supers789
07-14 04:18 PM
huh! looks like either not many ppl received audits.. or not many received response back ??
lagsam
04-11 08:43 PM
I think you can say 485 filed.
Actually I followed my previous filing from my lawyer and it is "Adjusting Applicant" or "AOS".
Actually I followed my previous filing from my lawyer and it is "Adjusting Applicant" or "AOS".
shirish
10-15 03:49 PM
Thankx for the info.
Once she goes from H4 to AOS(using EAD), it doesnt matter .she can work partime, FT or not work at all.
Once she goes from H4 to AOS(using EAD), it doesnt matter .she can work partime, FT or not work at all.
pitha
02-24 11:27 AM
People on H4 cannot get any sort of tution waiver like F1 guys can get with TA or RA
more...
mnkaushik
04-13 03:23 PM
Last weekend while chit chatting with my Indian neighbor, he told me that some of people he knows of got GC with their PD not being current. He said that his very good friend, who has a PD of 2005 for EB3, just got his GC. I kind of mentioned that may he applied for EB2 and did porting. But he was firm and said no his friend did not do it. He also went on to mention that his friend got a RFE and then once he responded to the RFE, he immediately got GC.
I know, for now this whole thing from my standpoint is hearsay. But I just would like to know if any of you have come across such cases. Just want to get an understanding of how much of this occurs. I am guessing it is a very small number.
I know, for now this whole thing from my standpoint is hearsay. But I just would like to know if any of you have come across such cases. Just want to get an understanding of how much of this occurs. I am guessing it is a very small number.
s416504
11-16 01:30 PM
After entering US on AP you need to inform you employer. Your status after entering on AP makes you a Parolee ??????????
Inform verbally/New I9 Form? I haven't done this in past. I did used AP 2-3 times in past & haven't informed employer. What employer is going to do if we inform that we are on parolee status? Any USCIS law tells this to do?
Can any lawyer comment on this situation?
If you enter US using your AP even for the same employer you will no longer have your H1B status valid, you an return back to H1B status only after a renewal. After entering US on AP you need to inform you employer. Your status after entering on AP makes you a Parolee.
Inform verbally/New I9 Form? I haven't done this in past. I did used AP 2-3 times in past & haven't informed employer. What employer is going to do if we inform that we are on parolee status? Any USCIS law tells this to do?
Can any lawyer comment on this situation?
If you enter US using your AP even for the same employer you will no longer have your H1B status valid, you an return back to H1B status only after a renewal. After entering US on AP you need to inform you employer. Your status after entering on AP makes you a Parolee.
more...
my_gc_wait
08-10 11:20 AM
1. You can ask them for H1 transfer and AC21 portability of your existing EB3 GC Process.
2. You can also ask them for doing EB2 processing, some employers have policy that they will do it after 6-12 months but you should do it before joining so that they can analyze if position suits EB2 needs.
And both of the above should be done before joining a new employer because before joining you are in better bargaining position provided you rocked the interviews.
2. You can also ask them for doing EB2 processing, some employers have policy that they will do it after 6-12 months but you should do it before joining so that they can analyze if position suits EB2 needs.
And both of the above should be done before joining a new employer because before joining you are in better bargaining position provided you rocked the interviews.
chanduv23
09-15 10:12 PM
the ones I meet in DC. The ones I currently have, who did not make it to DC in spite of being aware about it, will no longer have me as a friend.
SAME HERE - THOSE WHO HAVE STOPPED CALLING ME BECAUSE THEY ARE AFRAID I WILL ASK THEM TO THE RALLY WILL NEVER BE MY FRIENDS ANYMORE.
SAME HERE - THOSE WHO HAVE STOPPED CALLING ME BECAUSE THEY ARE AFRAID I WILL ASK THEM TO THE RALLY WILL NEVER BE MY FRIENDS ANYMORE.
more...
tinamatthew
07-21 12:05 AM
OK agreed , when it's a law we should abide by them.But what are the other options available for B? He can't be covered under 245(K) so this option is ruled out.He needs to forget about GC? Will it be helpful if he contacts good lawyer any hope? Or just rely on luck?
