kramer2005
07-11 07:11 PM
Yes. June 2003 mean that in Oct. 2007 you stand a chance to be current. With extra checks it will mean Oct 2009
wallpaper 12.23.06 / Unwritten Law
santb1975
04-10 12:28 PM
gsc999 - Thanks for all your Help and Encouragement. It is greatly appreciated. This initiative would not have been possible without your help and guidance
Pappu - Thanks for your support and endorsement of this campaign.
Pappu, thank you for linking this thread from the main page
Pappu - Thanks for your support and endorsement of this campaign.
Pappu, thank you for linking this thread from the main page
gcgonewild
01-12 12:10 PM
Try tradeking
I know some brokerages go deep.. but tradeking works out cool no minimum.
Just a little hassle as it is not directly attached to your checking..
Have a margin account and options account, but stay away from using margin and options.
I know some brokerages go deep.. but tradeking works out cool no minimum.
Just a little hassle as it is not directly attached to your checking..
Have a margin account and options account, but stay away from using margin and options.
2011 Unwritten Law - Here#39;s to the
abracadabra102
08-28 06:49 PM
Vow, what are you suggesting? Everybody should drop out? People like Einstein, Bill Gates etc are one in a multi-million chance, 99.9% dropouts don't fall into that category. There is a reason people from elite institutes are respected/sought after. Agreed, there may be some totally incompetent inspite of being from a Tier1 school, but whats the percentage of such people? 0.01 %?
No. Education is a good thing. But do not judge people by education alone. Get the drift?
No. Education is a good thing. But do not judge people by education alone. Get the drift?
more...
aachoo
09-01 07:51 PM
Just got the email! Havent seen my wife's application status change.
15 years+ from the day I entered the US...
15 years+ from the day I entered the US...
BharatPremi
09-25 10:05 PM
Yeah, go ahead and request that.
Banning me is not the solution to your problems amigo.
You guys (EB3-I) need to understand that "sympathy" is NOT a tenable legal position.
Law is law, rules are rules.
You cannot be planning to tramp all over patiently waiting EB2-I folks and expect to get away with it. Of course, I and probably several other people will undertake all legal efforts required to fight this (illegal) request from EB3-I.
To the guy who lectured me on how great his experience was etc: I obtained my Masters in Mechanical Engg from Stanford. Of course, I am not going to tell you where I work and what I earn. You can speculate all you want about my "Skillz".
To the guy who assured me that I am sinning and God will punish me: No, I don't think so. Fighting for the truth, and trying to fight for and protect my legal rights is not a sin. Speaking the truth is not a sin. I did not make EB1/EB2/EB3 categories. The government did. I did not screw people to have them apply in EB3, they should have known better.
To the guys who say EB2-I folks do not care about them: OF COURSE they don't, you guys (EB3-I) are trying EVERY TRICK IN THE BOOK to have an advantage at our cost. This shall not stand.
To anyone from the EB3-I cabal who wishes to engage with me: Try, and I will debate your points, any subject, any time (no IT please, I don't work in that miserable industry), regarding what is legal and good for EB3-I and also what is illegal and bad (mostly for EB2-I).
Behind every visa number, is a person and most probably a family. Children. Parents. Spouses. Siblings. DO NOT preach to me that I don't know about the suffering. We each have our own suffering. I have mine. Unfortunately, I wish my suffering just involved my GC.
Do you really think that whatever frustrations poured down here by whomsoever will force USCIS to change mind or its operational procedures changed? If not then why are you screaming so intensively? If this is the level one can achieve after joining Standford then we should now starting to doubt about the real quality level of Standford. But do not worry we will not judge Standford based on your behaviour here.
People are pouring down their frustrations, ideas and possible solutions. One may be agree or disagree for a particular post/idea but upon disagreement no one should become uncivil.
Banning me is not the solution to your problems amigo.
You guys (EB3-I) need to understand that "sympathy" is NOT a tenable legal position.
Law is law, rules are rules.
You cannot be planning to tramp all over patiently waiting EB2-I folks and expect to get away with it. Of course, I and probably several other people will undertake all legal efforts required to fight this (illegal) request from EB3-I.
To the guy who lectured me on how great his experience was etc: I obtained my Masters in Mechanical Engg from Stanford. Of course, I am not going to tell you where I work and what I earn. You can speculate all you want about my "Skillz".
