gcnirvana
09-10 01:36 PM
Just completed a one-time contribution of $200 towards the rally. Its highly unfortunate that I will not able to come to the rally. But my contributions will continue in form of money and other efforts till our goals are reached.
Here is the confirmation on my paypal trx: 7F411123HE851093R
Go IV Go!!!
Here is the confirmation on my paypal trx: 7F411123HE851093R
Go IV Go!!!
wallpaper wallpaper lineage 2 the
xyzgc
02-09 09:49 PM
My stand is based on the premise that a man is financially responsible for his wife and his kids and not to wife's parents! The point I was making is about a completely non working spouse. It is not about a wife that leaves workforce for medical reason temporarily.
Let us not confuse the responsibility towards a man's wife and kids with that of in-laws!
Using the same token, a man shouldn't expect/demand any property/cash from in-laws!
I'm perfectly OK with humanitarian and need based help. What crosses the line, according to me, is that 'taking for granted' attitude!
If the brother in OP's story is taking care of his parents, then this situation wouldn't have occurred. Look at it other way. If the man's parents are in need of money, it is better to ask the man instead of their son-in-law!
A man taking a stand and be done with it has a better chance of saving a marriage than a man caving to the demand and building resentment. Hey, if a man is willing to please his in-laws in all possible ways, then who are we to stop him! Let him enjoy!!
I think, gcisadawg, the problem is the structure of the indian society. This is true with westerners too but as much true.
An Indian/asian guy has to earn because he is perceived to be a bread winner. Unless he is properly settled he is not eligible for marriage.
On the other hand, if a girl is not career-oriented she can still get good husbands depending on her personality and so on.
And such girls invariably forfeit the right to send money to their parents. In such cases, one should not expect girl's parents to give her a share in their property. Its all clean.
You have Indian house wives (many of them) but you have fewer house husbands. Even if your wife works, it is supplementary income and not the main.
This is a complex equation and husbands and wives must understand the social structure we live in and adjust with each other.
Let us not confuse the responsibility towards a man's wife and kids with that of in-laws!
Using the same token, a man shouldn't expect/demand any property/cash from in-laws!
I'm perfectly OK with humanitarian and need based help. What crosses the line, according to me, is that 'taking for granted' attitude!
If the brother in OP's story is taking care of his parents, then this situation wouldn't have occurred. Look at it other way. If the man's parents are in need of money, it is better to ask the man instead of their son-in-law!
A man taking a stand and be done with it has a better chance of saving a marriage than a man caving to the demand and building resentment. Hey, if a man is willing to please his in-laws in all possible ways, then who are we to stop him! Let him enjoy!!
I think, gcisadawg, the problem is the structure of the indian society. This is true with westerners too but as much true.
An Indian/asian guy has to earn because he is perceived to be a bread winner. Unless he is properly settled he is not eligible for marriage.
On the other hand, if a girl is not career-oriented she can still get good husbands depending on her personality and so on.
And such girls invariably forfeit the right to send money to their parents. In such cases, one should not expect girl's parents to give her a share in their property. Its all clean.
You have Indian house wives (many of them) but you have fewer house husbands. Even if your wife works, it is supplementary income and not the main.
This is a complex equation and husbands and wives must understand the social structure we live in and adjust with each other.
chanduv23
06-13 12:36 PM
Come on folks - your contributions are highly appreciated
2011 lineage2 wallpaper. Lineage II
pappu
08-08 02:49 PM
Pappu - it is good to know that we are using the current mass media in this techie country (actually world...should say). Anything "Open" would yield good results.
My suggestion is not only contribution but also careful screening of opinions would be needed.
I will definitely love to contribute.
thanks MahaBharatGC ,
pls feel free to contribute and comment on other's op-eds if there are any suggestions to make them better.
My suggestion is not only contribution but also careful screening of opinions would be needed.
I will definitely love to contribute.
thanks MahaBharatGC ,
pls feel free to contribute and comment on other's op-eds if there are any suggestions to make them better.
more...
chanduv23
09-12 11:52 AM
can we put up forum threads here for state chapters or some kind of direct link or page for each individual state chapter
Doing state chapters through list servs is just not working out.
I think IV is trying to bring State Chapters also onto the website instead of individual list serves. I do not have any details, maybe pappu or Aman can throw light on this. But nevertheless, we can currently execute things in the way we are doing now.
Doing state chapters through list servs is just not working out.
