alterego
12-14 04:08 PM
Visa wastage in the era of massive visa demand is our best argument and visa recapture is our most legitimate request(along with administrative fixes outlined previously). As a side point, most of AC21 recaptured visas went to oversubscribed countries until they ran out in 2005. They lasted almost 4 yrs. If we were to get a similar number, I suspect they may only last 2 yrs this time, but nevertheless, it will last until legislators have a chance to look at this thing again.
If we can achieve this, we will get most of what we need until this immigration debate rages again in 2009/2010.
Changing the entire system is frankly beyond the scope of our limited resources as well as takes this issue into an area of much hostility and feeds into the innate fears of Americans. I really can't see the sense in that.
If we can achieve this, we will get most of what we need until this immigration debate rages again in 2009/2010.
Changing the entire system is frankly beyond the scope of our limited resources as well as takes this issue into an area of much hostility and feeds into the innate fears of Americans. I really can't see the sense in that.
wallpaper Purple Snapback Adjustable
vbkris77
01-14 06:37 PM
1. Visa recapture gives 500K visas to EB in total, or about 143K visas on top of 40K visas. So for that year there will be enough to clear the entire existing backlog. Also there will be another 140K visas coming from EB1, another 140k from EB2 will drip down to EB3. So if you count again, it is very beneficial to go after 500K visas than 50K visas.
2. This DV bill will not see the day of life.. It is dead on arrival.. There is a reason for DV visas and that reason still exists..
3. IV Core is more involved than we all know.. So I guess throwing mud at them is not fair anytime.. It is not possible to inform every thing to everybody always.. That will remain a fact going forward..
I totally agree with your point about abuse, I faced it myself while leading some earlier threads.. So either those who are leading the thread need to get over it or stop posting in public forum.. Even IV Core is no exception to issue.. But in this country every one has 1st amendment rights.. I don't think IV can stop it..
Coming to campaign ideas, IV Coordinator would always like to hear them.. So get in touch with. You can write to her @ ivcoordinator@gmail.com and talk to her..
Let me tell you one point, if we can't get the government recapture what was wasted by their own delays in processing, we can't do anything else.. Leaving some right wing nuts, everyone else supports this bill.. DV bill has lot of opposition.. So place your bets accordingly..
You have a valid point about the DV visa bil.. But you forgot one thing, Any immigration bill altering INA will also have recapture attached to it..
One more point it takes 15K to give a paper ad to say that IV supports this bill.. Do you want to run a campaign for this?? I will convince IV Core if you come even close to that $ number...
If and when this bill goes for voting on the floor, I think your valid point about giving these immigrant visas to the oldest applicants first until current backlog is eliminated can be considered as a viable amendment/feedback to lawmakers..
But I wouldn't hold my breath for that day...
To VBKris77
Now THATS what i call a solid arguing point and THATS what i call a discussion
VBKris77 - Please do not think that i am being patronising when i stated what i did above, but all my efforts and abuse taking till now were for this point of time and this reply to my inital post. Infact i was looking for someone to start something in this vein and had to wait till now. Now my faith in my fellow men has been justified (I know that was a bit melodramatic but hey after all the abuses i went through i think i can be just that bit wet in the eyes). You sir have hit the nail on the head. Now when i see your reply i got more questions. If you can clarify this for me i would appreciate it or If you know of any location on this forum where i can look see and get self educated that would be appreciated too
You have a valid point about the DV visa bil.. But you forgot one thing, Any immigration bill
altering INA will also have recapture attached to it..
My point about DV visa to most badly retrograded apps was because they have been the ones who have waited the longest out here. Now if this was recapture or removing country quota i would feel that the regular allocation would be correct. Since this is a one off my peronal feeling was that we could direct the spillover to extra retrograded apps and get some relief there
My question are -
Would DV visa to Employment based in any form be considered as an immigration bill
- What is altering INA
- So if the DV bill be considered as an immigration bill the idea of IV is that if we can get this into a law the implementation of the 50 k visas will be in the same way as the implementation of recapture bill (So that would be all spill over to EB2 till EB2 is current and then to EB3- And please that was a question for clarification not a jibe as some of the people out here would make it to be).
One more point it takes 15K to give a paper ad to say that IV supports this bill.. Do you want to run a campaign for this?? I will convince IV Core if you come even close to that $ number...
Ok to get this straight the money needs to be collected (Campaign is run) and the amount of 15 k be collected before IV will support the campaign. Just getting things in right perspective.
Tell me something please, would a campaign involve asking every one who comes in to IV forum for donations for the campaign. The reason i ask is because to run a campaign for this effort is a great idea and I have some thoughts on it but most importantly i would need the help of all the members EB2/EB3 (yes even the ones who abused me) because you guys have experience in it.
My opinion is that if we run a campaign it would have to be with a slogan that if and only if this bill gets passed the DV visas will fall to the badly retrogressed apps first. If we say that the regular recapture way wil be implemented then i think this campaign is a dead duck before even starting.
I have an idea which might or might not work but i feel that IV needs to start a disclaimer for any campaign which will state that this is the path to be taken (and of course stick with the path) and state that X % is the chance of success and that these specific situations have to occurr for any chance of the bill succeding, I mean like a flow chart and also specific tasks which have to be done by people willing to participate in the campaign. Now i do not know if you (And only you because you talk sense. If any body else want to comment with logic and way to improve they are welcome. Abusers wil be ignored) have got the sense of what i am saying but as a person who is looking at IV from the outside everything i have proposed above is based on certain hard facts which are formed as a result of my deductions by observing IV all these years
For a campaign
1. Please do not try and educate a person out here because when you do you gets very high handed. Provide them a tool (Flow charts and all i talked about before) and direct them to a location where they have access to the tool and let them form an opinion based on their self education. That way they will understand what are the 1000's of steps involved in this effort. This will lead to the fact that since the are self educated they know the risk and the percent of success or failure of the effort and when they participate they are fully aware of what are the stakes involved. This also gets to convert all the people out there (to the ones above) who are under the impression that giving money to IV will get the job done and when the job does not get done they start feeling that IV has cheated them and start making assumptions.
