Mike Tyson Tattoos

Your case is just like many others here. Does that worth you own thread?
Spend some time to read thru some posts. You will know there are many people who are with 2002 PD have not been approved yet. If there's a definitely answer for your question, why will they be frustrate.

My friend,

I dont know what tends to write the answer you replied.. but i am not here to find out why anybody frustrate or what any anybody is doing etc.. Its not my business as well..

I ask question because it just came in my mind.. i dont bothers about others at all..

God bless everyone..

what's happening these days..they are so slow..they take almost an year to process. By the time you get ur H1, you've to file the next..and so on on..

:mad:

Mine was filed on May 01, 2006 EB-2 and I am still waiting. I has been close to 9 months now. I also logged in an enquiry 35 days ago, but still no reply. Worried as what to do. Do, I convert to Premium?

it is the primary applicat's status which matters. spouse can be on any non immigrant status to file for I-485.

Once spouse's I-485 will be filed, F1 will become invalid but will become AOS applicant. AOS is a status by itself and you will not be out of status. Spouse will be eligible for EAD and AP to work and travel. There is no need to convert back to H4 before filing for I-485.

The only danger is if for some reason, I-485 is denied, then AOS status becomes invalid and then it will be out of status. In that case, primary applicant should have maintained H1 status (used H1 transfer to change jobs instead of EAD and used H1 visa to travel instead of AP) and that can be used for re-instatement of status of spouse back to H4.

In summary, bringing back to H4 before filing for I-485 might be safer but may be impractical as the conversion will take time and in that time, one might miss the priority date window which will change month to month. Also, if spouse is using F1 to work, conversion back to H4 will require stoppage of work till EAD.

Your rights as a participant of a bulletin board or online forum like Immigration Voice forums:



The rights of bloggers (site admin, site owner or site moderators), their liability and section 230. Section 230 refers to Section 230 of Title 47 of the United States Code (47 USC � 230) (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/230.html). To learn the plain English language explanation of this section, go here: http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-230.php (http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-230.php)

What this means is that whenever someone posts anything against anyone, Immigration Voice is immune from libel suits or defamation lawsuits, with couple of exceptions (discussed in item 2). Therefore, any anonymous poster saying bad things about their lawyers, employers, or anyone else DOES NOT HAVE TO BE DELETED. Other than couple of exceptional scenarios (see point # 2), we are not liable for content posted by users of message boards, forums, discussion boards etc. Section 230 protects Immigration Voice website administrator and moderator against libel suits or other lawsuits caused by participants who post messages against their lawyers, employers or anyone else. A recent example of such a case is illustrated in 22 page opinion of a federal judge in DiMeo V Max (http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1149152717145).

Immigration Voice is not going to delete, edit or moderate the posts and threads posted by our members no matter how defamatory or criticizing they are. That�s because A) Immigration Voice is not liable for what our members do or not do per section 230 and B) Immigration Voice needs to give freedom to members to vent out against the incompetent immigration lawyers and/or dishonest employers because that is what makes us unique and different from censored forums and it is the ESSENCE of this bulletin board.


The exceptions when Section 230 protections won�t work.Section 230 will not protect Immigration Voice if site moderators and administrators themselves post content that causes damages to others. We (site admin and moderators) will not edit or delete posts that say bad things about other orgs or persons - no matter how derogatory or defamatory they are against some lawyers, employers etc. We are not liable or responsible for them and legally it�s best and safest for moderators/site admins to leave those posts alone. Besides, that is one reason why people come to this site � freedom to vent out without any censorship, sometimes even against the Immigration Voice leadership and core group.

The other scenario when the section 230 wont protects us is in case of intellectual property. So don�t post any patented information or technology details on this website. However the laws give us a lot of latitude when we post some news articles or other content created by other sources. More details of intellectual property are here on this link. http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-ip.php (http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-ip.php).



