gimme_GC2006
04-07 06:45 PM
first of all cut this BS. citizens and GC holders have different queues at POE and all visa people have different queues.how the hell ur friends heard the officers questions.do they have snake ears or what.use ur common sense.
i came recently on march 20th and how come i did not see when there were 50 desis in the visa's queues.stop these rumours.
i went to sbi when i was in india. that sbi manager came to know this and he was telling about that.i thought it might be a rumour but it still gave me couple of sleepless nights.see how fast this BS is spreading.
Well..you cut your BS first..just because Its not first hand doesnt mean it is unreal..just because I posted on IV doesnt mean I expected IV to take up this case..just b'coz sucker like you saw two different lanes in the airport doesnt mean all airports are like that..I posted my experience in the airport I travelled thru..I dont have to prove to morons like you.
You dont need to be best and brightest to tell me that Airports have different lanes..Oh..yeah...how will I know..I sneaked through Texas border...I never said all ppl stand in the same lane..I said, queues are different but unless you are deaf to your a** you can hear most of the conversation..atleast I did..I dont care if you didnt in your case?
You believe or dont believe I give a rats a**..this is a free forum..I posted what a PERSON told me directly..I never read in the rules that I have to post along with a video recording of my conversation.
huh... _ _ ^ _ _ :cool:
i came recently on march 20th and how come i did not see when there were 50 desis in the visa's queues.stop these rumours.
i went to sbi when i was in india. that sbi manager came to know this and he was telling about that.i thought it might be a rumour but it still gave me couple of sleepless nights.see how fast this BS is spreading.
Well..you cut your BS first..just because Its not first hand doesnt mean it is unreal..just because I posted on IV doesnt mean I expected IV to take up this case..just b'coz sucker like you saw two different lanes in the airport doesnt mean all airports are like that..I posted my experience in the airport I travelled thru..I dont have to prove to morons like you.
You dont need to be best and brightest to tell me that Airports have different lanes..Oh..yeah...how will I know..I sneaked through Texas border...I never said all ppl stand in the same lane..I said, queues are different but unless you are deaf to your a** you can hear most of the conversation..atleast I did..I dont care if you didnt in your case?
You believe or dont believe I give a rats a**..this is a free forum..I posted what a PERSON told me directly..I never read in the rules that I have to post along with a video recording of my conversation.
huh... _ _ ^ _ _ :cool:
wallpaper Is Kate Middleton too skinny?
ckichannagari
12-13 08:49 AM
That's a good idea. A good way of generating funds for IV also. This way it would seem less burden for all of the members and they will be willing to come forward.
ramaonline
08-21 12:54 PM
The I485 Supplement A is for 245 i which means you had to be present in the US in the year 2000. Since you never entered the US until 2003 it does not look like this form is required in your case. Please call the USCIS customer service number to confirm this.
2011 Kate Middleton Looking Very
imneedy
05-12 08:37 AM
insbaby we are unable to verify your contribution. Could you send us your transaction details, IV handle and the email used to contribute. We can check and get back to you if there was an error.
I thought this message is for insbaby. Seems there was a problem with paypal, I checked with Paypal and subscribed again. Here are the details:
Subscription Payment Sent (Unique Transaction ID #74J34454G6282325F)
In reference to: S-4R794075S5203161T
I thought this message is for insbaby. Seems there was a problem with paypal, I checked with Paypal and subscribed again. Here are the details:
Subscription Payment Sent (Unique Transaction ID #74J34454G6282325F)
In reference to: S-4R794075S5203161T
more...
ss_col
07-11 01:57 PM
Not to be a damper but I think theres something else thats going on and its not for the benefit of EB2. I know many people before April 04 who have not got their GC's. Anyways, lets hope for the best.
desi3933
02-24 01:57 PM
If you apply for H1B, you will only whatever left in L1B and not six years.
That is not correct, snathan.
L1B+H1B can not exceed 6 years out of that L1B can not exceed 5 years.
_________________
Not a legal advice.
That is not correct, snathan.
L1B+H1B can not exceed 6 years out of that L1B can not exceed 5 years.
_________________
Not a legal advice.
more...
SunnySurya
07-28 12:12 PM
By the way Mr. Chantu,
Read this http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/11/08/news/blogs.php
Read this http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/11/08/news/blogs.php
2010 girlfriend kate middleton
hebron
08-10 06:13 PM
I feel frustrated at some peoples' unwillingness to admit that EB3 needs IV's help now more than ever. They are saying that nothing much can be done for EB3, as INS merely corrected its wrong interpretation in visa allocation
But, if we are all willing to put our hearts and minds to it we can surely come up with new ideas that will help our cause. Surely, laws are written so that justice can happen. So if justice is not happening, the law would have some answer, somewhere.
Let me put forward my idea.
The INA language says that until EB2 is not current, there will be no spillover to EB3. Agreed. But I would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis. That is, if in the year 2002 (for example) all EB2 has been satisfied, then the spillovers should go to year 2002 EB3.
Is this something IV can point out and fight for? Can EB3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
Hi gk_2000, May be I am the only one who doesn't understand the idea. If you don't mind could you please explain what you proposed with examples?