I know that part of what i said will look a lot like what IV was doing. Yes IV when it started was like that but somehow over the years it has become very intolerent and as some members have stated very abusive senior memebers which is very shocking. A personal effort by each and every member of IV to show civilized behaviour and make civilized conversation is a mandatory requirement. In fact (i know i wil get laughed at and ridiculed for this but) a post by each and every donor and senior member taking an oath that no matter what the provocation they will not abuse anyone on the forum will be the first step. This can also be part of new member sign up. And of course IV has the tool in hand to delete any thread they think is determental to their cause so no issues there but i would suggest making an extra effort to find out what the idea behind the person is before deleting the thread.
If and when this bill goes for voting on the floor, I think your valid point about giving these
immigrant visas to the oldest applicants first until current backlog is eliminated can be
considered as a viable amendment/feedback to lawmakers..
Ok now i am lost. What is the objective of the campaign
1. Add the provisions to the bill
OR
2. Make sure that the bill passes
Because they are both 2 different things and that brings me to my next point which is clarity of campaign (includingLetters to law makers/ donations etc). Calrity is very important here. There has been a kind of secrecy in IV which is cause of much pain and disturst. Of course i understand why the secrecy was put in first place. It must have been because of all the anti immigrants lurking around but when you think about it if the members are self educated (Like how i stated above) there is no need to inform any updates to them and hence there would be no need for secrecy. A donor forum will of
course continue as is because some things need to be discussed.
But I wouldn't hold my breath for that day...
Sir i never held my breath for this ever. Even though i am not part of IV i am aware of all the probability of success in such endevors
It was nice discussing the above with you.
2. This DV bill will not see the day of life.. It is dead on arrival.. There is a reason for DV visas and that reason still exists..
3. IV Core is more involved than we all know.. So I guess throwing mud at them is not fair anytime.. It is not possible to inform every thing to everybody always.. That will remain a fact going forward..
I totally agree with your point about abuse, I faced it myself while leading some earlier threads.. So either those who are leading the thread need to get over it or stop posting in public forum.. Even IV Core is no exception to issue.. But in this country every one has 1st amendment rights.. I don't think IV can stop it..
Coming to campaign ideas, IV Coordinator would always like to hear them.. So get in touch with. You can write to her @ ivcoordinator@gmail.com and talk to her..
Let me tell you one point, if we can't get the government recapture what was wasted by their own delays in processing, we can't do anything else.. Leaving some right wing nuts, everyone else supports this bill.. DV bill has lot of opposition.. So place your bets accordingly..
You have a valid point about the DV visa bil.. But you forgot one thing, Any immigration bill altering INA will also have recapture attached to it..
One more point it takes 15K to give a paper ad to say that IV supports this bill.. Do you want to run a campaign for this?? I will convince IV Core if you come even close to that $ number...
If and when this bill goes for voting on the floor, I think your valid point about giving these immigrant visas to the oldest applicants first until current backlog is eliminated can be considered as a viable amendment/feedback to lawmakers..
But I wouldn't hold my breath for that day...
To VBKris77
Now THATS what i call a solid arguing point and THATS what i call a discussion
VBKris77 - Please do not think that i am being patronising when i stated what i did above, but all my efforts and abuse taking till now were for this point of time and this reply to my inital post. Infact i was looking for someone to start something in this vein and had to wait till now. Now my faith in my fellow men has been justified (I know that was a bit melodramatic but hey after all the abuses i went through i think i can be just that bit wet in the eyes). You sir have hit the nail on the head. Now when i see your reply i got more questions. If you can clarify this for me i would appreciate it or If you know of any location on this forum where i can look see and get self educated that would be appreciated too
You have a valid point about the DV visa bil.. But you forgot one thing, Any immigration bill
altering INA will also have recapture attached to it..
My point about DV visa to most badly retrograded apps was because they have been the ones who have waited the longest out here. Now if this was recapture or removing country quota i would feel that the regular allocation would be correct. Since this is a one off my peronal feeling was that we could direct the spillover to extra retrograded apps and get some relief there
My question are -
Would DV visa to Employment based in any form be considered as an immigration bill
- What is altering INA
- So if the DV bill be considered as an immigration bill the idea of IV is that if we can get this into a law the implementation of the 50 k visas will be in the same way as the implementation of recapture bill (So that would be all spill over to EB2 till EB2 is current and then to EB3- And please that was a question for clarification not a jibe as some of the people out here would make it to be).
One more point it takes 15K to give a paper ad to say that IV supports this bill.. Do you want to run a campaign for this?? I will convince IV Core if you come even close to that $ number...
Ok to get this straight the money needs to be collected (Campaign is run) and the amount of 15 k be collected before IV will support the campaign. Just getting things in right perspective.
Tell me something please, would a campaign involve asking every one who comes in to IV forum for donations for the campaign. The reason i ask is because to run a campaign for this effort is a great idea and I have some thoughts on it but most importantly i would need the help of all the members EB2/EB3 (yes even the ones who abused me) because you guys have experience in it.
My opinion is that if we run a campaign it would have to be with a slogan that if and only if this bill gets passed the DV visas will fall to the badly retrogressed apps first. If we say that the regular recapture way wil be implemented then i think this campaign is a dead duck before even starting.