If this is a real scenario, then if I was him/her I would only give the last 3 paystubs, W2s, tax returns. If the USCIS can't guess that I have no paystubs for 185 days then I will not hand it to them on a platter. I would however answer EVERY question TRUTHFULLY on all forms completed
If this is a real scenario, then if I was him/her I would only give the last 3 paystubs, W2s, tax returns. If the USCIS can't guess that I have no paystubs for 185 days then I will not hand it to them on a platter. I would however answer EVERY question TRUTHFULLY on all forms completed
abq_gc
07-18 06:16 PM
HI Guys,
How do you decide, whether to file at NSC or TSC ?
How do you decide, whether to file at NSC or TSC ?
more...
gsrknth
08-22 11:12 AM
I applied on June 12 (paper file) at TSC , Notice date June 18th , RD June 13th and received EAD cards on Aug 18th (CPO mail on Aug 15th).
Hope this info helps.
Hope this info helps.
franklin
07-05 10:39 PM
If people want to send flowers, let them send flowers. I really don't see the point, but whatever
But please - do we need multiple polls and threads about this? How many of the 200 that are apparently ready (although this number differs on the 3 or so other polls, and countless other threads on this subject) have done actual IV action items?
Admins - please close this.
But please - do we need multiple polls and threads about this? How many of the 200 that are apparently ready (although this number differs on the 3 or so other polls, and countless other threads on this subject) have done actual IV action items?
Admins - please close this.
more...
Ann Ruben
06-26 09:48 AM
the answer you got is correct. you can sign as the child's father. I agree that the law is inhumane, but sadly it is the law. The baby's young age alone will not suffice as a basis for Humanitarian Parole. Again, I urge you to consult with an experienced lawyer before proceeding.
patelkirti
04-17 08:55 AM
Hi All,
I am an aspiring US immigrant, and currently work with a desi-like employer who has not been paying me for last 3 months. I have resigned and started working at a new employer, using portability options. I will also contact DOL and report this to get my money back, however, DOL may not be able to recover it if the employer files for bankruptcy. I donot care much about money now, as its not too much and my new job increment covers it.
Here are my questions
1) Is there a way i can report this misdoing to USCIS directly. Is there any phone number/contact info to report frauds on I-140s and I-485s as he is holding some employees hostage (not allowing them to move out because of this situation where your money is stuck and so is your immigration).
2) What else should i do to make this injustice visible? I will work with DOl and get my money back.
3) I am thinking of reporting this directly to the I-140 processing centers. Is this is a good idea?
PK
I am an aspiring US immigrant, and currently work with a desi-like employer who has not been paying me for last 3 months. I have resigned and started working at a new employer, using portability options. I will also contact DOL and report this to get my money back, however, DOL may not be able to recover it if the employer files for bankruptcy. I donot care much about money now, as its not too much and my new job increment covers it.
Here are my questions
1) Is there a way i can report this misdoing to USCIS directly. Is there any phone number/contact info to report frauds on I-140s and I-485s as he is holding some employees hostage (not allowing them to move out because of this situation where your money is stuck and so is your immigration).
2) What else should i do to make this injustice visible? I will work with DOl and get my money back.
3) I am thinking of reporting this directly to the I-140 processing centers. Is this is a good idea?
PK
more...
gcdreamer05
07-03 02:01 PM
Please dont take risk travelling while the h1b petition is pending.
I would advice not to travel during this case.
I would advice not to travel during this case.
sjhugoose
February 15th, 2004, 05:54 PM
I have a Sony DSC F717. I got it to photograph model trains, so it is almost lways in macro mode. Frequently, the image blurs toawrds the back, even when set at the highest F-stop. The subject is usially about 5-12 inches away from the camera, depending on the model I am photographing. The models are about an inch high and up to 10 inches long.