I think IV is trying to bring State Chapters also onto the website instead of individual list serves. I do not have any details, maybe pappu or Aman can throw light on this. But nevertheless, we can currently execute things in the way we are doing now.
punjabi
09-10 08:59 PM
Its shocking!!! They've foolishly approved many 2006 cases and dont tell me it was unpredictable and now ppl with 2003 r still waiting....how logical is this? A bunch of A** H**** working there or what?
I know, this is very illogical. And very upsetting for the people who are waiting for a long long time. Hopefully, we'll see a shine in the clouds this year. A lot of people are aware now and have stood up against the "injustice" since last year, mainly through the efforts of IV.
And I strongly believe that higher is the volume of the prayers, sooner they get answered.
I know, this is very illogical. And very upsetting for the people who are waiting for a long long time. Hopefully, we'll see a shine in the clouds this year. A lot of people are aware now and have stood up against the "injustice" since last year, mainly through the efforts of IV.
And I strongly believe that higher is the volume of the prayers, sooner they get answered.
more...
s_r_e_e
09-10 02:29 PM
I am surprised that, many are surprised about the OCT dates! expected!
recapture or die! :)
recapture or die! :)
2010 Lineage 2 - Wallpaper 012
gcseeker2002
08-10 11:05 PM
I just got mail from lawyer with the Receipt nos for myself & Spouse got online. Receipt notices not yet received.
Hang on there everyone will get it sooner or later
I485 Filed: Jul 2nd 7:55 AM (received by R.Williams)
Revd at : NSC
Transferred to TSC: No
ND: Aug 7th
I-140 approved: Jun 2006 @ TSC
EB3 PD - May 2002
As per the tracking no. given by my lawyer, my app also received at 7.55 AM on July 2nd, signed by R.Williams , but my check not cashed yet, no receipts yet, what a mess....
Hang on there everyone will get it sooner or later
I485 Filed: Jul 2nd 7:55 AM (received by R.Williams)
Revd at : NSC
Transferred to TSC: No
ND: Aug 7th
I-140 approved: Jun 2006 @ TSC
EB3 PD - May 2002
As per the tracking no. given by my lawyer, my app also received at 7.55 AM on July 2nd, signed by R.Williams , but my check not cashed yet, no receipts yet, what a mess....
more...
gccube
07-19 02:29 AM
I personally believe that PD is more significant than the RD but it makes sense to me that RD may take precedence if the PD is current (as suggested by some members of the forum).
But if we think that at all times RD is the order they process them what would happen in this scenario
1. A guy with 2001 PD filed later and was 750,000 th guy in the queue of AOS applications.
2. After accepting all the apps USCIS retrogressed the dates to 2002 Jan. That means that USCIS is asking for AOS apps which satisfy this PD. That means that a visa no is available as of that date for adjudication so the first new application received(after they are retrogressed) will be 750,001 th application.
3. If RD is the only processing order at all times then 750,001th application will not be sent to an officer for review until all other 750,000 th applications with a better RD are processed.
4. Assuming that this takes 3 years (for example) then they are accepting an application today which they are not going to even look at in the next three years and this is not making sense to me.
5. If they are accepting the 750,001 th application because that application qualifies for a visa no then that should be processed before the other applications(barring for special cases FBi name check issues, RFEs etc). This means PD comes into picture when there is retrogression. So then they have to apply the same rule for the I-485 applications which are pending with them. They some how have to order them on the PD and I assume this should not be rocket science for them as that data is part of our AOS applications.
Thanks everyone for your inputs.
But if we think that at all times RD is the order they process them what would happen in this scenario
1. A guy with 2001 PD filed later and was 750,000 th guy in the queue of AOS applications.
2. After accepting all the apps USCIS retrogressed the dates to 2002 Jan. That means that USCIS is asking for AOS apps which satisfy this PD. That means that a visa no is available as of that date for adjudication so the first new application received(after they are retrogressed) will be 750,001 th application.
3. If RD is the only processing order at all times then 750,001th application will not be sent to an officer for review until all other 750,000 th applications with a better RD are processed.
4. Assuming that this takes 3 years (for example) then they are accepting an application today which they are not going to even look at in the next three years and this is not making sense to me.
5. If they are accepting the 750,001 th application because that application qualifies for a visa no then that should be processed before the other applications(barring for special cases FBi name check issues, RFEs etc). This means PD comes into picture when there is retrogression. So then they have to apply the same rule for the I-485 applications which are pending with them. They some how have to order them on the PD and I assume this should not be rocket science for them as that data is part of our AOS applications.
Thanks everyone for your inputs.
hair Lineage 2 - Wallpaper 007
kondur_007
12-10 04:20 PM
Does this mean that spill over is not "quarterly" as we've been discussing
Yes, that's is correct. and they clarified (once more) that "when spill over occurs, PD of oversubscribed countries will move together".
