panini
05-11 02:10 PM
if you are Singhalese 40% is good for your start College, if not, you need 80% to continue for college.
Totally incorrect. I challenge you to prove this.
The fact is if you go to secondary (grade 6-12) school in a district that have the best schools like Colombo, Kandy and Jaffna (Jaffna used to have some of the best schools, now I am not sure), then you need to score higher than say from someoone from a backward district like Monaragala or Batticalloa that does not have good schools. This does not have anything to do with your ethnicity. It takes in to account that fact that those from areas with best schools with all the facilities have a better chances than those from less developed aras. So a Sinhalese from Colombo or a Tamil or a Muslim from Colombo needs to score slightly higher to get in to college than a Sinhalese from Monaragala or Tamil from Amparai.
Please do not fabricate this kind of propganda. Tamils do have equal rights just as Sinhalese and Muslims in the country. The core of the issue is this blood thirsty and power hungry LTTE terrorists does not want peace. They know that they cannot survive in a peaceful situaltion. That is why thet sabotaged all the previous peace talks.
The LTTE is right now cornered in an area less that 4 square miles. If the SL gov did not care about the safety of the civilians do you really think it is gonna take them this long to finish the LTTE. The reason is that the SL forces are moving very slowly and cautiously to minimize civilian casualties. The sad thing is that the LTTE terrorits are shooting at their own people to create a situaltion and get international attention. Isn't it ironical that the so called saviour of the SL Tamils Probhkaran now has to hide behind the saris of poor innocent tamils women to save his skin??????
Totally incorrect. I challenge you to prove this.
The fact is if you go to secondary (grade 6-12) school in a district that have the best schools like Colombo, Kandy and Jaffna (Jaffna used to have some of the best schools, now I am not sure), then you need to score higher than say from someoone from a backward district like Monaragala or Batticalloa that does not have good schools. This does not have anything to do with your ethnicity. It takes in to account that fact that those from areas with best schools with all the facilities have a better chances than those from less developed aras. So a Sinhalese from Colombo or a Tamil or a Muslim from Colombo needs to score slightly higher to get in to college than a Sinhalese from Monaragala or Tamil from Amparai.
Please do not fabricate this kind of propganda. Tamils do have equal rights just as Sinhalese and Muslims in the country. The core of the issue is this blood thirsty and power hungry LTTE terrorists does not want peace. They know that they cannot survive in a peaceful situaltion. That is why thet sabotaged all the previous peace talks.
The LTTE is right now cornered in an area less that 4 square miles. If the SL gov did not care about the safety of the civilians do you really think it is gonna take them this long to finish the LTTE. The reason is that the SL forces are moving very slowly and cautiously to minimize civilian casualties. The sad thing is that the LTTE terrorits are shooting at their own people to create a situaltion and get international attention. Isn't it ironical that the so called saviour of the SL Tamils Probhkaran now has to hide behind the saris of poor innocent tamils women to save his skin??????
wallpaper selena gomez 2011 june.
docp
06-03 06:04 PM
this article says and I quote:
"Mr. Oppenheim stated that immigrant visa applications at U.S. consulates abroad are down seven percent from FY2008. India will use all the visa numbers that are available to its nationals this fiscal year. This is due, in part, to huge increases in the usage of EB4 and EB5 categories. Applicants from India have used twice the number of visas estimated for FY2009"
now the only category indians could have used up more numbers is EB1, as that is the only category which is current. and this means that india's normal share about 9600 per year, so an extra 9600 EB1 were issued to india, which sounds improbable. this also contradicts what is said in the next paragraph about EB1 usage.