I suspect a wide angle lense should help this, but sony has two available for their 58MM bezel. Am i right on this? Basically i want close up on full manual with
as good a depth of fied as possible. Here are the choises:
http://www.sonystyle.com/is-bin/INTERSHOP.enfinity/eCS/Store/en/-/USD/SY_DisplayProductInformation-Start;sid=C5ukSQtNKAGkcEti_UiuQkRd1gcWOHL-Dh0=?CategoryName=dcc_DIAccessories_DILensesandFil ters_Lenses&Dept=dcc&TemplateName=item%2fsy_item_b&ProductSKU=VCLMHG07A
This one costs $150, includes two peice glass.
http://www.sonystyle.com/is-bin/INTERSHOP.enfinity/eCS/Store/en/-/USD/SY_DisplayProductInformation-Start;sid=C5ukSQtNKAGkcEti_UiuQkRd1gcWOHL-Dh0=?CategoryName=dcc_DIAccessories_DILensesandFil ters_Lenses&Dept=dcc&TemplateName=item%2fsy_item_b&ProductSKU=VCLHG0758
This one is $400, and is a three peice glass.
Both have the same .7x magnification. Wich one should I get?
Your experiencing an effect called Depth of Field(DOF). This is commen and usally you want to minimize it for effect but not in your case.
You will need to learn to use a DOF calculator, there is one on this site but it does not include the 2/3" sensor sive you camera has. A better one for you right now may be this calculator here: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikoncp5700/page2.asp
Using this you can determine the distance you need, focal length and distance to subject to obtain the desired DOF. Currently on the wide end of your camera, you'll need to move about a 1.5 feet from the focus point with f8 to get the DOF you desire. If you get the WA adaptor you'll be able to move closer to about .9 feet from the focus point and still obtain the DOF you desire.
You'll never be able to be within 5 inches from the object and obtain the DOF you desire, it simply is not possible with you camera. As to which WA adaptor to get? I don't know. I've never used anything of the sort so I can not answer that question for you.
Scott
I suspect a wide angle lense should help this, but sony has two available for their 58MM bezel. Am i right on this? Basically i want close up on full manual with
as good a depth of fied as possible. Here are the choises:
http://www.sonystyle.com/is-bin/INTERSHOP.enfinity/eCS/Store/en/-/USD/SY_DisplayProductInformation-Start;sid=C5ukSQtNKAGkcEti_UiuQkRd1gcWOHL-Dh0=?CategoryName=dcc_DIAccessories_DILensesandFil ters_Lenses&Dept=dcc&TemplateName=item%2fsy_item_b&ProductSKU=VCLMHG07A
This one costs $150, includes two peice glass.
http://www.sonystyle.com/is-bin/INTERSHOP.enfinity/eCS/Store/en/-/USD/SY_DisplayProductInformation-Start;sid=C5ukSQtNKAGkcEti_UiuQkRd1gcWOHL-Dh0=?CategoryName=dcc_DIAccessories_DILensesandFil ters_Lenses&Dept=dcc&TemplateName=item%2fsy_item_b&ProductSKU=VCLHG0758
This one is $400, and is a three peice glass.
Both have the same .7x magnification. Wich one should I get?
Your experiencing an effect called Depth of Field(DOF). This is commen and usally you want to minimize it for effect but not in your case.
You will need to learn to use a DOF calculator, there is one on this site but it does not include the 2/3" sensor sive you camera has. A better one for you right now may be this calculator here: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikoncp5700/page2.asp
Using this you can determine the distance you need, focal length and distance to subject to obtain the desired DOF. Currently on the wide end of your camera, you'll need to move about a 1.5 feet from the focus point with f8 to get the DOF you desire. If you get the WA adaptor you'll be able to move closer to about .9 feet from the focus point and still obtain the DOF you desire.
You'll never be able to be within 5 inches from the object and obtain the DOF you desire, it simply is not possible with you camera. As to which WA adaptor to get? I don't know. I've never used anything of the sort so I can not answer that question for you.
Scott
more...