Are we obligated to provide information to plaintiffs about our anonymous posters?First of all, most of the time, we ourselves don�t know the anonymous posters and who they are. The most we can do is provide IP address. Those IP addresses too are not easy to pin down in certain kinds of network environments. However, we will not give any information about our members to anyone unless and until we are subpoenaed for it. Subpoenas are either issued by law enforcement or by plaintiffs who file the lawsuit. Unless we are subpoenaed, we don�t have to give away any information like IP or email of any anonymous poster. Immigration Voice will never make the IP address or any information available to anyone unless it is ordered by court. Immigration Voice will use all possible legal avenues to protect the privacy and anonymity of its members and online discussion participants.


What if someone with deep pockets sues Immigration Voice with the objective of shutting us down, even though they know they don�t have a case, but want to sue us just to drag us into expensive court battle and make us bankrupt?There is nothing that protects Immigration Voice (or any such website with discussion boards and forums) from frivolous lawsuits. Anyone can sue anyone else, whether he or she lose or win is a different matter. Section 230 protects immigration voice from libel lawsuits resulting from anonymous participants posting messages that cause damages to organizations or individuals. They are even more counterproductive for the plaintiff if that state has ANTI-SLAAP laws.

SLAAP means �Strategic lawsuit against active participation�. If someone sues us just to make us bankrupt and shut us down without caring for outcome of the case, then it�s a SLAAP lawsuit. The objective is such lawsuit is not to win but to drag the other party into expensive court battle and make them bankrupt. Some states have laws against SLAAP lawsuits called ANTI-SLAAP laws. They are different in every state. What those laws do in general is make the plaintiff of SLAAP lawsuit pay the defendant for the cost of litigation and defense if they lose. So if someone from state that has ANTI-SLAAP laws sues us, then the money we spend on litigation would have to be paid by plaintiffs if they lose. Therefore there is good chance of finding a pro-bono lawyer because if they win, they get paid from the other party. What this means is that it�s difficult to drive someone to bankruptcy with frivolous lawsuits if the state has good ANTI-SLAAP laws. California is one example. Therefore the chances of us getting sued by someone in CA are lesser than other states.

Should any party sue Immigration Voice for libel based on posted messages on online forums, Immigration Voice will fight back to the fullest extent and will not remove posts or threads against those organizations.


What should one do if they have been badly hurt due to incompetence or malfeasance on the part of employer or lawyers?Immigration Voice will neither encourage nor discourage members to post messages against their employers or lawyers or any other party. Members and participants are free to post whatever they want to post. If you lawyer�s actions have hurt you and if you think it�s due to malpractice then you can file a complaint against that lawyer in a state bar. If your employer�s action has hurt you and if you think his actions are illegal, then you can file a complaint against your employer at the department of labor (for wages issues) or other departments for other issues.

Hi,
This is for a good friend of mine. He is going to get married in dec 2007. He has already applied for 140 premium processing. There is a opportunity to apply for 485 by end of this month and he has asked me for advice on this matter. His labor has PD March 2005(got cleared).

My request to all IV members is to give me some advice that I can pass on to him.

Please help !

apb,

Can you please update on what your lawyer advised to do? I had a misdemeanor (non traffic) charge in 01, that was dismissed as Nolle Prosequi (lack of evidence). I totally forgot about the incident and filed for 485 (self mailed on 6/30) Jul 2nd with out choosing YES. I got the disposition charges from the county court today and I need to update my case before I have further issues. I was NOT finger printed. NO Fines, NO community service, NO Probation and a normal criminal history record check at the county shows NONE. I never had issues with H1B stamping and traveling in and out of US. My labor is not substituted. My 140 is already approved

Can you please send me a PM with what forms your law firm is filing with USCIS? Are they planning to file a motion to reconsider by any chance? (or) Are you just filling another 485 form as an amendment? I don't have my receipts yet. If you can share your law firm info as well in a PM, it would be great.

Itstimenow,

How to send USCIS the document with out RFE? I heard that documentation sent without RFE's do not get the proper treatment. I am not saying that I will not send one in my case, but I would like to know the correct way to send documentation so that I can send the disposition as soon as I get receipts. I am also looking for an attorney and will not be doing this myself. I am just getting info as much as I can here. I am also filing for expungement as soon as I talk with an Immi attorney.

