how does it stand as it is conflicting the agreement which company a signed with PF sayign tht upon my termination of the emplyment with them, Pf can take me without any gap period... what can i do to get my money. they also refused to provide me with experience letter which i need for my future GC filing.
Plz give me ur valuable inputs
I work for a company which recovers expenses incurred for relocation, training, certification exam fee paid, GC expenses, etc if I choose to leave them with in one year of incurring expenses. It seems to be a common practice. Many times, these recovery is waived at the discretion of the managers.
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
hindu_king
03-06 04:38 PM
You are seeing it from a complete 180 degrees than I see it. It's not us who's discriminating, it is the laws which are discriminating. I am asking them to treat us all equal, I entered the country on an H1B which was an employement based application it did not hav any country quota, then why should green cards for EB have country quota. Why should a person from India wait for 10 year and a person from Romania get it in 1 year....I think your ROW friends shold understand our position.
We are not asking for discriminating ROW. All we are asking is to end discriminating Indians.
We are not asking for discriminating ROW. All we are asking is to end discriminating Indians.
girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14%
vban2007
06-01 04:41 PM
Sent email... Thanks again
hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11%
esh06
09-22 04:33 PM
Filed at NSC.
reedandbamboo
09-13 09:30 PM
And to be honest, I don't know what happens if they simply choose to ignore us !! But I'm done with doing NOTHING. I need to let them know what I think.
On another note, it appears that the US has chosen to PRETEND to deal with immigration (legal and illegal) by endlessly proposing and killing legislation in Congress. This way they're throwing a bone to us (immigrants) while safeguarding their re-election (since they're not approving any kind of pro-immigration legislation, they aren't incurring the wrath of the almighty electorate).
On another note, it appears that the US has chosen to PRETEND to deal with immigration (legal and illegal) by endlessly proposing and killing legislation in Congress. This way they're throwing a bone to us (immigrants) while safeguarding their re-election (since they're not approving any kind of pro-immigration legislation, they aren't incurring the wrath of the almighty electorate).
BharatPremi
03-26 10:21 AM
2008, 2009 = 280K
Total EB 485 applicants whose PD<2006 approx 200K????
Ans: Problem is these 200k are form India and China only.:) So this 200k workload will be adjusted against 22000 total (EB2/3- China, India) per year and that is how 10 years.I think you guys are in good shape. I dont know why it will take 10 years.
The process is streamlined now.
PERM process
140 immediately after labor
Note: Not yet. Still many rot in I-140 queue and premium has not started yet.No more labor substitution no more cutting lines.
NC>180 days you will GC
Once they reinstate 140 premium processing.....all the backlogs will be cleared by next year october.
see above
Total EB 485 applicants whose PD<2006 approx 200K????
Ans: Problem is these 200k are form India and China only.:) So this 200k workload will be adjusted against 22000 total (EB2/3- China, India) per year and that is how 10 years.I think you guys are in good shape. I dont know why it will take 10 years.
The process is streamlined now.
PERM process
140 immediately after labor
Note: Not yet. Still many rot in I-140 queue and premium has not started yet.No more labor substitution no more cutting lines.
NC>180 days you will GC
Once they reinstate 140 premium processing.....all the backlogs will be cleared by next year october.
see above
No comments:
Post a Comment