Anders �stberg
June 18th, 2005, 11:18 PM
On my monitor it looks too grey and washed out... I guess what this shows is there is a big difference in monitors, the printed product is perhaps what counts in the end. I've been thinking of replacing my monitors, they are getting old and I can't get them quite right according to the Eye One calibration software.
purgan
01-22 11:35 AM
http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/5585.html
The Immigrant Technologist:
Studying Technology Transfer with China
Q&A with: William Kerr and Michael Roberts
Published: January 22, 2007
Author: Michael Roberts
Executive Summary:
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain? Professor William Kerr discusses the phenomena of technology transfer and implications for U.S.-based businesses and policymakers.
The trend of Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs staying home rather than moving to the United States is a trend that potentially offers both harm and opportunity to U.S.-based interests.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S. and are strong contributors to American technology development. It is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group.
U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries, around 15 percent today. U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain?
Q: Describe your research and how it relates to what you observed in China.
A: My research focuses on technology transfer through ethnic scientific and entrepreneurial networks. Traditional models of technology diffusion suggest that if you have a great idea, people who are ten feet away from you will learn about that idea first, followed by people who are 100 miles away, and so forth in concentric circles. My research on ethnic networks suggests this channel facilitates faster knowledge transfer and faster adoption of foreign technologies. For example, if the Chinese have a strong presence in the U.S. computer industry, relative to other ethnic groups, then computer technologies diffuse faster to China than elsewhere. This is true even for computer advances made by Americans, as the U.S.-based Chinese increase awareness and tacit knowledge development regarding these advances in their home country.
Q: Is your research relevant to other countries as well?
China is at a tipping point for entrepreneurship on an international scale.A: Yes, I have extended my empirical work to include over thirty industries and nine ethnicities, including Indian, Japanese, Korean, and Hispanic. It is very important to develop a broad sample to quantify correctly the overall importance of these networks. The Silicon Valley Chinese are a very special case, and my work seeks to understand the larger benefit these networks provide throughout the global economy. These macroeconomic findings are important inputs to business and policy circles.
Q: What makes technology transfer happen? Is it entrepreneurial opportunity in the home country, a loyalty to the home country, or government policies that encourage or require people to come home?
A: It's all of those. Surveys of these diasporic communities suggest they aid their home countries through both formal business relationships and informal contacts. Formal mechanisms run the spectrum from direct financial investment in overseas businesses that pursue technology opportunities to facilitating contracts and market awareness. Informal contacts are more frequent�the evidence we have suggests they are at least twice as common�and even more diverse in nature. Ongoing research will allow us to better distinguish these channels. A Beijing scholar we met on the trip, Henry Wang, and I are currently surveying a large population of Chinese entrepreneurs to paint a more comprehensive picture of the micro-underpinnings of this phenomena.
Q: What about multinational corporations? How do they fit into this scenario?
A: One of the strongest trends of globalization is that U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries. About 5 percent of U.S.-sponsored R&D was done in foreign countries in the 1980s, and that number is around 15 percent today. We visited Microsoft's R&D center in Beijing to learn more about its R&D efforts and interactions with the U.S. parent. This facility was founded in the late 1990s, and it has already grown to house a third of Microsoft's basic-science R&D researchers. More broadly, HBS assistant professor Fritz Foley and I are working on a research project that has found that U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals like Microsoft help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Q: Does your research have implications for U.S. policy?
A: One implication concerns immigration levels. It is interesting to note that while immigrants account for about 15 percent of the U.S. working population, they account for almost half of our Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers. Even within the Ph.D. ranks, foreign-born individuals have a disproportionate number of Nobel Prizes, elections to the National Academy of Sciences, patent citations, and so forth. They are a very strong contributor to U.S. technology development, so it is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group. It is one of the easiest policy levers we have to influence our nation's rate of innovation.
Q: Are countries that send their scholars to the United States losing their best and brightest?
A: My research shows that having these immigrant scientists, entrepreneurs, and engineers in the United States helps facilitate faster technology transfer from the United States, which in turn aids economic growth and development. This is certainly a positive benefit diasporas bring to their home countries. It is important to note, however, that a number of factors should be considered in the "brain drain" versus "brain gain" debate, for which I do not think there is a clear answer today.
Q: Where does China stand in relation to some of the classic tiger economies that we've seen in the past in terms of technology transfer?