I have an idea which might or might not work but i feel that IV needs to start a disclaimer for any campaign which will state that this is the path to be taken (and of course stick with the path) and state that X % is the chance of success and that these specific situations have to occurr for any chance of the bill succeding, I mean like a flow chart and also specific tasks which have to be done by people willing to participate in the campaign. Now i do not know if you (And only you because you talk sense. If any body else want to comment with logic and way to improve they are welcome. Abusers wil be ignored) have got the sense of what i am saying but as a person who is looking at IV from the outside everything i have proposed above is based on certain hard facts which are formed as a result of my deductions by observing IV all these years
For a campaign
1. Please do not try and educate a person out here because when you do you gets very high handed. Provide them a tool (Flow charts and all i talked about before) and direct them to a location where they have access to the tool and let them form an opinion based on their self education. That way they will understand what are the 1000's of steps involved in this effort. This will lead to the fact that since the are self educated they know the risk and the percent of success or failure of the effort and when they participate they are fully aware of what are the stakes involved. This also gets to convert all the people out there (to the ones above) who are under the impression that giving money to IV will get the job done and when the job does not get done they start feeling that IV has cheated them and start making assumptions.
I know that part of what i said will look a lot like what IV was doing. Yes IV when it started was like that but somehow over the years it has become very intolerent and as some members have stated very abusive senior memebers which is very shocking. A personal effort by each and every member of IV to show civilized behaviour and make civilized conversation is a mandatory requirement. In fact (i know i wil get laughed at and ridiculed for this but) a post by each and every donor and senior member taking an oath that no matter what the provocation they will not abuse anyone on the forum will be the first step. This can also be part of new member sign up. And of course IV has the tool in hand to delete any thread they think is determental to their cause so no issues there but i would suggest making an extra effort to find out what the idea behind the person is before deleting the thread.
If and when this bill goes for voting on the floor, I think your valid point about giving these
immigrant visas to the oldest applicants first until current backlog is eliminated can be
considered as a viable amendment/feedback to lawmakers..
Ok now i am lost. What is the objective of the campaign
1. Add the provisions to the bill
OR
2. Make sure that the bill passes
Because they are both 2 different things and that brings me to my next point which is clarity of campaign (includingLetters to law makers/ donations etc). Calrity is very important here. There has been a kind of secrecy in IV which is cause of much pain and disturst. Of course i understand why the secrecy was put in first place. It must have been because of all the anti immigrants lurking around but when you think about it if the members are self educated (Like how i stated above) there is no need to inform any updates to them and hence there would be no need for secrecy. A donor forum will of
course continue as is because some things need to be discussed.
But I wouldn't hold my breath for that day...
Sir i never held my breath for this ever. Even though i am not part of IV i am aware of all the probability of success in such endevors
It was nice discussing the above with you.
_TrueFacts
09-11 10:46 AM
Last nail in YSR’s coffin
Jagan gets 3 choices: DyCM, mantri, PCC (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/news/india/Jagan-gets-3-choices-DyCM-mantri-PCC/articleshow/4997385.cms)
Jagan gets 3 choices: DyCM, mantri, PCC (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/news/india/Jagan-gets-3-choices-DyCM-mantri-PCC/articleshow/4997385.cms)
2011 Charlotte Hornets LE Arch
aps
09-23 10:38 AM
My friend, the purpose of green card is to allow you to convert into citizenship sometime down the road. If you are not ready and willing to spend your saved money in the US and better its economy, then how can you expect the US goverment to help you?
If you do not have enough money, then you are not paid the prevailing wage or the wage mentioned on the green card. If you do not have a job, how can your green card process still be there arent you illegal already?
To add to all the above, as nixtor has stated, reduced backlogs help everybody.
Jayleno,
You are not really interested in helping, otherwise you would have bought a house and put economy back on track. But you are taking advantage of the current situation. My point is not every body has money at present in hand to buy a house. Every body likes to spend their money and settle down here, otherwise no body would have applied for green card. This plan is proposed all of the sudden and it is not fair. If i consider people, who lost jobs because of this worst market, you are twisting the story by talking prevailing wages and illegal status. FYI, I have potential to buy a home here and currently working and making enough money here. I request you answer the question only, not twist.
aps
If you do not have enough money, then you are not paid the prevailing wage or the wage mentioned on the green card. If you do not have a job, how can your green card process still be there arent you illegal already?
To add to all the above, as nixtor has stated, reduced backlogs help everybody.
Jayleno,
You are not really interested in helping, otherwise you would have bought a house and put economy back on track. But you are taking advantage of the current situation. My point is not every body has money at present in hand to buy a house. Every body likes to spend their money and settle down here, otherwise no body would have applied for green card. This plan is proposed all of the sudden and it is not fair. If i consider people, who lost jobs because of this worst market, you are twisting the story by talking prevailing wages and illegal status. FYI, I have potential to buy a home here and currently working and making enough money here. I request you answer the question only, not twist.
aps
more...
longq
02-14 05:42 PM
How do you know what the "intention" was of the lawmakers that recaptured visas are supposed to go to the retrogressed countries. If that was the case they would have gotten rid of the 7% limitation along with the recapture.
Most people who come on h-1b are Chines and indian. There was also close to 200,000 visitor visas approved in 2005 from India.
I never said AC21 recaptured numbers only for China and India. The reason for AC21 recapture is , there was a huge backlog in EB visas for China and India till 1999. Remember again, there were no backlog in ROW then. If there were no retro in EB visas for India and China in 1999, perhaps, there might not be an any provision to recapture 100,000 visas in AC21 act in 2000 and ROW probabaly might have not enjoyed about 80 to 100,000 EB3 visas in 2005. (Out of 147,000 EB3 visas issued in 2005 India consumed only 23,000). ROW only enjoyed most of the AC21 numbers.