If I hire a different attorney than the company attorney, What kind of documentation would he/she require from my company? My company did not provide me with a copy of labor cert. I have a copy of approved 140. I am assuming I can get a copy of my labor cert through FOIA. Can some confirm that?

s/he like to think of europe as one entity
not sure a lot of europeans will agree though :-)

yadadaba, i have posted my email in many places. If you want to get info, please email me directly in the future. I will share what I know - IV folks ridiculed me when I said my info from the Ombudsman's office was true. They simply don't want people who have a slightly variant info to raise a voice. I have not personally heard from the O's office on this as I sent my application out on Friday for a Monday delivery without any knowledge of such possibility. If it happens it will really stink...to those who call Ombudsman the barking dog - think before you say - he may have just saved us from loosing 40K visas. Possibly the dates were made current only to clear pre-adjudicated cases. And if thats true, guess what? A window will open again in October. Thats better than where we were without the O's report that may have not impacted anything and the 40K cases ahead of us would still be pending. Its in our greater interest that they get approved and we move up the ladder versus we trying to cry wolf. My 2 cents...


Something to ponder: "Gandhi's peace marches did not get Independence to India alone. They were radical movements of many people behind it equally responsible if not more. IVs movement is the peaceful one - important but not enough and definitely not filled with exclusivity"

Copy of notice is fine.

To all,
If your EAD is not expiring soon (within 10 days) and your EAD renewal is still pending, there is chance that your expedited request may not be processed at all.

THis is what happened with my Wife's EAD renewal.

My Wife's EAD is set to expire on Sept 4th and was in a danger of loosing her job, if she didn't have her new EAD in time. There was no word/status_updates about her pending EAD renewal for the past 2 months. Complicating things further she only recently received FP notice.

We contacted our lawyer and she said that we are not eligible to file an expedited case as it is not even pending 90 days, but she did advise us to give it a try.

So, my wife called USCIS on August 26th (promtly at 8:00AM) and gave all the details to the Rep. Rep said that she will expedite the case and wait for 5 days to get a response. She said that they will send an email, if USCIS requires additional documents and also asked us not call again within 5 days.

Surprise, surprise, The very next day, her EAD case status got updated with a message "Card Production ordered......."
Usually, there would be "EAD approved" message followed by Card production ordered. However, in this case, they directly jumped to "Card production ordered..."

My Advise is to call USCIS, if your EAD is set to expire in just few days. They can do many things out of way to help out.

Hope this helps.
--sri

Thank you all. I am going to get an appointment with the doctor (CS) who is in my medical group. I will keep you all posted how this goes and about the odd file processing even though my PD is way far from the current PD date!

J Barrett

Hi,

I was wondering if anyone was ever able to change from Software Engineer to Technical Marketing Engineer (TME), using the AC21 portability rules. A TME needs similar level of technical skills as that of a Software Engineer, of course used for a different purpose.

A short description of this role (for those of you who don't know about this role)

The Technical Marketing Engineer role is exciting and challenging for the employee that enjoys equally working hands on with technology in the lab and marketing this knowledge to customers. Working with marketing, engineering, services and the sales channels

I really like to consider moving to TME roles. I see this as a first point to moving to Product Manager roles. One could move to Product Manager directly, but I guess the transition for a Software Engineer will be smooth, when he/she goes from Software Engineer -> TME -> Product Manager. The advantage with TME is, you can leverage your technical skills to perform this new role and then gradually hone your marketing/soft skills, to move to the Product Manager position. This is also the input I got from the Marketing Director of one of the reputed firms.

All looks good, but I am not sure if this transition to TME will be acceptable under the AC21 rules. It would be nice to know if anyone has ever able to do it successfully (without getting any RFEs/rejections). Right now, I have a feeling that I am totally stuck in the Software Engineer role and really like to explore my options.

Appreciate your thoughts on this


tpcool,

Given the fact that ur I-140 is not approved yet, I would wait till the approval before considering any job change.

Good luck.

First of all thanks to IV core team,logiclife,pappu and all the others who have made this possible for the rest of us !
As I understand change of marriage date is really not possible as everything has been paid for and arranged et al...
Thanks so much for your advice on this matter. I will convey the advice for this posting to him so he can take the appropriate decision.

The following link from immigration.com forums might give you some mental relief. As every one else said report to DOL if you were not paid.

DOL obtains $638,000 in wages and debars a New Jersey Company for one year - Blogs - ImmigrationPortal Forums (http://forums.immigration.com/entry.php?266-DOL-obtains-638-000-in-wages-and-debars-a-New-Jersey-Company-for-one-year)

If the I-140 has been approved, you are entitled to use the PD on any subsequent I-140 unless it is revoked based on fraud or misrepresentation.
The best document to have is a copy of the I-140 approval notice. You are legally entitled to have a copy of this document, and can obtain it by making a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to USCIS using Form G-639. USCIS provides detailed instructions at: USCIS - Freedom of Information and Privacy Act (FOIA) (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextchannel=34139c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a 1RCRD&vgnextoid=34139c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1RCRD )
In my experience, it can take anywhere from 2 months to 18 months for USCIS to act on a FOIA request and provide copies.

Hope this helps.

Josh, I'm so blown away by those atomic bomb looking clouds that I never even got to the one with the deer! (Nik had some atomic bombs over a barn last week also). I think you make all the relevent points; the first 2 certainly can benefit from some post processing in Photoshop. Those clouds are really it, but the needed something else to frame it, branches, grasses, something. I noticed that the horizon was treed, so assumed that the shore on which Kenny was standing had some trees, I "framed" the pic as if it were shot with trees framing it. Attached is the result which shows how finding objects to create a "frame" for the picture can make a world of difference. Also, I had to guess at the actual sunset color scheme. Since I wasn't there, I opted for the most dramatic. (hope you don't mind me messing with your pic Kenny, but it lent itself well to the discussion of framing and processing and illustrates better than words what I am getting at).

Other than higlighting a few things, I kind of like the deer one the way it is. It's almost a "where's Waldo", but that's what I like about it. Nature itself plays the "where's Waldo" game on us.

Tech firms play quiet role in immigration-overhaul push - Politics AP - MiamiHerald.com (http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/05/06/1617199_p2/tech-firms-play-quiet-role-in.html)




WASHINGTON � The technology sector, a little-publicized but key player in the coalition that's pushing for an overhaul of immigration laws, has given mixed reviews to the proposal that Senate Democrats unveiled last week.

Public dialogue on immigration has focused largely on a path to legalization for the estimated 11 million to 12 million illegal immigrants living in the United States, but technology companies have lobbied for years to streamline and ease the process of hiring skilled legal immigrant workers. They hope to capitalize on the momentum that surrounds immigration.

Peter Muller is the director of government relations for Intel, one of the largest sponsors of H-1B temporary visas for skilled workers. The company was approved for 723 new H-1B visas in 2009. Muller said Intel had been hindered in hiring and keeping the most qualified people by the annual caps on H-1B visas and the sometimes decade-long delay in processing green card applications.

"To not be able to hire the people who really drive innovation in our company is a frustration," he said.

The number of H-1B visas issued each year is capped at 65,000, with another 20,000 reserved for foreign-born students who graduate from U.S. schools with advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering and math, programs from which companies such as Intel recruit many of their workers. In past years, the allotment often was gone within days after the application period opened in April. Last year, it took until December to hit the cap.

Even with a slower economy reducing demand for workers, however, tech companies say they want the system overhauled.

"Companies are still hiring, so fixing the problems and fixing the system is important," said Jessica Herrera-Flanigan, the co-executive director of Compete America, a coalition of companies that are lobbying for more high-skilled immigration. "It's an issue today for some companies, and it's going to continue to be an issue that needs to be addressed."

For H-1B workers who want to stay in the country permanently, the wait for a green card can take years. Ashish Sharma, an Indian citizen who's working for a technology company in California, has waited for a green card for seven years. At one point, Sharma said, he considered leaving the United States because of the uncertainty of his status.

"The long wait does bother people," he said. "I did look at what Canada was offering, where they give you a green card within three months."

Sharma ultimately decided to stay for the sake of his two children, who were raised in the U.S., but some employers as well as workers have chosen to go abroad. Microsoft, a top sponsor of H-1B visas with 1,318 petitions approved in 2009, opened a development center in Vancouver, British Columbia, in 2007, in part to take advantage of Canada's more lenient immigration laws.

Compete America praised some aspects of the Democratic immigration framework that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada and Sens. Charles Schumer of New York and Robert Menendez of New Jersey put forward last week.

The coalition favors a provision that would offer green cards to foreign students who graduate from U.S. universities with advanced degrees in specialized fields, but it's pushing back against provisions that would limit the hiring of H-1B workers and increase government scrutiny of companies that sponsor the temporary visas.

The language in the Democrats' framework that deals with temporary visas came largely from a bill intended to curb abuses in the H-1B system that Sens. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., and Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, introduced last year.

Durbin said in an e-mailed statement that the H-1B program was too easily abused by employers who used it to, in effect, outsource jobs that American workers could fill.

"Congress created the H-1B visa program so an employer could hire a foreign guest worker when a qualified American worker could not be found," he said. "However, the H-1B visa program is plagued with fraud and abuse and is now a vehicle for outsourcing that deprives qualified American workers of their jobs."

Tech industry representatives disagreed.

"We are all for strong enforcement," Herrera-Flanigan said. "But the way the provisions are written, it's much more far-reaching than that, and it could have an adverse effect on companies that are not bad actors."

The H-1B provisions came in for criticism from people who represent immigrant workers as well as from employers. Aman Kapoor, the president of Immigration Voice, a network of skilled immigrant workers, called the proposal draconian and said the restrictions could render the H-1B process essentially useless.

Schumer's office didn't respond to requests for comment.

Advocates in the broader immigration-overhaul coalition said support from the technology industry would be key to winning the wide political backing that was necessary to give a comprehensive bill a shot at passing.

"I think it is important, and in part that is because tech is one of the key business sectors that will be necessary to bring the Republican votes we will need, in the Senate, especially," said Jeanne Butterfield, a senior adviser for the National Immigration Forum, a group that advocates policies that are more welcoming toward immigrants.

Technology companies make up a substantial portion of the voices that are lobbying for federal immigration revisions. Of the 288 federal lobbyist filings that had reported lobbying on immigration issues in the first quarter of the year as of Monday, an analysis shows that about 17 percent came from companies and organizations that represent the technology and engineering sectors. Others represented fields such as medicine and education, which also are interested in skilled immigrants.

The people who are lobbying on behalf of the tech sector said that although their issues with the immigration system were specific, they had no plans to peel off from the broader overhaul coalition to pursue a more tailored bill.

Muller said the word from Capitol Hill had been that immigration was too contentious an issue to tackle piecemeal.

PROVISIONS THAT WOULD AFFECT TECH SECTOR:

Green cards (legal permanent resident visas):

* Foreign students who graduate from U.S. schools with advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering or mathematics automatically would be eligible for green cards if U.S. employers offer them jobs.

* The caps that limit the numbers of immigrants who can come from specific countries would be eliminated.

H-1B visas (temporary work visas for foreign workers in specialized jobs):

* Would forbid employers from giving priority to H-1B applicants and would limit the number of H-1B employees that large employers may hire.

* Would authorize the Department of Labor to investigate applications for possible fraud and would require the department to audit companies that have large numbers of H-1B employees.

Thanks for those blobs. I'll play around with them but I defenatly won't claim that I made them. I will always show credit where credit is do. Thats why on my site I have a Thank you section. I wouldn't be as fare along as I'm without the people on this forum so I never have a problem giving some credit. You guys are all great:) =) :P

Your wife might have a problem in leaving US with expired I94 , if the immigration officer who is collecting sees that I94 is expired she is subject to 10 year BAN unless she goes CANADA or MEXICO route where they don't collect I94's and to come back in she needs advance parole to be approved receipt may not help .