A: Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, and similar smaller economies have achieved a full transition from agriculture-based economies to industrialized economies. In those situations, technology transfer increases labor productivity and wages directly. The interesting thing about China and also India is that about half of their populations are still employed in the agricultural sector. In this scenario, technology transfer may lead to faster sector reallocation�workers moving from agriculture to industry�which can weaken wage growth compared with the classic tiger economy example. This is an interesting dynamic we see in China today.
Q: The export growth that technology may engender is only one prong of the mechanism that helps economic development. Does technology also make purely domestic industries more productive?
A: Absolutely. My research shows that countries do increase their exports in industries that receive large technology infusions, but non-exporting industries also benefit from technology gains. Moreover, the technology transfer can raise wages in sectors that do not rely on technology to the extent there is labor mobility across sectors. A hairdresser in the United States, for example, makes more money than a hairdresser in China, and that is due in large part to the wage equilibrium that occurs across occupations and skill categories within an economy. Technology transfer may alter the wage premiums assigned to certain skill sets, for example, increasing the wage gaps between skilled and unskilled workers, but the wage shifts can feed across sectors through labor mobility.
Q: What are the implications for the future?
A: Historically, the United States has been very successful at the retention of foreign-born, Ph.D.-level scientists, inventors, and entrepreneurs. As China and India continue to develop, they will become more attractive places to live and to start companies. The returnee pattern may accelerate as foreign infrastructures become more developed for entrepreneurship. This is not going to happen over the next three years, but it is quite likely over the next thirty to fifty years. My current research is exploring how this reverse migration would impact the United States' rate of progress.
About the author
Michael Roberts is a senior lecturer in the Entrepreneurial Management unit at Harvard Business School.
The Immigrant Technologist:
Studying Technology Transfer with China
Q&A with: William Kerr and Michael Roberts
Published: January 22, 2007
Author: Michael Roberts
Executive Summary:
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain? Professor William Kerr discusses the phenomena of technology transfer and implications for U.S.-based businesses and policymakers.
The trend of Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs staying home rather than moving to the United States is a trend that potentially offers both harm and opportunity to U.S.-based interests.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S. and are strong contributors to American technology development. It is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group.
U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries, around 15 percent today. U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain?
Q: Describe your research and how it relates to what you observed in China.
A: My research focuses on technology transfer through ethnic scientific and entrepreneurial networks. Traditional models of technology diffusion suggest that if you have a great idea, people who are ten feet away from you will learn about that idea first, followed by people who are 100 miles away, and so forth in concentric circles. My research on ethnic networks suggests this channel facilitates faster knowledge transfer and faster adoption of foreign technologies. For example, if the Chinese have a strong presence in the U.S. computer industry, relative to other ethnic groups, then computer technologies diffuse faster to China than elsewhere. This is true even for computer advances made by Americans, as the U.S.-based Chinese increase awareness and tacit knowledge development regarding these advances in their home country.
Q: Is your research relevant to other countries as well?
China is at a tipping point for entrepreneurship on an international scale.A: Yes, I have extended my empirical work to include over thirty industries and nine ethnicities, including Indian, Japanese, Korean, and Hispanic. It is very important to develop a broad sample to quantify correctly the overall importance of these networks. The Silicon Valley Chinese are a very special case, and my work seeks to understand the larger benefit these networks provide throughout the global economy. These macroeconomic findings are important inputs to business and policy circles.
Q: What makes technology transfer happen? Is it entrepreneurial opportunity in the home country, a loyalty to the home country, or government policies that encourage or require people to come home?
A: It's all of those. Surveys of these diasporic communities suggest they aid their home countries through both formal business relationships and informal contacts. Formal mechanisms run the spectrum from direct financial investment in overseas businesses that pursue technology opportunities to facilitating contracts and market awareness. Informal contacts are more frequent�the evidence we have suggests they are at least twice as common�and even more diverse in nature. Ongoing research will allow us to better distinguish these channels. A Beijing scholar we met on the trip, Henry Wang, and I are currently surveying a large population of Chinese entrepreneurs to paint a more comprehensive picture of the micro-underpinnings of this phenomena.