For example, if EB2 India and China has different PDs, spillover is not occuring.
Additionally, it looks like demand in Eb1 is high enough that spill over may not be big, and so even with spill over, EB2 PD will not cross 2005. (they are saying indirectly that dont hold the hopes for big jump in the last quarter this year....)
USCIS seems to be working very efficiently and has a good grasp on the number of applications now (at least it seems...). All that extra staff they hired for July 2007 fiasco is working now and there is not much new filing. System will stay efficient until the time comes for them to handle 12 million undocumented after the CIR.
Yes, that's is correct. and they clarified (once more) that "when spill over occurs, PD of oversubscribed countries will move together".
For example, if EB2 India and China has different PDs, spillover is not occuring.
Additionally, it looks like demand in Eb1 is high enough that spill over may not be big, and so even with spill over, EB2 PD will not cross 2005. (they are saying indirectly that dont hold the hopes for big jump in the last quarter this year....)
USCIS seems to be working very efficiently and has a good grasp on the number of applications now (at least it seems...). All that extra staff they hired for July 2007 fiasco is working now and there is not much new filing. System will stay efficient until the time comes for them to handle 12 million undocumented after the CIR.
more...
Macaca
07-18 08:18 PM
IV has accomplished the current mission in a very american way, of lobbying, on behalf,of a grassroots movement, and based on fairness. Besides acheiving the goals, it also demonstrates that the legal skilled community is ready to integrate into the American society.....
A small contribution for the future goals ... $500 today and more to come....
Thank you IV for your time, effort and support through the emotional roller coaster.
Thank you very very much! :D :D
A small contribution for the future goals ... $500 today and more to come....
Thank you IV for your time, effort and support through the emotional roller coaster.
Thank you very very much! :D :D
hot Lineage 2 - The chaotic
Aah_GC
07-11 12:13 PM
Try your best to find a job. The market is picking up. At least try to join one of those desi companies even if they are offering a low salary. Just get past this time without making your situation a whole lot more complex.
Dont worry about lawyers, your ex employer revoking I140 - all that stuff doesn't matter now - just go find a job.
I am not sure if I should be happy or sad with this news. I was laidoff recently and had applied for I-485 on July 17,2007 i.e. current processing date for TSC. Also with this bulletin I will be current (EB2 2006). I have not found a new job yet and my company has told me that they will be revoking my I-140 after 30 days. My company lawyers are not advising me much citing conflict of interest.
What options do I have? Will sending a new G-28 form at this time raise any issues that I do not have job with original employer as my PD is current and it is quite possible that my case maybe adjudicated. In the meantime if I do not sent new G-28 form I am not sure how much my company attorney will co-operate
Dont worry about lawyers, your ex employer revoking I140 - all that stuff doesn't matter now - just go find a job.
I am not sure if I should be happy or sad with this news. I was laidoff recently and had applied for I-485 on July 17,2007 i.e. current processing date for TSC. Also with this bulletin I will be current (EB2 2006). I have not found a new job yet and my company has told me that they will be revoking my I-140 after 30 days. My company lawyers are not advising me much citing conflict of interest.
What options do I have? Will sending a new G-28 form at this time raise any issues that I do not have job with original employer as my PD is current and it is quite possible that my case maybe adjudicated. In the meantime if I do not sent new G-28 form I am not sure how much my company attorney will co-operate
more...
house lineage2 wallpaper.
desi485
11-08 05:02 PM
Chandu,
Thank you for taking time writing the blog. People like you make this website so much helpful and valuable.
I found one very detailed thread on Ron Gotcher's website. He mentioned that cancellation or revocation of I-140 doesn't automatically revokes EAD.
this is quite interesting and a big relief if true.
Click to read yourself (http://immigration-information.com/forums/showpost.php?p=18946&postcount=28)
I would suggest to read this thread completely to anyone who is AOS candidate. Even if you are not thinking of changing your job, during current economy, anyone should be prepared to use AC21 if needed.
"An EAD remains valid until it expires or is explicitly revoked. Since most AOS denials flow from I-140 problems, an EAD card is not going to get revoked immediately. If nothing else, they have to wait until the interval for an I-140 appeal has lapsed - even if you don't appeal."
Thank you for taking time writing the blog. People like you make this website so much helpful and valuable.
I found one very detailed thread on Ron Gotcher's website. He mentioned that cancellation or revocation of I-140 doesn't automatically revokes EAD.
this is quite interesting and a big relief if true.