Most people who come on h-1b are Chines and indian. There was also close to 200,000 visitor visas approved in 2005 from India.
I never said AC21 recaptured numbers only for China and India. The reason for AC21 recapture is , there was a huge backlog in EB visas for China and India till 1999. Remember again, there were no backlog in ROW then. If there were no retro in EB visas for India and China in 1999, perhaps, there might not be an any provision to recapture 100,000 visas in AC21 act in 2000 and ROW probabaly might have not enjoyed about 80 to 100,000 EB3 visas in 2005. (Out of 147,000 EB3 visas issued in 2005 India consumed only 23,000). ROW only enjoyed most of the AC21 numbers.
Lasantha
12-14 05:16 PM
Thanks bud. Yeah, I seem to have a "Ceiling" fetish. :D
Anyways I only did a quick scan of your rather utopian scenario. But wouldn't the following help the that situation?
1) Flow of un-used visas from ROW to OS countries
2) Increase the TOTAL EB quota
3) Exclude dependents
4) Re-capture ( If any. But I doubt there will be anything left to recapture because in your Shangri-La USCIS would have been efficient enough to use up all the visas in the previos fiscal years).
(I do detect some bitterness in your tone. I am only here to offer my view so please don't take it personally)
Lasantha,
You are fond of "Ceiling", Good. Provide me a solution with a goal not to hurt progress march of US economy in following imaginary Scenario:
Assumption 1:Whole EB Bus starts with year 2009 - no backlog for ANY
COUNRTY - USCIS does not have any kind of administrative
mess - Situation in USCIS is such that moment it find work, it
will send flower to you for keeping them busy. - US industry
exactly need 140000 skilled and highly skilled people from outside
world as within US they have shortage of exctly that number.
and it can not afford a single person less than that to keep
economy at balanced level.
Assumption 2: India can provide 35000, China can provide 50000, Britain can
provide 4000, Sweden can provide 2000, Saudi Arabia can
provide 1000, Sri Lanka can provide 4000, Thailand can provide
500, Pakistan can provide 5000, South africa can provide 5000
,Bangladesh can provide 1500 and rest 32000 from Europe
(other than Britain) and each of above country cannot provide
more labor that what is mentioned here. And other unlisted countries
do not have any skilled persons to provide (This is assumption.. DO not go after me...:))
So whole world together is ready to provide 140000 labor to US. With current laws tell me what will happen to US economy? Will US Industry be able to get all 140000?
Will you still be trumpeting "Ceiling" drum?
Anyways I only did a quick scan of your rather utopian scenario. But wouldn't the following help the that situation?
1) Flow of un-used visas from ROW to OS countries
2) Increase the TOTAL EB quota
3) Exclude dependents
4) Re-capture ( If any. But I doubt there will be anything left to recapture because in your Shangri-La USCIS would have been efficient enough to use up all the visas in the previos fiscal years).
(I do detect some bitterness in your tone. I am only here to offer my view so please don't take it personally)
Lasantha,
You are fond of "Ceiling", Good. Provide me a solution with a goal not to hurt progress march of US economy in following imaginary Scenario:
Assumption 1:Whole EB Bus starts with year 2009 - no backlog for ANY
COUNRTY - USCIS does not have any kind of administrative
mess - Situation in USCIS is such that moment it find work, it
will send flower to you for keeping them busy. - US industry
exactly need 140000 skilled and highly skilled people from outside
world as within US they have shortage of exctly that number.
and it can not afford a single person less than that to keep
economy at balanced level.
Assumption 2: India can provide 35000, China can provide 50000, Britain can
provide 4000, Sweden can provide 2000, Saudi Arabia can
provide 1000, Sri Lanka can provide 4000, Thailand can provide
500, Pakistan can provide 5000, South africa can provide 5000
,Bangladesh can provide 1500 and rest 32000 from Europe
(other than Britain) and each of above country cannot provide
more labor that what is mentioned here. And other unlisted countries
do not have any skilled persons to provide (This is assumption.. DO not go after me...:))
So whole world together is ready to provide 140000 labor to US. With current laws tell me what will happen to US economy? Will US Industry be able to get all 140000?
Will you still be trumpeting "Ceiling" drum?
more...
easygoer
07-23 01:51 PM
vldrao has done good job and we are thankful to him
2010 Charlotte Hornets Snapback Cap
ajthakur
07-15 02:32 AM
I filed for 485 during July 2007. My 140 was already approved. Due to some problems I quit my employer in August 2007. My previous employer was a desi blood sucker. I was fed up & decided to quit after working for him for 3 years. I applied for H1 transfer with a new employer based on approved 140. I got H1 approval for another 3 years. Currently I am working for the new H1 sponsoring employer. I also received an EAD card based on pending 485 for one year. I didnt notify USICS of job change in July.
I applied for EAD extension this year. The application for EAD extension is pending. I got a following RFE on my 485:
Please state whether or not you are currently working for your I-140 petitioner.
You must submit a currently dated letter from you permanent employer, describing your present job duties & position in the organization, your proferred position (if different from your current one), the date you began employement & the offered salary & wage. The letter must also indicate whether the terms & conditions of your employement based visa petition (or labor certification) continue to exist.
I am not in good terms with my previous employer so I cant ask him for a letter. I can ask my new employer for such a letter.
Also is it possible that 140 was revoked by my previous employer?
Why did they send a RFE instead of NOID in my case?