Q: What about multinational corporations? How do they fit into this scenario?
A: One of the strongest trends of globalization is that U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries. About 5 percent of U.S.-sponsored R&D was done in foreign countries in the 1980s, and that number is around 15 percent today. We visited Microsoft's R&D center in Beijing to learn more about its R&D efforts and interactions with the U.S. parent. This facility was founded in the late 1990s, and it has already grown to house a third of Microsoft's basic-science R&D researchers. More broadly, HBS assistant professor Fritz Foley and I are working on a research project that has found that U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals like Microsoft help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Q: Does your research have implications for U.S. policy?
A: One implication concerns immigration levels. It is interesting to note that while immigrants account for about 15 percent of the U.S. working population, they account for almost half of our Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers. Even within the Ph.D. ranks, foreign-born individuals have a disproportionate number of Nobel Prizes, elections to the National Academy of Sciences, patent citations, and so forth. They are a very strong contributor to U.S. technology development, so it is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group. It is one of the easiest policy levers we have to influence our nation's rate of innovation.
Q: Are countries that send their scholars to the United States losing their best and brightest?
A: My research shows that having these immigrant scientists, entrepreneurs, and engineers in the United States helps facilitate faster technology transfer from the United States, which in turn aids economic growth and development. This is certainly a positive benefit diasporas bring to their home countries. It is important to note, however, that a number of factors should be considered in the "brain drain" versus "brain gain" debate, for which I do not think there is a clear answer today.
Q: Where does China stand in relation to some of the classic tiger economies that we've seen in the past in terms of technology transfer?
A: Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, and similar smaller economies have achieved a full transition from agriculture-based economies to industrialized economies. In those situations, technology transfer increases labor productivity and wages directly. The interesting thing about China and also India is that about half of their populations are still employed in the agricultural sector. In this scenario, technology transfer may lead to faster sector reallocation�workers moving from agriculture to industry�which can weaken wage growth compared with the classic tiger economy example. This is an interesting dynamic we see in China today.
Q: The export growth that technology may engender is only one prong of the mechanism that helps economic development. Does technology also make purely domestic industries more productive?
A: Absolutely. My research shows that countries do increase their exports in industries that receive large technology infusions, but non-exporting industries also benefit from technology gains. Moreover, the technology transfer can raise wages in sectors that do not rely on technology to the extent there is labor mobility across sectors. A hairdresser in the United States, for example, makes more money than a hairdresser in China, and that is due in large part to the wage equilibrium that occurs across occupations and skill categories within an economy. Technology transfer may alter the wage premiums assigned to certain skill sets, for example, increasing the wage gaps between skilled and unskilled workers, but the wage shifts can feed across sectors through labor mobility.
Q: What are the implications for the future?
A: Historically, the United States has been very successful at the retention of foreign-born, Ph.D.-level scientists, inventors, and entrepreneurs. As China and India continue to develop, they will become more attractive places to live and to start companies. The returnee pattern may accelerate as foreign infrastructures become more developed for entrepreneurship. This is not going to happen over the next three years, but it is quite likely over the next thirty to fifty years. My current research is exploring how this reverse migration would impact the United States' rate of progress.
About the author
Michael Roberts is a senior lecturer in the Entrepreneurial Management unit at Harvard Business School.
singhsa3
04-12 02:57 PM
Nice thoughts Harvinder,
But this exactly what we tried to do through the recent campaign on admin fixes..
Hi Friends and Administrators,
I have a suggestion. I am sure the administrators here have much better ideas than mine but I would request administrators to please read this suggestion with an open mind. It might be useful for the community.
I am sure we have enough members working for big companies like Microsoft, Google, Yahoo, Intel etc. The past experiences tell us that congress listens to these companies more than us even if we are making a valid point on the legal immigration issues. The irony here is that these companied care for H1 visa expansion not green card quota expansion. These big companies do not realize the benefit of green card quota expansion to them.