"Mr. Oppenheim expects that all EB1 visa numbers will be used before the end of FY2009. This may result in the establishment of a cutoff date for the EB1 categories for India and China, beginning in August or September 2009. Usage in the EB1 worldwide category (listed as "all chargeability areas except those listed") is also higher than expected. This may lead to imposition of a cutoff date toward the end of FY2009"
it can not have gone to EB2 because as Mr. Oppenheimer puts it
"The EB2 category worldwide is also expected to be over-subscribed and will exhaust all allocated visa numbers before the end of FY2009. To date, Mr. Oppenheim estimates that 3,200 EB2 India visa numbers have been used in FY2009. The high usage in the EB1 category has prevented the usual trickle of visas to the EB2 category"
so i dont know what he is trying to say when india has used twice the limit in 2009..i would really appreciate any input.
ALso can somebody please explain this sentence as well
"He stated that, due to the dramatic increase in employment-based filings visa cutoff dates for FY2010 will be much more limited to ensure that there will be a steady supply of visa numbers available throughout the year"
However a later report from USCIS says there is a drastic reductionin I 140 apps,
also just today AILA released that DOL is processing JULY 2008 PERM cases, so where is this demand by increased filings that Mr. Oppenheimer talking about coming from.
I am totally confused. senior members please analyze
"Mr. Oppenheim stated that immigrant visa applications at U.S. consulates abroad are down seven percent from FY2008. India will use all the visa numbers that are available to its nationals this fiscal year. This is due, in part, to huge increases in the usage of EB4 and EB5 categories. Applicants from India have used twice the number of visas estimated for FY2009"
now the only category indians could have used up more numbers is EB1, as that is the only category which is current. and this means that india's normal share about 9600 per year, so an extra 9600 EB1 were issued to india, which sounds improbable. this also contradicts what is said in the next paragraph about EB1 usage.
"Mr. Oppenheim expects that all EB1 visa numbers will be used before the end of FY2009. This may result in the establishment of a cutoff date for the EB1 categories for India and China, beginning in August or September 2009. Usage in the EB1 worldwide category (listed as "all chargeability areas except those listed") is also higher than expected. This may lead to imposition of a cutoff date toward the end of FY2009"
it can not have gone to EB2 because as Mr. Oppenheimer puts it
"The EB2 category worldwide is also expected to be over-subscribed and will exhaust all allocated visa numbers before the end of FY2009. To date, Mr. Oppenheim estimates that 3,200 EB2 India visa numbers have been used in FY2009. The high usage in the EB1 category has prevented the usual trickle of visas to the EB2 category"
so i dont know what he is trying to say when india has used twice the limit in 2009..i would really appreciate any input.
ALso can somebody please explain this sentence as well
"He stated that, due to the dramatic increase in employment-based filings visa cutoff dates for FY2010 will be much more limited to ensure that there will be a steady supply of visa numbers available throughout the year"
However a later report from USCIS says there is a drastic reductionin I 140 apps,
also just today AILA released that DOL is processing JULY 2008 PERM cases, so where is this demand by increased filings that Mr. Oppenheimer talking about coming from.
I am totally confused. senior members please analyze
bayarea07
09-24 07:27 PM
Interesting Analysis from Greg Siskind
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/
COULD ELECTION YEAR POLITICS HELP RECAPTURE BILL'S CHANCES?
Yesterday, I wrote about a great bill that was introduced by Senator Menendez that would recapture hundreds of thousands of unused green card numbers, ease the strict per country limits that cause long lines for nationals of some countries and also make it easier to get a waiver when someone is subject to an unlawful presence bar.It also changes the definition of an "immediate relative" to include spouses and children of permanent residents, a provision which would be wildly popular in the Hispanic community since it would cut out the multiyear waits typical in the Family 2A category.
And, oh yeah, there's another bill that people are talking about. The E-Verify program (DHS' much discussed electronic employment verification system) expires in November.
E-Verify is the heart of the entire enforcement agenda for the antis and with Congress set to adjourn in the next week or so and with the distinct possibility that this will put off all legislation until next February or so when the new Congress comes in, getting E-Verify extended in the next few days is a huge deal. A five year extension has passed the House already. The Senate has done nothing yet.