I applied for EAD extension this year. The application for EAD extension is pending. I got a following RFE on my 485:
Please state whether or not you are currently working for your I-140 petitioner.
You must submit a currently dated letter from you permanent employer, describing your present job duties & position in the organization, your proferred position (if different from your current one), the date you began employement & the offered salary & wage. The letter must also indicate whether the terms & conditions of your employement based visa petition (or labor certification) continue to exist.
I am not in good terms with my previous employer so I cant ask him for a letter. I can ask my new employer for such a letter.
Also is it possible that 140 was revoked by my previous employer?
Why did they send a RFE instead of NOID in my case?
more...
Googler
02-16 02:30 PM
That is one way to look at things. The important thing is, whether the Judge looks at the situation the same way. It will be tough job to convince the Judge. If you seek legal opinion from a lawyer, lawyers mostly tend to say that you have a case expecting that that lawyer will be the one filing the lawsuit (i.e. making the money). So be careful with the idea and advise from a lawyer.
And more importantly, even if 'we have a case', do we have folks who are willing to be plaintiff in this lawsuit. Are you or Googler or chandu (because he replied to my earlier posts suggesting that we will find someone to lead) willing to be the plaintiff, or are you encouraging others (putting the gun on other's shoulder to fire) to be the plaintiff. If you see that there is chance/value in filing lawsuit, why don't you decide to be the plaintiff? Either way, if you are a plaintiff or if you know someone who wants to be one, why don't you take this to IV team.
Say we have a case, then to go to the next step we need -
1.) Someone willing to take the initiative/lead
2.) Plaintiff
3.) Resources
4.) There maybe more that I am not able to think at this time, because I no experience of filing class action lawsuit.
How to find what we need to file lawsuit -
For (1.), I suggest someone willing to give out his/her name as plaintiff should contact IV. I saw that folks are discussing this on too, but that site is not a non-profit. That site is owned by some guy who is earning good money of off the ads on his site. He won't spend resources to file for lawsuit although he has made good money off of the woes of others tracking their green card case status. So the only viable option is to get IV involved.
For (2.), if you want to see this through, then, at least one of around 180 folks who voted for filing lawsuit should be willing to be the plaintiff. If not, then someone needs to make phone calls to find a possible plaintiff.
For (3.), as mentioned above, I don't know of any one organized effort other than IV to lead such an effort of a lawsuit.
Sanju, while I commend the thought you have put into this, note that the thinking on this is at a VERY VERY VERY preliminary stage. In real life class action lawsuits, named plaintiffs are chosen based on how well they fit the argument in the case, not the other way round. As I said upthread, all those who want decisions, deals, money etc RIGHT NOW are being pretty unrealistic -- probably just because of unfamiliarity with the progress of cases like this. I know people want to be reassured that there is NO risk of losing, every decision node is mapped out, responsibility assigned, but if that is what anyone is thinking they have to rejigger their thinking. ;-)
If I fit the argument that is eventually made, I'd be more than happy to be a named plaintiff. I also have no problem ponying up a significant amount of money once I'm convinced about the legal argument and the attorney in question.
And more importantly, even if 'we have a case', do we have folks who are willing to be plaintiff in this lawsuit. Are you or Googler or chandu (because he replied to my earlier posts suggesting that we will find someone to lead) willing to be the plaintiff, or are you encouraging others (putting the gun on other's shoulder to fire) to be the plaintiff. If you see that there is chance/value in filing lawsuit, why don't you decide to be the plaintiff? Either way, if you are a plaintiff or if you know someone who wants to be one, why don't you take this to IV team.
Say we have a case, then to go to the next step we need -
1.) Someone willing to take the initiative/lead
2.) Plaintiff
3.) Resources
4.) There maybe more that I am not able to think at this time, because I no experience of filing class action lawsuit.
How to find what we need to file lawsuit -
For (1.), I suggest someone willing to give out his/her name as plaintiff should contact IV. I saw that folks are discussing this on too, but that site is not a non-profit. That site is owned by some guy who is earning good money of off the ads on his site. He won't spend resources to file for lawsuit although he has made good money off of the woes of others tracking their green card case status. So the only viable option is to get IV involved.
For (2.), if you want to see this through, then, at least one of around 180 folks who voted for filing lawsuit should be willing to be the plaintiff. If not, then someone needs to make phone calls to find a possible plaintiff.
For (3.), as mentioned above, I don't know of any one organized effort other than IV to lead such an effort of a lawsuit.
Sanju, while I commend the thought you have put into this, note that the thinking on this is at a VERY VERY VERY preliminary stage. In real life class action lawsuits, named plaintiffs are chosen based on how well they fit the argument in the case, not the other way round. As I said upthread, all those who want decisions, deals, money etc RIGHT NOW are being pretty unrealistic -- probably just because of unfamiliarity with the progress of cases like this. I know people want to be reassured that there is NO risk of losing, every decision node is mapped out, responsibility assigned, but if that is what anyone is thinking they have to rejigger their thinking. ;-)
If I fit the argument that is eventually made, I'd be more than happy to be a named plaintiff. I also have no problem ponying up a significant amount of money once I'm convinced about the legal argument and the attorney in question.
hair Hornets Purple-Creole Blue
aps
09-23 02:26 AM
Most of us are waiting in line for years by sacrificing their career growth and earnings with the so called consulting companies. what for? To get a green card by buying a home here? Is it sensible? common. Bring some common solution to everybody, not for few. If you want to leave some IV members behind, then you may continue with this idea. your proposal DOES NOT MAKE ANY SENSE to me.
more...
morchu
06-13 11:10 AM
Dilip,
There are no excuses. You are closing the doors behind and trying to forget the path you came through.