To the guy who assured me that I am sinning and God will punish me: No, I don't think so. Fighting for the truth, and trying to fight for and protect my legal rights is not a sin. Speaking the truth is not a sin. I did not make EB1/EB2/EB3 categories. The government did. I did not screw people to have them apply in EB3, they should have known better.
To the guys who say EB2-I folks do not care about them: OF COURSE they don't, you guys (EB3-I) are trying EVERY TRICK IN THE BOOK to have an advantage at our cost. This shall not stand.
To anyone from the EB3-I cabal who wishes to engage with me: Try, and I will debate your points, any subject, any time (no IT please, I don't work in that miserable industry), regarding what is legal and good for EB3-I and also what is illegal and bad (mostly for EB2-I).
Behind every visa number, is a person and most probably a family. Children. Parents. Spouses. Siblings. DO NOT preach to me that I don't know about the suffering. We each have our own suffering. I have mine. Unfortunately, I wish my suffering just involved my GC.
Do you really think that whatever frustrations poured down here by whomsoever will force USCIS to change mind or its operational procedures changed? If not then why are you screaming so intensively? If this is the level one can achieve after joining Standford then we should now starting to doubt about the real quality level of Standford. But do not worry we will not judge Standford based on your behaviour here.
People are pouring down their frustrations, ideas and possible solutions. One may be agree or disagree for a particular post/idea but upon disagreement no one should become uncivil.
more...
arunmohan
04-07 02:29 AM
Group:
Please refer the below URL.
http://www.workpermit.com/news/2008-04-09/uk/2006-hsmp-changes-ruled-illegal.htm
Can't we do something like in USA?
Please refer the below URL.
http://www.workpermit.com/news/2008-04-09/uk/2006-hsmp-changes-ruled-illegal.htm
Can't we do something like in USA?
2010 Places - Unwritten Law
RandyK
04-04 01:46 PM
According to there are only a few approvals for EB3 ROW in April so far.....
more...
istrategist
05-03 02:56 PM
So on 4/23 they sent it back to TSC, and today, May 3, I got an update saying that it is now transferred to a USCIS office.
Any ideas why?
my EAD app was delivered to tx on 3/29, and I got a text on 4/6 saying it was accepted and routed to VSC. A few days later, I got the notice in the mail.
Any ideas why?
my EAD app was delivered to tx on 3/29, and I got a text on 4/6 saying it was accepted and routed to VSC. A few days later, I got the notice in the mail.
hair Unwritten Law | So, Bring On
amirani
05-23 07:04 PM
Thanks very much snathan and Ron.
I don't mind giving my case number for letter.
come on guys move forward so we can send this letter soon.
Thanks,
Ajay
I don't mind giving my case number for letter.
come on guys move forward so we can send this letter soon.
Thanks,
Ajay
more...
sobers
06-07 01:40 PM
House GOP threatens to �blue-slip� bill (The Hill)
By Jonathan Allen
Lawmakers are shrouding themselves in a thin slip of blue paper as deep divisions on immigration policy are again being laid bare.
House Republicans have threatened to deliver a �blue slip� rejection of the Senate immigration bill, and Senate Democrats are blocking efforts to circumvent that maneuver.
The result is a procedural paralysis that has prevented the two chambers from even naming conference negotiators, a clear sign of the difficulties facing proponents of an immigration overhaul.
The Senate-written immigration bill contains tax provisions, violating the Constitution�s requirement that all revenue measures originate in the House. Any House member could object to the Senate bill on that basis, forcing debate and a vote on whether to reject the measure outright.
Ways and Means Chairman Bill Thomas (R-Calif.) is considered the most likely to raise such an objection, but any number of House conservatives would be happy to kill the Senate bill. To avoid that fate, Senate Republican leaders want to bring up a separate House-passed tax bill, gut it and replace its provisions with the Senate immigration bill. But Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has objected to that maneuver.
Reid said he is concerned that using a House-passed tax vehicle could invite the introduction of unrelated tax cuts into House-Senate conference negotiations. If President Bush wants progress on the bill, he should tell House Republicans, �Don�t raise the blue-slip issue,� Reid said.
But Republicans say the problem is Reid, not the blue slip.
�Unfortunately, the minority leader over there, Harry Reid, continues to stand in the way,� House Majority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) said yesterday. �I think he ought to quit playing politics.�
As lawmakers engaged a new round of finger-pointing yesterday, one thing remained clear: The immigration bill is stuck.
Conservative Republicans are dead-set against the Senate bill, which would beef up border security, establish a temporary-worker program and allow many of the 11 million to 12 million illegal immigrants in the country now to become citizens eventually.
The House version focuses solely on border security, and many House Republicans say the Senate bill would grant amnesty to millions of immigrants who broke the law to get here.
But proponents of the Senate bill say the blue-slip threat is merely a distraction, one of a number of tools the bill�s critics could use to thwart its progress if they chose to do so. If the will exists to strike a deal, they say, procedural roadblocks will not be a problem.
�Some technical blue slip is not going to stop any resolution that we come to,� Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a chief proponent of the Senate bill, said yesterday. �Let�s not get caught up in the minutiae and the weeds.�
McCain was among the leaders of a bipartisan core of senators who struck a deal on the immigration bill and then shepherded it through the Senate last month. Sixty-two senators, most of them Democrats, voted for the final bill.
The legislation drew harsh criticism from Senate conservatives, many of whom voted against it. Even if Reid were to allow GOP leaders to move forward, there is no guarantee that Republican senators would not use procedural weapons to stop action.
Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) tried to kill the bill on its first trip through the Senate.
Sessions sent a �Dear Colleague� letter yesterday in which he urged colleagues to study the details of the immigration bill, particularly the number of legal immigrants it would allow into the country in future years.
�It remains deeply flawed,� he wrote.
Republicans hinted yesterday that they have other options for getting around the blue-slip problem.
�There�s always a Plan B,� said Eric Ueland, chief of staff to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.).
In 2000, House and Senate leaders circumvented a similar problem by appointing �shadow� conferees to a bankruptcy bill and attaching their work product to the conference report on a separate bill, according to Walter J. Oleszek�s Congressional Procedures and the Policy Process.
But alternatives and timelines were in short supply yesterday.
�Things can break loose at any time,� Ueland said.
By Jonathan Allen
Lawmakers are shrouding themselves in a thin slip of blue paper as deep divisions on immigration policy are again being laid bare.
House Republicans have threatened to deliver a �blue slip� rejection of the Senate immigration bill, and Senate Democrats are blocking efforts to circumvent that maneuver.
The result is a procedural paralysis that has prevented the two chambers from even naming conference negotiators, a clear sign of the difficulties facing proponents of an immigration overhaul.
The Senate-written immigration bill contains tax provisions, violating the Constitution�s requirement that all revenue measures originate in the House. Any House member could object to the Senate bill on that basis, forcing debate and a vote on whether to reject the measure outright.
Ways and Means Chairman Bill Thomas (R-Calif.) is considered the most likely to raise such an objection, but any number of House conservatives would be happy to kill the Senate bill. To avoid that fate, Senate Republican leaders want to bring up a separate House-passed tax bill, gut it and replace its provisions with the Senate immigration bill. But Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has objected to that maneuver.
Reid said he is concerned that using a House-passed tax vehicle could invite the introduction of unrelated tax cuts into House-Senate conference negotiations. If President Bush wants progress on the bill, he should tell House Republicans, �Don�t raise the blue-slip issue,� Reid said.
But Republicans say the problem is Reid, not the blue slip.
�Unfortunately, the minority leader over there, Harry Reid, continues to stand in the way,� House Majority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) said yesterday. �I think he ought to quit playing politics.�
As lawmakers engaged a new round of finger-pointing yesterday, one thing remained clear: The immigration bill is stuck.
Conservative Republicans are dead-set against the Senate bill, which would beef up border security, establish a temporary-worker program and allow many of the 11 million to 12 million illegal immigrants in the country now to become citizens eventually.
The House version focuses solely on border security, and many House Republicans say the Senate bill would grant amnesty to millions of immigrants who broke the law to get here.
But proponents of the Senate bill say the blue-slip threat is merely a distraction, one of a number of tools the bill�s critics could use to thwart its progress if they chose to do so. If the will exists to strike a deal, they say, procedural roadblocks will not be a problem.
�Some technical blue slip is not going to stop any resolution that we come to,� Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a chief proponent of the Senate bill, said yesterday. �Let�s not get caught up in the minutiae and the weeds.�
McCain was among the leaders of a bipartisan core of senators who struck a deal on the immigration bill and then shepherded it through the Senate last month. Sixty-two senators, most of them Democrats, voted for the final bill.
The legislation drew harsh criticism from Senate conservatives, many of whom voted against it. Even if Reid were to allow GOP leaders to move forward, there is no guarantee that Republican senators would not use procedural weapons to stop action.
Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) tried to kill the bill on its first trip through the Senate.
Sessions sent a �Dear Colleague� letter yesterday in which he urged colleagues to study the details of the immigration bill, particularly the number of legal immigrants it would allow into the country in future years.
�It remains deeply flawed,� he wrote.
Republicans hinted yesterday that they have other options for getting around the blue-slip problem.
�There�s always a Plan B,� said Eric Ueland, chief of staff to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.).
In 2000, House and Senate leaders circumvented a similar problem by appointing �shadow� conferees to a bankruptcy bill and attaching their work product to the conference report on a separate bill, according to Walter J. Oleszek�s Congressional Procedures and the Policy Process.
But alternatives and timelines were in short supply yesterday.
�Things can break loose at any time,� Ueland said.
hot Unwritten Law
kasanski33
01-19 02:12 PM
For all those who have signed up for monthly recurring payment.......Thanks a lot, we need more people like you.
For people still on the wall....What you waiting for....This is the year we will be able to make a difference. It's now or never
Please sign up for monthly recurring payments..........
For people still on the wall....What you waiting for....This is the year we will be able to make a difference. It's now or never
Please sign up for monthly recurring payments..........
more...
house Unwritten Law — Actress
StarSun
02-03 09:17 AM
To get a head start on the advocacy effort, we need members to register, contribute, plan the travel, and spread the word as soon as possible.
tattoo Unwritten Law - Swan MP3
gk_2000
09-29 05:55 PM
Doctors are EB2 and EB1.
They are not EB3
Even Physical therapists are EB2.
EB3 are low level/entry level programmers or skilled workers with with undergraduate degree or diploma degree holders that use education evaluation service to prove that their diploma is equivalent to an undergraduate degree.
Now some of you will say you have masters degree and still are EB3. It does not matter if you have a undergraduate degree from IIT or Harvard and have MBA from Harvard. If your job needs only undergraduate degree your master degrees are useless. You are working in a wrong job and overqualified for your job. You should look for another job that needs your american masters degree. Some will say that their lawyer filed in EB3 even though they qualify for EB2. Now that is also a wrong excuse. If your lawyer and HR screwed you, it is your fault that you could not stand up to them. It is not USCIS fault.
News: You make no sense. Why don't you get out of here back to your asylum?
They are not EB3
Even Physical therapists are EB2.
EB3 are low level/entry level programmers or skilled workers with with undergraduate degree or diploma degree holders that use education evaluation service to prove that their diploma is equivalent to an undergraduate degree.
Now some of you will say you have masters degree and still are EB3. It does not matter if you have a undergraduate degree from IIT or Harvard and have MBA from Harvard. If your job needs only undergraduate degree your master degrees are useless. You are working in a wrong job and overqualified for your job. You should look for another job that needs your american masters degree. Some will say that their lawyer filed in EB3 even though they qualify for EB2. Now that is also a wrong excuse. If your lawyer and HR screwed you, it is your fault that you could not stand up to them. It is not USCIS fault.
News: You make no sense. Why don't you get out of here back to your asylum?
more...
pictures UNWRITTEN LAW - LIVE AND
cal_dood
07-17 10:31 PM
My wife's LC was filed through the old process. We also did the PERM for her and were able to port the old PD BUT it took almost a year and the lawyer told us he had to ask his 'congressional contact' for help.
PERM may be an option for people in BEC - but not a sure shot one. The whole process takes ~6 months (including advertisements) and you/your company need to shell out $$$.
I empathize with you - but this is life. I had a PD of Oct '03 - but got sick of my job and changed - so now have a PD of Dec '05. Didn't make a difference as both became current in the July VB.
All of us come here for different reasons - many like me come for career opportunities. When GC/visa issues become a barrier for your career, it's time to rethink - when at the same time the opportunities in your country are much better. In the grand scheme of things, it's still not clear how important a GC is - don't get me wrong it really really helps - but if you are unlucky - then you need to evaluate the opportunity cost.
Good luck!
PERM may be an option for people in BEC - but not a sure shot one. The whole process takes ~6 months (including advertisements) and you/your company need to shell out $$$.
I empathize with you - but this is life. I had a PD of Oct '03 - but got sick of my job and changed - so now have a PD of Dec '05. Didn't make a difference as both became current in the July VB.
All of us come here for different reasons - many like me come for career opportunities. When GC/visa issues become a barrier for your career, it's time to rethink - when at the same time the opportunities in your country are much better. In the grand scheme of things, it's still not clear how important a GC is - don't get me wrong it really really helps - but if you are unlucky - then you need to evaluate the opportunity cost.
Good luck!
dresses Unwritten Law — Actress
rdehar
07-19 02:22 PM
Hi All,
MY LC (PD May 2003) is still stuck in DBEC. So I may or may not be able to file withing Aug17th.
My question is regarding the procedure used by USCIS to process AOS applications. It would be great if someone could explain this to me.
These are my questions:
1. Is the AOS application processed by RD or PD?
2. Once USCIS starts processing the I485, do they check PD at any stage, or is it just used as the initail "gate " for allowing I485 application submission?
3. Suppose Tom with a PD of July 2006 applied in July 2007. Then Harry's case gets approved by BEC in August 2007 and he applies in October 2007. Who will get the GC first?
Thanks for the help!
I-485 would be processed by RD if (and only iffffff) the PD is current.
That means:
. Your PD has to be current for approval;
. Older PD still has a lot more value than RD;
. If BEC victims are unable to file for I-485 now (for lack of labor approval), they would be able to file I-140 and I-485 later, when their dates become current (remember: no approvals without forward movement of dates)
PS: I just got out of BEC mess (after 3 years), can't even imagine what's going on in minds of those still stuck :(
MY LC (PD May 2003) is still stuck in DBEC. So I may or may not be able to file withing Aug17th.
My question is regarding the procedure used by USCIS to process AOS applications. It would be great if someone could explain this to me.
These are my questions:
1. Is the AOS application processed by RD or PD?
2. Once USCIS starts processing the I485, do they check PD at any stage, or is it just used as the initail "gate " for allowing I485 application submission?
3. Suppose Tom with a PD of July 2006 applied in July 2007. Then Harry's case gets approved by BEC in August 2007 and he applies in October 2007. Who will get the GC first?
Thanks for the help!
I-485 would be processed by RD if (and only iffffff) the PD is current.
That means:
. Your PD has to be current for approval;
. Older PD still has a lot more value than RD;
. If BEC victims are unable to file for I-485 now (for lack of labor approval), they would be able to file I-140 and I-485 later, when their dates become current (remember: no approvals without forward movement of dates)
PS: I just got out of BEC mess (after 3 years), can't even imagine what's going on in minds of those still stuck :(
more...
makeup Unwritten Law — Actress
fide_champ
05-15 07:37 AM
Hi, Did somebody take advantage of the new rule of H1-H4 decoupling where one can use the time spent in H4 in H1? or can somebody confirm that this rule is in place and a law ? Please let me know.
my wife worked for 31/2 years on H1/L1 before changing status to H4. After 4 years on H4, she recently got a job and he H1 was approved in 2 days under premium processing. So the decoupling rule is effective.
my wife worked for 31/2 years on H1/L1 before changing status to H4. After 4 years on H4, she recently got a job and he H1 was approved in 2 days under premium processing. So the decoupling rule is effective.
girlfriend Unwritten Law — Actress
NolaIndian32
04-16 01:37 PM
Depending on how my training goes, I should know in 3 months if I am capable of doing the half marathon in 2009. When does the registration end?
Hi Girijas,
I was advised by the Race Director at Houston that the Marathon and Half Marathon will max out at 18,000 as early as July 2008. So we need to act soon on that. There is no time limit for registration for the Houston 5K.
Hi Girijas,
I was advised by the Race Director at Houston that the Marathon and Half Marathon will max out at 18,000 as early as July 2008. So we need to act soon on that. There is no time limit for registration for the Houston 5K.
hairstyles Seein#39; Green / Unwritten Law
princenj
05-01 11:14 AM
I'm stuck in the Atlanta PERM too.......
Audit from Atlanta DOL increased in the last quarter of 2007 because they are working on several other things, but after Oct 07, they haven't cleared several audit cases.
Applied: July 07
Audit: Nov 07
Replied: Nov 07
Audit from Atlanta DOL increased in the last quarter of 2007 because they are working on several other things, but after Oct 07, they haven't cleared several audit cases.
Applied: July 07
Audit: Nov 07
Replied: Nov 07
go_gc_way
12-26 01:13 AM
Bump /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
neelu
12-14 05:35 PM
Sent email to few of my friends who have not joined yet. Will talk to them this weekend and make sure they join and may be contribute.
Thank you, Reachag!
Please post here once they join.
Everyone, please bring just ONE member by Dec 31st!!!
Thank you, Reachag!
Please post here once they join.
Everyone, please bring just ONE member by Dec 31st!!!