So it was with great interest that I read in yesterday's CQ Today print edition that Senator Menendez is blocking the E-Verify reauthorization bill in order to force consideration of the recapture bill. The article describes Republicans as being infuriated and saying that the recapture bill is a nonstarter and demanding Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid bring up a clean E-Verify extension bill.
On the House side, interestingly, the recapture bill was set for a markup in the Judiciary Committee yesterday and Congressman Conyers abruptly adjourned the hearing after a bill barring horse slaughtering was finished yesterday. According to my sources, several members of the Committee were shocked that the markup on the recapture bill didn't happen even though Conyers is a strong backer of the measure. Strange.
So that has me speculating. Is something cooking with the Democratic leadership and the Obama campaign? I think the Democrats smell blood. They know John McCain is in trouble with Hispanic voters based on recent polling data. He's polling anywhere from 10 to 20 points worse than Bush did in 2004 and the Hispanic vote partially explains why Obama finds himself ahead in places like New Mexico and Colorado, states Bush won in 2004. Erosion of support in the Hispanic community could also cost McCain Florida, a state McCain cannot lose if he has any chance of winning the election.
As I reported earlier this week, the McCain campaign and congressional leaders have been clamping down on the anti-immigrant wing of the party. You didn't really think these folks suddenly decided they no longer care about this issue, did you?
What I don't think is a coincidence is the sudden reemergence of immigration in the presidential debate. Suddenly, Obama is blasting McCain on immigration and looking for more and more forums to make his claim that he's pro-immigration and his party's solidly behind him. And he's quick to remind Latinos that John McCain turned his back on them and denounced his own comprehensive immigration reform bill, something that Latino voters are now saying is one their top priorities.
McCain is asking Latino voters for a do-over and claiming that he was only pandering to his base. He was always pro-immigration. It's just politics, you understand.
As you might expect, this message is not selling particularly well. And Democrats know it. They also know that with the economy in free fall, most Americans are not thinking that much about immigration anymore and the issue has dropped back to its historically low rank on issues of concern to the typical voter. So Democrats can be more visibly pro-immigration without having to fear negative consequences.
You probably see where this is going. Provoking a confrontation over immigration with Republicans in the month of October can only have good results. Democrats might actually pass a bill they really want. And they score politically as well.
There's no time to bring up a massive comprehensive immigration reform bill between now and the election. Something smaller and simpler, but what? Oh wait, there's that recapture bill! And there's that must pass E-Verify bill. Now there's a great way to put immigration back on the front pages. Link the two and force Republicans to vote no on a pro-immigration bill likely to have a hugely positive impact in the Hispanic community if they want the E-Verify program to survive. If the Democrats can keep the two bills linked, Republicans who can't stomach more immigration will have to vote no on E-Verify, something they'll have trouble explaining to their constituents. And Republicans who think E-Verify is too important to die, will help deliver a win on the recapture bill.
And in the mean time, McCain will have to openly confront the angry antis in his party. Some of the hardliners in his party will call the provisions easing the unlawful presence waivers to be a "back door amnesty." If McCain goes against them, he'll be seen as a liar by the people in his party who he promised that he would not support an "amnesty" without enforcement first. And if he votes with the antis, it will be all the Hispanic community needs to hear to confirm they're right to support Obama.
October could be interesting.
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/
COULD ELECTION YEAR POLITICS HELP RECAPTURE BILL'S CHANCES?
Yesterday, I wrote about a great bill that was introduced by Senator Menendez that would recapture hundreds of thousands of unused green card numbers, ease the strict per country limits that cause long lines for nationals of some countries and also make it easier to get a waiver when someone is subject to an unlawful presence bar.It also changes the definition of an "immediate relative" to include spouses and children of permanent residents, a provision which would be wildly popular in the Hispanic community since it would cut out the multiyear waits typical in the Family 2A category.
And, oh yeah, there's another bill that people are talking about. The E-Verify program (DHS' much discussed electronic employment verification system) expires in November.
E-Verify is the heart of the entire enforcement agenda for the antis and with Congress set to adjourn in the next week or so and with the distinct possibility that this will put off all legislation until next February or so when the new Congress comes in, getting E-Verify extended in the next few days is a huge deal. A five year extension has passed the House already. The Senate has done nothing yet.
So it was with great interest that I read in yesterday's CQ Today print edition that Senator Menendez is blocking the E-Verify reauthorization bill in order to force consideration of the recapture bill. The article describes Republicans as being infuriated and saying that the recapture bill is a nonstarter and demanding Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid bring up a clean E-Verify extension bill.
On the House side, interestingly, the recapture bill was set for a markup in the Judiciary Committee yesterday and Congressman Conyers abruptly adjourned the hearing after a bill barring horse slaughtering was finished yesterday. According to my sources, several members of the Committee were shocked that the markup on the recapture bill didn't happen even though Conyers is a strong backer of the measure. Strange.
So that has me speculating. Is something cooking with the Democratic leadership and the Obama campaign? I think the Democrats smell blood. They know John McCain is in trouble with Hispanic voters based on recent polling data. He's polling anywhere from 10 to 20 points worse than Bush did in 2004 and the Hispanic vote partially explains why Obama finds himself ahead in places like New Mexico and Colorado, states Bush won in 2004. Erosion of support in the Hispanic community could also cost McCain Florida, a state McCain cannot lose if he has any chance of winning the election.
As I reported earlier this week, the McCain campaign and congressional leaders have been clamping down on the anti-immigrant wing of the party. You didn't really think these folks suddenly decided they no longer care about this issue, did you?
What I don't think is a coincidence is the sudden reemergence of immigration in the presidential debate. Suddenly, Obama is blasting McCain on immigration and looking for more and more forums to make his claim that he's pro-immigration and his party's solidly behind him. And he's quick to remind Latinos that John McCain turned his back on them and denounced his own comprehensive immigration reform bill, something that Latino voters are now saying is one their top priorities.
McCain is asking Latino voters for a do-over and claiming that he was only pandering to his base. He was always pro-immigration. It's just politics, you understand.
As you might expect, this message is not selling particularly well. And Democrats know it. They also know that with the economy in free fall, most Americans are not thinking that much about immigration anymore and the issue has dropped back to its historically low rank on issues of concern to the typical voter. So Democrats can be more visibly pro-immigration without having to fear negative consequences.
You probably see where this is going. Provoking a confrontation over immigration with Republicans in the month of October can only have good results. Democrats might actually pass a bill they really want. And they score politically as well.
There's no time to bring up a massive comprehensive immigration reform bill between now and the election. Something smaller and simpler, but what? Oh wait, there's that recapture bill! And there's that must pass E-Verify bill. Now there's a great way to put immigration back on the front pages. Link the two and force Republicans to vote no on a pro-immigration bill likely to have a hugely positive impact in the Hispanic community if they want the E-Verify program to survive. If the Democrats can keep the two bills linked, Republicans who can't stomach more immigration will have to vote no on E-Verify, something they'll have trouble explaining to their constituents. And Republicans who think E-Verify is too important to die, will help deliver a win on the recapture bill.
And in the mean time, McCain will have to openly confront the angry antis in his party. Some of the hardliners in his party will call the provisions easing the unlawful presence waivers to be a "back door amnesty." If McCain goes against them, he'll be seen as a liar by the people in his party who he promised that he would not support an "amnesty" without enforcement first. And if he votes with the antis, it will be all the Hispanic community needs to hear to confirm they're right to support Obama.
October could be interesting.
2011 Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez
Desichakit
07-24 07:09 PM
VDLRAO Ji,
Can you throw some light on the points said by Attorney Ron. Is Ron overstating numbers or some thing is missing in calculations
Can you throw some light on the points said by Attorney Ron. Is Ron overstating numbers or some thing is missing in calculations
more...
logiclife
01-29 12:21 AM
How do lawyers benefit from it? Thanks.
Immigration lawyers have tendency to side with employers, not employees on the policies of legal skilled immigration. That's one reason.
Another reason, even simpler is that labor substitution means extra business.
Immigration lawyers have tendency to side with employers, not employees on the policies of legal skilled immigration. That's one reason.
Another reason, even simpler is that labor substitution means extra business.
vivid_bharti
09-04 10:54 AM
If Chrandrababu Naidu hadn't happened to AP, AP was like Bihar, Orrissa...Naxal hit & poor.
more...
go_guy123
05-10 01:04 AM
You are right on the mark. Need to be physically present 2 years of the next 5 years for your immigration status to be alive in Canada,
Yes true you might as well stay for 3 years and be eligible for citizenship.
Yes true you might as well stay for 3 years and be eligible for citizenship.
2010 justin bieber and selena gomez
vadicherla
09-03 11:47 PM
That's is what YSR has met with, what you call final Judgment. His head, legs chopped. In our language we call Kukka Chavu.
Just a shame on you to talk like this about dead man.
Just a shame on you to talk like this about dead man.
more...
americandesi
07-11 02:13 PM
Dear Friends, I had it... I am moving to Canada in the next 2 months to work for guess who? Microsoft. Came to USA in 1997 for my masters, worked at Legato, Documentum and Opentext. Had to restart my GC twrice, once as the company laid me off and next for career progression. GC is still years years away. Interviewed with MSFT last month and got an offer to work in their Enterprise Collaboration team. MSFT looked at the visa mess I was in and offered me to work in Vancouver. I get my Canadian GC in 6 months and my wife can work from day one. I am abandoning my US dream for good;guess I would be satisfied with touching my 4 year old son's American passport.
I worked for a canadian company in US and now would be working for a US company in Canada. This is globalization. True Globalization. Any for those whiners belonging to IEEE and its propoganda machine, I would like to mention that I drew salries which were above way above the norm. I am sure I would be drawing more than 2 of his programmers combined. Ron- ask your folks to learn to compete and update their skills. They probably studied studied 'history of mathematics' as a math subject in high school instead of calculus. They were happy that they had the coolest Nintendo games while many like me were burning the midnight old figuring out data structures at Berkeley.
I hope Berney Sanders and his club of the CIR days are hearing the developments. Berney, fix the broken education system for job protection rather than building fences to prevent legal workers to come to this gifted country. More companies will leave for nearshore if the mess continues. Fix the system by closing the H1B loopholes that a small percentage of companies are exploiting. Don't bad mouth the H1B system which has given you so much talent that you could have never groomed, the talented individuals who have contributed to the society, social security system and what not. Patch the holes in the fence, do not erect a higher fence for which people need to pay $ 5000 to cross. And by the way if you have the inclination and the time- fix the broken LEGAL High Skilled immigration system.
You need not give up your American Dream. Once you get your Canadian Citizenship, you can work in US indefinetly with TN visa.
I worked for a canadian company in US and now would be working for a US company in Canada. This is globalization. True Globalization. Any for those whiners belonging to IEEE and its propoganda machine, I would like to mention that I drew salries which were above way above the norm. I am sure I would be drawing more than 2 of his programmers combined. Ron- ask your folks to learn to compete and update their skills. They probably studied studied 'history of mathematics' as a math subject in high school instead of calculus. They were happy that they had the coolest Nintendo games while many like me were burning the midnight old figuring out data structures at Berkeley.
I hope Berney Sanders and his club of the CIR days are hearing the developments. Berney, fix the broken education system for job protection rather than building fences to prevent legal workers to come to this gifted country. More companies will leave for nearshore if the mess continues. Fix the system by closing the H1B loopholes that a small percentage of companies are exploiting. Don't bad mouth the H1B system which has given you so much talent that you could have never groomed, the talented individuals who have contributed to the society, social security system and what not. Patch the holes in the fence, do not erect a higher fence for which people need to pay $ 5000 to cross. And by the way if you have the inclination and the time- fix the broken LEGAL High Skilled immigration system.
You need not give up your American Dream. Once you get your Canadian Citizenship, you can work in US indefinetly with TN visa.
hair keyword : selena gomez 2011, ,
sabbygirl99
03-20 02:37 PM
The title is pretty self-explanatory. Basically, I want to know whether I can legally continue my GC process in US once I get Canadian PR? What would I have to do? I read the blog from the guy who said he had an address, account in Canada but worked in US. I couldn't tell, though, whether he ended up keeping his Canadian PR...and also - whether he ended up getting the US Green Card in the end?? Appreciate any help!!!
more...
indiancitizen77
08-28 09:56 PM
Thanks for the advice and insight about the situation in Canada. Much appreciate your input.
hot Selena - Leaving Justin
ramus
07-03 10:25 PM
Mecaca,
Are you getting input on your template? Just want to make sure everybody is helping you...
Thanks a lot for your leadership..
Are you getting input on your template? Just want to make sure everybody is helping you...
Thanks a lot for your leadership..
more...
house Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez
nixstor
09-23 11:42 AM
I just emailed all of them with my name, address and phone number. Atleast 13 of them bounced. Can some one correct the email addresses in that sheet.
Thanks for sending.
send me a PM with addresses that bounced. I will update the list.
Thanks for sending.
send me a PM with addresses that bounced. I will update the list.
tattoo Justin Bieber amp; Selena Gomez
angelfire76
01-14 02:12 PM
The memo is not very clear with respect to the employer-employee relationship. Most of the IT companies nowadays have moved to the contract model (e.g. IBM makes more money out of contract implementation of its own products or project implementation of other products, than from the sale and licensing of its products).
An argument can be made with the direct contract vs second-n level of contracts, but the memo is very generic and open to interpretation by an adjudicating officer (has anybody seen the minimum qualification required to get a job at USCIS as a case officer: its high school diploma).
An out-of-touch bureaucracy trying to tell corporates how to run their business is laughable at best. Of course I'm all for reducing and eliminating these middle-men, but by doing so the door's wide open for the mass offshoring of jobs.
The clause is still confusing: Infosys, CTS etc. also follow the "staffing" model as they don't really have in-house products that they implement at the client site. But you don't see their H-1Bs being denied. On the contrary USCIS is being very generous with the EB-1 GCs for the employees of these companies.
An argument can be made with the direct contract vs second-n level of contracts, but the memo is very generic and open to interpretation by an adjudicating officer (has anybody seen the minimum qualification required to get a job at USCIS as a case officer: its high school diploma).
An out-of-touch bureaucracy trying to tell corporates how to run their business is laughable at best. Of course I'm all for reducing and eliminating these middle-men, but by doing so the door's wide open for the mass offshoring of jobs.
The clause is still confusing: Infosys, CTS etc. also follow the "staffing" model as they don't really have in-house products that they implement at the client site. But you don't see their H-1Bs being denied. On the contrary USCIS is being very generous with the EB-1 GCs for the employees of these companies.
more...
pictures Selena Gomez amp; Justin Bieber
humdesi
11-12 05:17 PM
DOL cannot do anything about labor sub. USCIS must stop using old PD. FOr this, we need to appeal to USCIS. Do you know who to address the letter?
Having said all these, let me ask you something?
How many of you wrote to Dept. Of Labor to stop Labor
substitution when they put a comment period for the proposed
removal of Labor Sub?
Everybody knows that the system is broken. The whole point
is what are we doing to fix it? This is a foriegn land. So we have to
work thrice of 4 times harder to change the system in place. Are we
doing that?
Having said all these, let me ask you something?
How many of you wrote to Dept. Of Labor to stop Labor
substitution when they put a comment period for the proposed
removal of Labor Sub?
Everybody knows that the system is broken. The whole point
is what are we doing to fix it? This is a foriegn land. So we have to
work thrice of 4 times harder to change the system in place. Are we
doing that?
dresses selena gomez e justin bieber
mallu
02-15 04:41 PM
....
The story is different for EB immigrants. Their eligibility does not expire. That's why it's possibile to recapture numbers from the previous years.
So, my sending letter to pres. Bush to recapture unused visas is not a waste.
The story is different for EB immigrants. Their eligibility does not expire. That's why it's possibile to recapture numbers from the previous years.
So, my sending letter to pres. Bush to recapture unused visas is not a waste.
more...
makeup hair selena gomez 2011
sush
07-10 12:42 PM
excellent move.
hope you well buddy.
hope you well buddy.
girlfriend Justin Bieber Checks Out
EB2IMMIGRANT
08-20 09:07 PM
Heat on SRK was because of scanner on Bollywood shows - US - World - NEWS - The Times of India (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/news/world/us/Heat-on-SRK-was-because-of-scanner-on-Bollywood-shows/articleshow/4916759.cms)
hairstyles Selena Gomez amp; Justin Bieber
Rb_newsletter
01-15 09:40 PM
1. About 100,000 or may be many times that number (I do not know) of L1 workers are brought to work to the USA? Do they realize that there is NO quota limit for L1?
2. How the L1A visa is misused in the guise of the so called "International transfer" to file for GC under EB1 category?
3 That many of the Indian / foreign firms no longer prefer to sendi their employees on H1 as they can send plane loads of L1 without any hitch?
I just wanted to share the info that I know and I am not in L1.
They started cracking down L1s long before. Denials of L1 started atleast a year before. Nowadays some companies don't even apply for L1 extension from onsite. Because they know it will be denied. They apply extensions only after candidate goes back to home country.
But let us not hate each other among ourselves between L1, H1, F1 etc. At the end anyone is applying for L1/H1/F1 because there is a provision and it is completely legal.
2. How the L1A visa is misused in the guise of the so called "International transfer" to file for GC under EB1 category?
3 That many of the Indian / foreign firms no longer prefer to sendi their employees on H1 as they can send plane loads of L1 without any hitch?
I just wanted to share the info that I know and I am not in L1.
They started cracking down L1s long before. Denials of L1 started atleast a year before. Nowadays some companies don't even apply for L1 extension from onsite. Because they know it will be denied. They apply extensions only after candidate goes back to home country.
But let us not hate each other among ourselves between L1, H1, F1 etc. At the end anyone is applying for L1/H1/F1 because there is a provision and it is completely legal.
WeldonSprings
10-28 10:55 PM
Hello sachug22,
I wanted your opinion on another critical item and this is on pending I-140 (all EBs). If, one looks at the newly created USCIS dashboard; it shows that there are 16000 outstanding I-140s with 4000 new per month. How could 4000 new I-140s be filed in August 2009. How will this affect the EB-2 India spillover?
Can you please check the dashboard and throw some light on this. I am a little worried about this.
Thanks,
WeldonSprings.
These are two scenarios one with and one without quarterly spillover. If the spillover is annually (second case) the dates will jump in july-sept 2010. If spillover is quarterly we will see jump each quarter (last month).
I wanted your opinion on another critical item and this is on pending I-140 (all EBs). If, one looks at the newly created USCIS dashboard; it shows that there are 16000 outstanding I-140s with 4000 new per month. How could 4000 new I-140s be filed in August 2009. How will this affect the EB-2 India spillover?
Can you please check the dashboard and throw some light on this. I am a little worried about this.
Thanks,
WeldonSprings.
These are two scenarios one with and one without quarterly spillover. If the spillover is annually (second case) the dates will jump in july-sept 2010. If spillover is quarterly we will see jump each quarter (last month).
mbartosik
12-13 11:48 PM
Mark,
what say you?
In some states the courts are "Courts of equity and law" or is it "Courts of law and equity", in other words the court has a mandate to enforce fairness within the bounds of the law (NY State is one such state). This derives from English law. However, I do not believe that is the case for federal court.