Have you heard about globalization? We are not there yet, but that is inevitable. People and humanity are beyond the boundaries of countries or governments.
If a "low-cost" person can do the same job as you, and the employer is happy with the quality of the job, there is NO reason for you to cash-in more for the same job. Nobody is superior. Everybody deserves their chances, irrespective of their education or college or economic background.
I can understand similar wordings from non-thinking public who never had to face real human issues or have seen dirt of poverty. But that coming from somebody who went through the hardworking path is unbelievable.
Protectionalism comes from the mere thinking that, some deserve a better and easier life just because they happen to be "born" at some place, or because they happen to be there "earlier", and don't want to be threatened by smarter / hardworking humanity.
There are no excuses. You are closing the doors behind and trying to forget the path you came through.
Have you heard about globalization? We are not there yet, but that is inevitable. People and humanity are beyond the boundaries of countries or governments.
If a "low-cost" person can do the same job as you, and the employer is happy with the quality of the job, there is NO reason for you to cash-in more for the same job. Nobody is superior. Everybody deserves their chances, irrespective of their education or college or economic background.
I can understand similar wordings from non-thinking public who never had to face real human issues or have seen dirt of poverty. But that coming from somebody who went through the hardworking path is unbelievable.
Protectionalism comes from the mere thinking that, some deserve a better and easier life just because they happen to be "born" at some place, or because they happen to be there "earlier", and don't want to be threatened by smarter / hardworking humanity.
hot Charlotte Hornets Snapback
abhijitp
07-04 02:04 AM
Surprisingly, no mention there.
BTW here is their "general info" email address
info@competeamerica.org
BTW here is their "general info" email address
info@competeamerica.org
more...
house Follow the retro snapback
Law Loving Alien
08-30 01:38 PM
Hi,
I am canadian PR too. My understanding is you have to enter Canada with your Canadian PR within 6 months of getting your Canadian PR. However, you can immedietly come out of Canada and stay out of Canada for upto 3 years.
The residency requirement to maintain your Canadian PR is to be physically present in Canada for total of 2 years out of 5 years after 1st time you enter Canada in Canadian PR.
Experts...correct me if I am wrong...
I am canadian PR too. My understanding is you have to enter Canada with your Canadian PR within 6 months of getting your Canadian PR. However, you can immedietly come out of Canada and stay out of Canada for upto 3 years.
The residency requirement to maintain your Canadian PR is to be physically present in Canada for total of 2 years out of 5 years after 1st time you enter Canada in Canadian PR.
Experts...correct me if I am wrong...
tattoo The Hornets Snapback in Purple
pointlesswait
09-29 02:50 PM
like i had said in my earlier posts...this is retarded idea..to begin with...and still is..
cause...if anyone is even dreaming of buying a house thinking the home values are down ..think again..no matter how good ur credit rating is..you will have to pay high interest...and no one in their right mind will say that the home values have bottomed out..it will continue to fall ...
First of all for presuming that highly skilled immigrants who are waiting for GC are the only ones who can buy a house. Even 10 illegal aliens can come together and buy a house and share the mortgage.
Then, the economy is in it's cycle, it will pick up without more house buying. The issue is banks not lending to BUSINESSES not mortgages.
Most imporant, the proposal is same as saying "Sell me a GC". Ya, sure, that will pass the House and Senate.
Remember, nothing stops you from buying a house right now!!
cause...if anyone is even dreaming of buying a house thinking the home values are down ..think again..no matter how good ur credit rating is..you will have to pay high interest...and no one in their right mind will say that the home values have bottomed out..it will continue to fall ...
First of all for presuming that highly skilled immigrants who are waiting for GC are the only ones who can buy a house. Even 10 illegal aliens can come together and buy a house and share the mortgage.
Then, the economy is in it's cycle, it will pick up without more house buying. The issue is banks not lending to BUSINESSES not mortgages.
Most imporant, the proposal is same as saying "Sell me a GC". Ya, sure, that will pass the House and Senate.
Remember, nothing stops you from buying a house right now!!
more...
pictures The Hornets Snapback in Purple
thomachan72
01-14 09:14 AM
I think the other intersting point is - Does the employer provide any benefits to the beneficiary/employee?
Almost no desi dalla provides medical insurance to its employees...it will be interesting how USCIS handles this and whether they will make it a point or not?
what the heck are you talking about. If there is any specific cases of abuse please contact the CIS and report those. Dont say "almost all" etc on this website. That might not be true and we dont want general statements like these to hurt the prospects of our members.
Almost no desi dalla provides medical insurance to its employees...it will be interesting how USCIS handles this and whether they will make it a point or not?
what the heck are you talking about. If there is any specific cases of abuse please contact the CIS and report those. Dont say "almost all" etc on this website. That might not be true and we dont want general statements like these to hurt the prospects of our members.
dresses VNDS HORNETS SNAPBACK 25$
WeldonSprings
09-15 04:36 PM
Hello Sachug 22,
Where are you getting numbers for EB2 India for 2005 to be 10000, when total labor approved for 2005 were just 6133 (for all countries).
Thanks,
WeldonSprings.
2004 2000
2005 10000
2006 13000
2007(july) 5000
Here are my Estimate of pending EB2 India case for give years
<=2004 2000
2005 10000
2006 13000
2007(july) 5000
==============
Total 30000
==============
This number is very close to Ron Gocthers number prediction a few months back (minus sept approvals).