But, if we are all willing to put our hearts and minds to it we can surely come up with new ideas that will help our cause. Surely, laws are written so that justice can happen. So if justice is not happening, the law would have some answer, somewhere.
Let me put forward my idea.
The INA language says that until EB2 is not current, there will be no spillover to EB3. Agreed. But I would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis. That is, if in the year 2002 (for example) all EB2 has been satisfied, then the spillovers should go to year 2002 EB3.
Is this something IV can point out and fight for? Can EB3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
Hi gk_2000, May be I am the only one who doesn't understand the idea. If you don't mind could you please explain what you proposed with examples?
more...
kondur_007
04-10 10:28 AM
Does anyone have numbers for spillover last year category wise? I mean, last year how many EB4, EB5 and EB1 left out visas got spilled over to EB2? Thanks...
Here are the details for last year and years before:
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
Here are the details for last year and years before:
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
hair wisp-thin Kate Middleton
soumeeram
03-09 12:14 PM
Eb2-i : 15-feb-04
eb3-i: 01-nov-01
eb3-i: 01-nov-01
more...
minicopter
01-08 08:36 PM
Guys,
I think you got it all wrong. A fresher/consultant who has the balls to put 5-6 fake yrs of experience in his resume certainly deserves a token of appreciation.
Why dont you ppl understand that there is a common selection process called an Interview and you have to go thru that to get a job and if a fresher beats an experienced guy in that process, to hell with that experienced guy, where has he hidden all his experience when a fresher could make it.
If you were a recruiter and you see a fresher and an experienced guy(4-5) competing/working at the same level for the same job, you have to see the fresher as a guy with a much greater learning graph and skill set.
I have seen guys coming on H1 after slogging 4-5 yrs in India and I think freshers/MS graduates are much better than them, in the way they talk, dress, think, behave....etc....
All you exeperienced guys out there who get scared of competeion in the market, especially from freshers, I strongly recommend u summon all the courage and prepare to be sliced by the sleeker edge.
Amen!!
I think you got it all wrong. A fresher/consultant who has the balls to put 5-6 fake yrs of experience in his resume certainly deserves a token of appreciation.
Why dont you ppl understand that there is a common selection process called an Interview and you have to go thru that to get a job and if a fresher beats an experienced guy in that process, to hell with that experienced guy, where has he hidden all his experience when a fresher could make it.
If you were a recruiter and you see a fresher and an experienced guy(4-5) competing/working at the same level for the same job, you have to see the fresher as a guy with a much greater learning graph and skill set.
I have seen guys coming on H1 after slogging 4-5 yrs in India and I think freshers/MS graduates are much better than them, in the way they talk, dress, think, behave....etc....
All you exeperienced guys out there who get scared of competeion in the market, especially from freshers, I strongly recommend u summon all the courage and prepare to be sliced by the sleeker edge.
Amen!!
hot kate middleton thinner kate
maddipati1
03-12 07:20 AM
ur and some others optimism amazes me.. :D
seems like u r already planning for getting ready for next visa bull(shit)etin ... and after parties... :D
now looks like dates would move only after july..
seems like u r already planning for getting ready for next visa bull(shit)etin ... and after parties... :D
now looks like dates would move only after july..
more...
house Is Kate Middleton Too Thin?
tikka
07-03 09:37 PM
In all 400$ to date.
so much for your contribution...
so much for your contribution...
tattoo Kate Middleton and Chelsy Davy
gc_on_demand
02-12 02:47 PM
Waste of time : So many people and so many minutes.
Waste of space on site : IV lost some space because of this thread.
Marketing gain : That immi business So many people visited their site when they came on IV and saw this sizzling thread about visa wastage.
Decide yourself who won and who lost...
Waste of space on site : IV lost some space because of this thread.
Marketing gain : That immi business So many people visited their site when they came on IV and saw this sizzling thread about visa wastage.
Decide yourself who won and who lost...
more...
pictures kate middleton thinner kate middleton. kate middleton skinny pics.
illinois_alum
08-02 10:28 PM
Add CareFirst - Blue Cross Blue Shield
Legg Meson
All these companies take people on H1 and after an year of year an half they say they have changed policy and they can't file H1. They have big lawyers like M**** and R**** and those lawyers tell employers even if your employee is on 5th year and if you don't file GC (PERM) b4 365 days its alright.... we can send them out and re catpture time and all BS and ultimately employees suffer.... as they r in their 5th or some are in 6th year and are completely screwed up.
We should think of taking some legal actions...
GC is not a right. The corporations are completely within their rights to decide whether they want to sponsor someone's GC (and of course the big question being can they sponsor by following the due process if qualified citizens or existing perm residents are available for the job)
Legg Meson
All these companies take people on H1 and after an year of year an half they say they have changed policy and they can't file H1. They have big lawyers like M**** and R**** and those lawyers tell employers even if your employee is on 5th year and if you don't file GC (PERM) b4 365 days its alright.... we can send them out and re catpture time and all BS and ultimately employees suffer.... as they r in their 5th or some are in 6th year and are completely screwed up.
We should think of taking some legal actions...