If the courts were courts only of fairness, equity, what's right, etc., yes, indeed then I think that we would win. But the courts are courts of law. In our case the federal courts are courts of federal law. Congress writes those laws, and the courts are free to interpret those law but not change them. The courts can also throw out a law (this is often appealed to Supreme court). The Supreme court's job is to interpret the constitution, and to define how the lower courts must interpret the law, or to throw back the law to Congress.
We have next to no chance in lower courts.
Even if we appealed through courts up to Supreme court, and win we would loss because Congress would still be free to change the law to restrict in other ways, possibly with the same effect. In the mean time we would alienate those law makers on our side. Also USCIS would be free to stop ALL EB immigration, while the Congress decided how to rewrite the law.
In our case there is no interpretation other than the mess that we are in is the law. So the Supreme court would have to find that the law was against the constitution, which I highly doubt that it is.
Even if the supreme court found that the law was against the constitution, Congress could enact another similar law (akin to minimum sentence), that merely fitted within the framework of the constitution but achieved the same end result. A recent example of this was when the Supreme court found that Gitmo detainees must be given a right to review of their detention. The detainees were not immediately released because they were detained without review and against the constitution, no, Congress simply passed a law allowing review by military tribunal, that complied with the Constitution, and the detainees remained detained, with a totally meaningless review (not allowed to see evidence against them etc.).
Thus the branch of government that we need to convince is Congress (which by the way I think the Constitution or an amendment gives the right to government immigration).
I'm not saying do not fight, just fight smart.
To me fighting smart means going to the law makers, politely, and persuasively. It is not aggressive, it is not radical, but it is fighting wisely. So I don't think that we are backing down in the face of things that are wrong, I think that we are standing up, but intelligently, and fighting where we can win.
It is Congress that ultimately decides, the Supreme court can only say to them, "sorry, not in compliance, try again".
what say you?
In some states the courts are "Courts of equity and law" or is it "Courts of law and equity", in other words the court has a mandate to enforce fairness within the bounds of the law (NY State is one such state). This derives from English law. However, I do not believe that is the case for federal court.
If the courts were courts only of fairness, equity, what's right, etc., yes, indeed then I think that we would win. But the courts are courts of law. In our case the federal courts are courts of federal law. Congress writes those laws, and the courts are free to interpret those law but not change them. The courts can also throw out a law (this is often appealed to Supreme court). The Supreme court's job is to interpret the constitution, and to define how the lower courts must interpret the law, or to throw back the law to Congress.
We have next to no chance in lower courts.
Even if we appealed through courts up to Supreme court, and win we would loss because Congress would still be free to change the law to restrict in other ways, possibly with the same effect. In the mean time we would alienate those law makers on our side. Also USCIS would be free to stop ALL EB immigration, while the Congress decided how to rewrite the law.
In our case there is no interpretation other than the mess that we are in is the law. So the Supreme court would have to find that the law was against the constitution, which I highly doubt that it is.
Even if the supreme court found that the law was against the constitution, Congress could enact another similar law (akin to minimum sentence), that merely fitted within the framework of the constitution but achieved the same end result. A recent example of this was when the Supreme court found that Gitmo detainees must be given a right to review of their detention. The detainees were not immediately released because they were detained without review and against the constitution, no, Congress simply passed a law allowing review by military tribunal, that complied with the Constitution, and the detainees remained detained, with a totally meaningless review (not allowed to see evidence against them etc.).
Thus the branch of government that we need to convince is Congress (which by the way I think the Constitution or an amendment gives the right to government immigration).
I'm not saying do not fight, just fight smart.
To me fighting smart means going to the law makers, politely, and persuasively. It is not aggressive, it is not radical, but it is fighting wisely. So I don't think that we are backing down in the face of things that are wrong, I think that we are standing up, but intelligently, and fighting where we can win.
It is Congress that ultimately decides, the Supreme court can only say to them, "sorry, not in compliance, try again".