Collaboration on visa quota data/analysis - Page 6 - Immigration Information Discussion Forum (http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/general-immigration-questions/8419-collaboration-on-visa-quota-data-analysis-6.html)
Pending as of 15 July 2009 145000
EB2 50000
EB3 94000
EB2India (2.4/3.5 EB2) 35714
We can use the LCA number and come close these numbers as well
2005
EB2 India LCA for 2005 = RIR (3000) + PERM (60% of 7290) ~ 7400
Assuming 20% abandon applicant we get = 5900
1.2 dependent per applicant give ~ 13000 I-485 applicantions
Assuming 10% approved in 2008 and 10% rejected/abandon I-485 and 5% cross-charageability we get => pending 10000 pending I-485 application for 2005
2006
India PERM applications = 18000
EB2 India PERM applications (60%) = 10800
Assuming 20% abandon applicant we get = 8640
1.2 dependent per applicant give ~ 19000 I-485 applicantions
Assuming 10% approved in 2008 and 10% rejected/abandon I-485 and 10% cross-charageability we get => pending 13000 pending I-485 application for 2006
So if we see spillover of more than 30K the date will move beyond July 2007.
Where are you getting numbers for EB2 India for 2005 to be 10000, when total labor approved for 2005 were just 6133 (for all countries).
Thanks,
WeldonSprings.
2004 2000
2005 10000
2006 13000
2007(july) 5000
Here are my Estimate of pending EB2 India case for give years
<=2004 2000
2005 10000
2006 13000
2007(july) 5000
==============
Total 30000
==============
This number is very close to Ron Gocthers number prediction a few months back (minus sept approvals).
Collaboration on visa quota data/analysis - Page 6 - Immigration Information Discussion Forum (http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/general-immigration-questions/8419-collaboration-on-visa-quota-data-analysis-6.html)
Pending as of 15 July 2009 145000
EB2 50000
EB3 94000
EB2India (2.4/3.5 EB2) 35714
We can use the LCA number and come close these numbers as well
2005
EB2 India LCA for 2005 = RIR (3000) + PERM (60% of 7290) ~ 7400
Assuming 20% abandon applicant we get = 5900
1.2 dependent per applicant give ~ 13000 I-485 applicantions
Assuming 10% approved in 2008 and 10% rejected/abandon I-485 and 5% cross-charageability we get => pending 10000 pending I-485 application for 2005
2006
India PERM applications = 18000
EB2 India PERM applications (60%) = 10800
Assuming 20% abandon applicant we get = 8640
1.2 dependent per applicant give ~ 19000 I-485 applicantions
Assuming 10% approved in 2008 and 10% rejected/abandon I-485 and 10% cross-charageability we get => pending 13000 pending I-485 application for 2006
So if we see spillover of more than 30K the date will move beyond July 2007.
more...
makeup basketball boston celtics hats
vikki76
05-11 01:27 AM
E3 visa is not enough reason to move to Australia.If ultimate decision is to come back to US ,then Canada is a better choice.
Lot of couples are there who are both on H1-B visa here, their GC plight is also same
Lot of couples are there who are both on H1-B visa here, their GC plight is also same
girlfriend Charlotte Hornets Mamp;N Teal
GCapplicant
01-22 02:26 PM
Recently , Immi officers are randomly dashing thru H1B sponsor companies ,where any H1B petitions have gone thru or waiting for renewal. NJ -
So guess its getting tougher - They have set of questions - from POEntry date with eaxct details of the petitioner.
How many H1's the company has issued , salary matching with Tax copies.
Guess - if the company has no base or structure , the so called employees name inot there physically or the whereabouts .
This happened today a checking in NJ. All the papers should be in hand
Its getting tougher
So guess its getting tougher - They have set of questions - from POEntry date with eaxct details of the petitioner.
How many H1's the company has issued , salary matching with Tax copies.
Guess - if the company has no base or structure , the so called employees name inot there physically or the whereabouts .
This happened today a checking in NJ. All the papers should be in hand
Its getting tougher
hairstyles Hornets #39;BIG CITY PUNCH
venetian
05-11 03:38 PM
Kodi,
From the bottom of your heart can you tell the forum that there was no discrimination against Tamils in Sri Lanka after its independence from Great Britain.
War is in the northern and eastern provinces. Sinhala and Muslims were driven out of this area by the LTTE. Tamils live all over the country. Tamils lead regular life in other areas of the country that's not succumbed to the war, this includes the capital, colombo. They conduct business, attend universities/schools, they lead a regular life just like any other sinhala or muslims. Tamils lead prosperous lives in other parts than the north and east. The reason they can't live in the north or east is due to their own LTTE, the group that was supposed to liberate tamils.
If there's ethnic cleansing or genocide against tamils, Sinhala and muslim people should be killing tamils all over the country. This is not case in Sri Lanka. I have tamil friends and classmates, we went to school together. How come there are tamil ministers in the parliament. Parliment members Lakshman Kadirgamar and Jeyaraj Fernandopulle both tamils and were killed by the LTTE not the gov. How can this be ethnic cleansing?
From the bottom of your heart can you tell the forum that there was no discrimination against Tamils in Sri Lanka after its independence from Great Britain.
War is in the northern and eastern provinces. Sinhala and Muslims were driven out of this area by the LTTE. Tamils live all over the country. Tamils lead regular life in other areas of the country that's not succumbed to the war, this includes the capital, colombo. They conduct business, attend universities/schools, they lead a regular life just like any other sinhala or muslims. Tamils lead prosperous lives in other parts than the north and east. The reason they can't live in the north or east is due to their own LTTE, the group that was supposed to liberate tamils.