Click to read yourself (http://immigration-information.com/forums/showpost.php?p=18946&postcount=28)
I would suggest to read this thread completely to anyone who is AOS candidate. Even if you are not thinking of changing your job, during current economy, anyone should be prepared to use AC21 if needed.
"An EAD remains valid until it expires or is explicitly revoked. Since most AOS denials flow from I-140 problems, an EAD card is not going to get revoked immediately. If nothing else, they have to wait until the interval for an I-140 appeal has lapsed - even if you don't appeal."
tattoo Lineage2 Chronicle 5 Wallpaper
9years
12-03 08:03 AM
Congrats 9Years. What a big relief ...... Right !!! Finally DONE. I am waiting for the same moment .....
Hi Vayumahesh,
Thank you and you will get it soon. Best of luck.
Hi Vayumahesh,
Thank you and you will get it soon. Best of luck.
more...
pictures Lineage 2 - The chaotic
Napoleon
03-10 09:38 PM
Question #3 and #4 should conclude this discussion.
Also how do you define an established company.
If I stay employed for 2-3 yrs on my spouse's LLC and bring 200K each year, is that established?
From the above paragraph (quoted on Murthy site), it seems that it would be very much possible to just get self-employed (of course job description should be same and legal).
But here are the Questions:
1). How will USCIS be convinced that the original job offer was really the intended employment at the time the I-140 and I-485 were filed??
2). How do you prove to USCIS that the original job offer was something that you intended to take on getting your GC?
From the below excerpt (same Murthy site and part of above doc)
Ability of New Sponsor to Pay
m
The Memo clarifies that there should not be requests for "ability to pay" proof from the new sponsor as part of the I-140 approval process. However, the Memo does state that it would be appropriate to check the legitimacy of the new employer and the job offer in connection with the I-485 approval. So, the new employer may have to show financial viability and prove that there is a valid job offer in order for the foreign national employee and any family members to obtain the I-485 approval.
Questions:
3).Doesn�t the above mean that USCIS will still check to see if your (lets say) spouse�s company or start-up company has the ability to pay you?
4). So, even though USCIS is saying �Yes� to self employment, will they (excerpt from mandersons musings)
�..ask for 2 yrs of tax filings of future employer to prove that it's an established company (although they are not supposed to bring up 'ability to pay' issue which is already covered in approved 140 -- but being USCIS anything goes...)???
Also how do you define an established company.
If I stay employed for 2-3 yrs on my spouse's LLC and bring 200K each year, is that established?
From the above paragraph (quoted on Murthy site), it seems that it would be very much possible to just get self-employed (of course job description should be same and legal).
But here are the Questions:
1). How will USCIS be convinced that the original job offer was really the intended employment at the time the I-140 and I-485 were filed??
2). How do you prove to USCIS that the original job offer was something that you intended to take on getting your GC?
From the below excerpt (same Murthy site and part of above doc)
Ability of New Sponsor to Pay
m
The Memo clarifies that there should not be requests for "ability to pay" proof from the new sponsor as part of the I-140 approval process. However, the Memo does state that it would be appropriate to check the legitimacy of the new employer and the job offer in connection with the I-485 approval. So, the new employer may have to show financial viability and prove that there is a valid job offer in order for the foreign national employee and any family members to obtain the I-485 approval.
Questions:
3).Doesn�t the above mean that USCIS will still check to see if your (lets say) spouse�s company or start-up company has the ability to pay you?
4). So, even though USCIS is saying �Yes� to self employment, will they (excerpt from mandersons musings)
�..ask for 2 yrs of tax filings of future employer to prove that it's an established company (although they are not supposed to bring up 'ability to pay' issue which is already covered in approved 140 -- but being USCIS anything goes...)???
dresses Lineage 2 Wallpaper for The
gcseeker2002
05-02 08:37 AM
My guess is that you will probably end up paying more than $600 additional in tax amount.
Is a h1b holder a nonresident alien or a resident alien ? It says on IRS site that you dont get stimulus if you are a nonresident alien.
Is a h1b holder a nonresident alien or a resident alien ? It says on IRS site that you dont get stimulus if you are a nonresident alien.
more...
makeup RPGFan Pictures - Lineage II:
GCapplicant
08-04 12:19 PM
I'm telling them my condition, and I know there are lot of people in the same boat. Again you need to talk to the lawyer about GC cost. Emplyee can bear all the GC related cost.
EAD/AP 360*2 + 305*3(Spouse + son) is almost 2K.
If your facts are different put that in writing and send it to them. Please stop telling me my facts. Also I have no idea why you are on this thread, please ignore this thread if it doesn't apply to you...
Desi3933
I don't understand why you are picking up on facts and faults on other post.What mirage is saying is true.I know 3 families stuck up in this GC process...all true cases.
There are some lucky people who have bought old labor substiution ;)who came to US in 2004 and got their GC's cleared and are very :D.
Some really who have come here to study...living in US for past 10 years genuine appliers are really stuck in this.They have all applied their labor and got them cleared only dec 2006.
people who are interested can send those letters if not ignore the thread.
If you are EB2 good for you...Its not that easy to change jobs having families..and when you are satisfied with the employer ,why would they change.
Everyone here want GC to stay in this country.And we all are here to find solutions thru IV - active participation is better.
Pani's letter is not that bad...if you dont like alter what you want to express and send it.People can write what they are facing only.
this is not an argument...just felt bad when you were point blankly picking on them.
I dont undestand :confused:
But one thing I understand there are many , in general like to irritate and hurt other's sentiments and thoughts and pinpoint only faults.
Becoz of this lack of unity only ,most of us face problems.
EAD/AP 360*2 + 305*3(Spouse + son) is almost 2K.
If your facts are different put that in writing and send it to them. Please stop telling me my facts. Also I have no idea why you are on this thread, please ignore this thread if it doesn't apply to you...
Desi3933
I don't understand why you are picking up on facts and faults on other post.What mirage is saying is true.I know 3 families stuck up in this GC process...all true cases.
There are some lucky people who have bought old labor substiution ;)who came to US in 2004 and got their GC's cleared and are very :D.
Some really who have come here to study...living in US for past 10 years genuine appliers are really stuck in this.They have all applied their labor and got them cleared only dec 2006.
people who are interested can send those letters if not ignore the thread.
If you are EB2 good for you...Its not that easy to change jobs having families..and when you are satisfied with the employer ,why would they change.
Everyone here want GC to stay in this country.And we all are here to find solutions thru IV - active participation is better.
Pani's letter is not that bad...if you dont like alter what you want to express and send it.People can write what they are facing only.
this is not an argument...just felt bad when you were point blankly picking on them.
I dont undestand :confused:
But one thing I understand there are many , in general like to irritate and hurt other's sentiments and thoughts and pinpoint only faults.
Becoz of this lack of unity only ,most of us face problems.
girlfriend Lineage 2 Logo Backdrop
kamdard
09-01 12:38 PM
Applied GC in MAY 2002 in EB3-I. Been with the same company, same job etc...
Labor cleared in MAY 2007.
Applied I140 and I485 in June 2007.
I140 approved in SEPT 2007. Since then am with AP and EAD.
Hope this helps.
Regards,
DK.
Labor cleared in MAY 2007.
Applied I140 and I485 in June 2007.
I140 approved in SEPT 2007. Since then am with AP and EAD.
Hope this helps.
Regards,
DK.
hairstyles Lineage 2 wallpaper by
rajpatelemail
02-07 08:17 PM
nowadays, girls are too much ...
Days are gone where man used to trouble woman.
Nowadays it is very much opposite...
Days are gone where man used to trouble woman.
Nowadays it is very much opposite...
walking_dude
07-06 12:54 AM
IV will become ready for elections when we have real candidates with real faces. I request all real candidates to publish their photos and accomplishments, their ideas for the organization; so that we can choose the best person for the job.
Any volunteers? Why don't I see a single volunteer! Seriously, can we have an election without candidates?!
I feel that initiator of this thread is not trying a coup d'�tat. He is merely pointing to the fact that every organization runs by elected officials. Having a life term president and core group is only heard in autocratic systems but not in a democratic one. What are we as an organization?
Why are we afraid of discussing new ideas? Why shouldn't we open up IV organization for elections? There is nothing wrong in declaring the rules and then playing by those rules.
So I completely support the guy who came up with this suggestion.
Any volunteers? Why don't I see a single volunteer! Seriously, can we have an election without candidates?!
I feel that initiator of this thread is not trying a coup d'�tat. He is merely pointing to the fact that every organization runs by elected officials. Having a life term president and core group is only heard in autocratic systems but not in a democratic one. What are we as an organization?
Why are we afraid of discussing new ideas? Why shouldn't we open up IV organization for elections? There is nothing wrong in declaring the rules and then playing by those rules.
So I completely support the guy who came up with this suggestion.
santb1975
05-29 03:54 PM
His name should be on the list
vadicherla has contributed $100 and updated the old contribution thread...
vadicherla has contributed $100 and updated the old contribution thread...
No comments:
Post a Comment