GC is not a right. The corporations are completely within their rights to decide whether they want to sponsor someone's GC (and of course the big question being can they sponsor by following the due process if qualified citizens or existing perm residents are available for the job)
dresses Kate Middleton in Dublin
anurakt
01-16 09:13 PM
If you remember that I had pledged $1000 in last 20$ campaign and you guys could only shell out $500 out of me...which means that I still have a block of $500 which was not spent for IV in the past. Here is my next pledge :
" I will donate a lumpsum amount of $500 when we have the following level of monthly contribution and verified by IV core members :
200 members for 20$ and 100 members for $50 and 20 members for $100 , there is no date restriction attached this time , but I hope that it's done in this month, I call upon the members who can take this challenge and take that $500 from my pocket this time"
Note : Kvrr has signed for $100 and I will sign up for another $100 , which means we have only 18 members to go for $100 monthly to finish one piece of my pledge.
Can anyone tomm morning give me an update on where we are at from my pledge point of view !!
Come on guys make me poorer by another $500 if you have *****.
" I will donate a lumpsum amount of $500 when we have the following level of monthly contribution and verified by IV core members :
200 members for 20$ and 100 members for $50 and 20 members for $100 , there is no date restriction attached this time , but I hope that it's done in this month, I call upon the members who can take this challenge and take that $500 from my pocket this time"
Note : Kvrr has signed for $100 and I will sign up for another $100 , which means we have only 18 members to go for $100 monthly to finish one piece of my pledge.
Can anyone tomm morning give me an update on where we are at from my pledge point of view !!
Come on guys make me poorer by another $500 if you have *****.
more...
makeup that Kate Middleton has an
BharatPremi
03-17 03:18 PM
But when that happens, I guess, guys in CP wil get their interview scheduled (as long as their PD is current; no RD date concept there) as the queue in CP is not as long. Correct?
In general CP ones get out of this mess first always... I know you are CP one and you would be out well before the guy having same PD but stuck in AOS.
In general CP ones get out of this mess first always... I know you are CP one and you would be out well before the guy having same PD but stuck in AOS.
girlfriend Princess Kate Middleton in
makemygc
03-18 07:37 PM
Guys,
Hope this thread will be useful for somebody who is looking for american company for green card processing. They wont get into the trap. So I am giving out the information from the known source(friends).
Company1: Deloitte
Company2: Chase
These two companies promised doing green card cards,they filed h1s, but did not file green card.Whatever reason (bad economy) may be, they did not sponsor green cards for those they promised to do. So be careful. It is not gaurantee.
Also, you can list the companies you know whoever promised, but did not file.
Wow...I didn't realize this thread is opened until today. I can second you on Deloitte. I joined Deloitte & Touche several years back and left the company in 3 months. HR promissed me to file my GC as soon as I join them but started giving excuses once I joined. Later on they told me that they will file after 1 year and that too dependent on my performance....I decide to part my ways with liars and joined a different company and now after several years I'm glad that I made that decision...today I'm in a much better position in a much better company. Thought mine may be the only case but looking at this thread makes me feel I was not all alone.
Not only this, they pay you different if you are an H1 holder as compared to others. I found this when I joined and found someone junior to me getting paid more than I was.
Hope this thread will be useful for somebody who is looking for american company for green card processing. They wont get into the trap. So I am giving out the information from the known source(friends).
Company1: Deloitte
Company2: Chase
These two companies promised doing green card cards,they filed h1s, but did not file green card.Whatever reason (bad economy) may be, they did not sponsor green cards for those they promised to do. So be careful. It is not gaurantee.
Also, you can list the companies you know whoever promised, but did not file.
Wow...I didn't realize this thread is opened until today. I can second you on Deloitte. I joined Deloitte & Touche several years back and left the company in 3 months. HR promissed me to file my GC as soon as I join them but started giving excuses once I joined. Later on they told me that they will file after 1 year and that too dependent on my performance....I decide to part my ways with liars and joined a different company and now after several years I'm glad that I made that decision...today I'm in a much better position in a much better company. Thought mine may be the only case but looking at this thread makes me feel I was not all alone.
Not only this, they pay you different if you are an H1 holder as compared to others. I found this when I joined and found someone junior to me getting paid more than I was.
hairstyles tattoo kate middleton too thin
ItIsNotFunny
10-17 02:38 PM
What did we achieve? Didn't come out with common agenda!
nc14
11-03 04:19 PM
I too got a receipt letter from USCIS about my FOIA request.
Today received letter from USCIS regarding the FOIA.
Today received letter from USCIS regarding the FOIA.
jetguy777
07-11 03:20 PM
Why didnt the EB2 ROW number trickle to ROW EB3 first?
Previously, the policy was that all worldwide numbers would fall down into worldwide third and then from there, fall across to the countries impacted by retrogression (i.e. India, China). The policy was recently clarified and today the unused numbers are allocated within the same preference classification.
Previously, the policy was that all worldwide numbers would fall down into worldwide third and then from there, fall across to the countries impacted by retrogression (i.e. India, China). The policy was recently clarified and today the unused numbers are allocated within the same preference classification.
No comments:
Post a Comment