Let me prove how. A large proportion of the immigration community is working for small companies as consultants. Their immigration status makes changing jobs very difficult. Now I am sure if the people stuck in GC process get there GC thousands of people will not be forced to work for consultant companies and will look for permanent jobs. And these big companies are sitting on the top of the most desired companies to work for. These thousands of consultants will be more than happy to work for these big companies after they get there GC.
My point here is that if we can have these Companies speak for us, our voices can be heard by congress.
How this can be done: If immigrants working for these companies as consultants or permanent can start a chain of email and send a signed copy with hundred of signatures to the management, management might think of putting these points across to congress.
The contents of this email should be simple and achievable. Like
1. Recapture of unused Visas.
2. Get rid of the country quota. (This one is difficult but very beneficial).
3. Except US graduates form quota. (This one is controversial in IV community, but if US graduates are out of the quota every one is benefited. US graduates will be benefited more, but others will be benefited because there will be less number of people to share the quota. I mention this one because this point can get big support for the universities also, and I am sure congress does not ignore a voice coming form the universities.
About increasing the quota it is difficult and will not help much if the country quota is still exists.
If the email submitted to the management contain thousands of signatures from immigrants working for here company and people who support these immigrants in the company management and people like Bill Gates might talk to the congress to hemp us.
May be it is 2 cents suggestion but I would like the administrators to think out it with a open mind.
Thanks,
But this exactly what we tried to do through the recent campaign on admin fixes..
Hi Friends and Administrators,
I have a suggestion. I am sure the administrators here have much better ideas than mine but I would request administrators to please read this suggestion with an open mind. It might be useful for the community.
I am sure we have enough members working for big companies like Microsoft, Google, Yahoo, Intel etc. The past experiences tell us that congress listens to these companies more than us even if we are making a valid point on the legal immigration issues. The irony here is that these companied care for H1 visa expansion not green card quota expansion. These big companies do not realize the benefit of green card quota expansion to them.
Let me prove how. A large proportion of the immigration community is working for small companies as consultants. Their immigration status makes changing jobs very difficult. Now I am sure if the people stuck in GC process get there GC thousands of people will not be forced to work for consultant companies and will look for permanent jobs. And these big companies are sitting on the top of the most desired companies to work for. These thousands of consultants will be more than happy to work for these big companies after they get there GC.
My point here is that if we can have these Companies speak for us, our voices can be heard by congress.
How this can be done: If immigrants working for these companies as consultants or permanent can start a chain of email and send a signed copy with hundred of signatures to the management, management might think of putting these points across to congress.
The contents of this email should be simple and achievable. Like
1. Recapture of unused Visas.
2. Get rid of the country quota. (This one is difficult but very beneficial).
3. Except US graduates form quota. (This one is controversial in IV community, but if US graduates are out of the quota every one is benefited. US graduates will be benefited more, but others will be benefited because there will be less number of people to share the quota. I mention this one because this point can get big support for the universities also, and I am sure congress does not ignore a voice coming form the universities.
About increasing the quota it is difficult and will not help much if the country quota is still exists.
If the email submitted to the management contain thousands of signatures from immigrants working for here company and people who support these immigrants in the company management and people like Bill Gates might talk to the congress to hemp us.
May be it is 2 cents suggestion but I would like the administrators to think out it with a open mind.
Thanks,
chanduv23
04-22 11:58 AM
There is a high possibility that more RFEs are being issued as there is a lot of background processing going on. Th economy is down and there might be instructions from top to review cases closely.
A denial can happen when RFEs are not responded in time.
From what I have been seeing on forum - all RFEs that people got for i 485 are not something difficult to answer.
If you look at RFEs for h1bs - some are very complicated and these days Attorneys are charging around 3K for responding to RFE with no guarantee
A denial can happen when RFEs are not responded in time.
From what I have been seeing on forum - all RFEs that people got for i 485 are not something difficult to answer.
If you look at RFEs for h1bs - some are very complicated and these days Attorneys are charging around 3K for responding to RFE with no guarantee
sertasheep
07-26 09:55 PM
Nice.
No comments:
Post a Comment