If there's ethnic cleansing or genocide against tamils, Sinhala and muslim people should be killing tamils all over the country. This is not case in Sri Lanka. I have tamil friends and classmates, we went to school together. How come there are tamil ministers in the parliament. Parliment members Lakshman Kadirgamar and Jeyaraj Fernandopulle both tamils and were killed by the LTTE not the gov. How can this be ethnic cleansing?
patiently_waiting
01-13 03:53 PM
makes the life very doomed.
Pineapple
12-14 05:10 PM
I can understand your concerns.. and no, I do no resent your comment. I rather welcome a different viewpoint! IV, I emphatically maintain is made up ordinary people, like you and me, regardless of nationality and culture. I'm not a core member, but that, in itself, is the point - there is no top-down hierarchy, no "party line". IV is us. It is the very embodiment of the philosophy, "Of the people, by the people, and for the people" .
If it were any different, I would not be here.
That said, let me address your concerns. You (and anyone else) is free to disagree.
Let us say all country quotas are removed. In that case, yes, you will see a majority of GCs going to people of Indian and Chinese extraction. But to say that the removal of country quota is going to disadvantage people of other countries is a mathematical fallacy.
Let me explain it this way, using an analogy. Suppose you take part in a lotto game. The prizes (GC) are limited. Say there is only one prize and you have 100 participants. Also, further, let us say 80 are from California and 20 are from Pennsylvania.
If you play the game several times, you will see that 80 % of the prizes go to people from California.
But, that does not mean that you will improve your chances of winning if you move from Pennsylvania to California!!
Your odds are exactly the same - 1 in 100.
Removing country quotas would have the same consequence: If would actually give everyone a level playing field, and everyone would have the same shot at making the coveted quota of 140,000 EB GCs.
But when you have quotas, the probabilities are severely distorted. Especially when you have arbitrary quotas. (Why 7 %? Why not 9 %? Why not 5.247 %?).
In this case, if you are from India or China, you are seriously disadvantaged, while someone from a smaller country gets an unfair advantage. This is not complex political philosophy. It is school boy arithmetic.
You see what I mean?
When an Indian or Chinese asks for no country quotas, he/she is not asking for more.. He/she can no more control the wind as control where he/she is born. He/she is just asking to have a fair chance just as anyone else in the world. Why should he/she be penalized for being born in a big country?
I hope you see what I mean.
Anyway, the thread is about whether we can make a constitutionality argument in the court. The issue of "fairness" is quite settled as I explained above.
I know what I am about to say will trigger a lot of reaction and some resentment, but it has to be said on behalf of those who are not Indian. I think the per country limit is to ensure that people of all nationalities and races have an equal opportunity to obtain a green card and to ensure that no one nationality, group, or even sector (i.e. IT) monopolizes the so few visas that are available. In fact, in the visa lottery, countries become excluded when the number of immigrants from them reach a certain point, so we are lucky they do not do that in the Employment-based system!
I think that by wanting to remove the per country limit so more Indians can avail of the green card quota is both asking for "special treatment" and a slap in the face for all the non-Indian IV members. The more I read the threads on this site, the more I feel that this organization is geared just to one ethnic group. I am sure that Indians probably make up the majority of members, but the founders of IV (I hope) did not want this organization to become one-sided! Please be considerate of ALL members and try to come up with suggestions that would benefit ALL members!!!:mad:
If it were any different, I would not be here.
That said, let me address your concerns. You (and anyone else) is free to disagree.
Let us say all country quotas are removed. In that case, yes, you will see a majority of GCs going to people of Indian and Chinese extraction. But to say that the removal of country quota is going to disadvantage people of other countries is a mathematical fallacy.
Let me explain it this way, using an analogy. Suppose you take part in a lotto game. The prizes (GC) are limited. Say there is only one prize and you have 100 participants. Also, further, let us say 80 are from California and 20 are from Pennsylvania.
If you play the game several times, you will see that 80 % of the prizes go to people from California.
But, that does not mean that you will improve your chances of winning if you move from Pennsylvania to California!!
Your odds are exactly the same - 1 in 100.
Removing country quotas would have the same consequence: If would actually give everyone a level playing field, and everyone would have the same shot at making the coveted quota of 140,000 EB GCs.
But when you have quotas, the probabilities are severely distorted. Especially when you have arbitrary quotas. (Why 7 %? Why not 9 %? Why not 5.247 %?).
In this case, if you are from India or China, you are seriously disadvantaged, while someone from a smaller country gets an unfair advantage. This is not complex political philosophy. It is school boy arithmetic.
You see what I mean?
When an Indian or Chinese asks for no country quotas, he/she is not asking for more.. He/she can no more control the wind as control where he/she is born. He/she is just asking to have a fair chance just as anyone else in the world. Why should he/she be penalized for being born in a big country?
I hope you see what I mean.
Anyway, the thread is about whether we can make a constitutionality argument in the court. The issue of "fairness" is quite settled as I explained above.
I know what I am about to say will trigger a lot of reaction and some resentment, but it has to be said on behalf of those who are not Indian. I think the per country limit is to ensure that people of all nationalities and races have an equal opportunity to obtain a green card and to ensure that no one nationality, group, or even sector (i.e. IT) monopolizes the so few visas that are available. In fact, in the visa lottery, countries become excluded when the number of immigrants from them reach a certain point, so we are lucky they do not do that in the Employment-based system!
I think that by wanting to remove the per country limit so more Indians can avail of the green card quota is both asking for "special treatment" and a slap in the face for all the non-Indian IV members. The more I read the threads on this site, the more I feel that this organization is geared just to one ethnic group. I am sure that Indians probably make up the majority of members, but the founders of IV (I hope) did not want this organization to become one-sided! Please be considerate of ALL members and try to come up with suggestions that would benefit ALL members!!!:mad:
