Mike Tyson Tattoos

As per Macaca's logic, pre Oct 2005 PDs will take up all the numbers available for EB2 Indai for 2007, in June and July.

If that is the case why was the Bulletin for july not set to Oct or Nov 2005 and instead made current. Surely USCIS does not want to deal with all the extra workload if it does not have to.

DOS/USCIS know the truth, but going by the Ombudsman's report, they want to use up visa numbers as fast as they can. So if they have 30K applications sitting, just waiting for visa numbers, now with everything set to C, they can blindly start approving without even seeing what the date on those apps is.
Also, with EB3-ROW being 'C' they dont even need to worry about per-country limits. Just pick up the next almost-approved file, assign visa number, mail out. repeat.

I think this discussion is enough. The ratio of persons wanting to file a case agains't USCIS is more than 85% . The poll never reduced to less than 85% even after a lot of members were added at different intervals.

We need plaintiffs. People who have been working for fortune 500 companies or govt organisations or non profit organisations or university research or commercial research organisations will be the best fit because they will have a clean immigration history? I think we need a seperate thread for plaintiffs or a seperate group. What do u guys say? Somebody can also contact AILA also about plaintiffs. We may need to start a seperate thread or seperate yahoo group for plaintiffs.

....I am riveted by this because I spoke to Oppenheim just the day before this meeting (he referred to it). This was the conversation in which he told me that at present EB-2 India would only get numbers leftover from EB-1 India -- the problem is he doesn't know either exactly how many EB-2 India adjudicated applications there are in any specific PD range -- so every month he makes wild guesses, with the intent of using up visas. ...
I sent an email to Attorney Greg ( http://www.visalaw.com/gsiskind.html ), may be he knows something about it.

--I think, per country quota system was framed with diversification as underlying principle, not discrimination.

Depending on which country you are from, it may seem like discrimination or fair system upholding diversity.

If you are from India, you would hate it. There are truckloads of programmers in that country. But if you are the only graduate with programming skills from a country like timbaktoo (?), you would love it. You also got a shot at american dream.

This EB quota system reminds me of Caste reservation system in India. To some that is fair, to others, it is unfair. Depends on which side of the fence you are.

Fairness or not is not the issue. Question is can it be challenged in a court? Diversity at work place is encouraged through outreach for example. But you cannot discriminate in employment based on national origin. Employers can't put quotas for employee diversity. Employment based immigration I don't think can count because part of the requirement for holding the job is that the employee have a valid work authorization.

For example, someones H1b 6yrs runs out the without possibility of extension, you cannot cry discrimination from the employer for not hiring you beyond 6yrs. As I said, the employers don't force you to not change job or job title. People don't because they will lose their GC or spot in the GC queue.

As an unrelated side note, the current quota system is something that has evolved from past policies some of which was used to restrict citizens of certain countries.

I don't see any authencity of this rumour.

Mirage, thanks for the correction..

wondering what he is going to promise to people of Moradabad !?!

Litte correction dude, Hyderabad people know this man from top to bottom, so he's contesting from Moradabad.

Watch and see how fast the Michigan government will start issuing DL to H1B holders and to those who has pending I-485.

http://www.aclumich.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=567
https://www.aclumich.org/pdf/licensecomplaint.pdf

Long 19 page memo - but loud and clear for many scenarios -
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2010/H1B%20Employer-Employee%20Memo010810.pdf

USCIS posts Q & A:
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=3d015869c9326210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCR D&vgnextchannel=68439c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD


This memo is an eye opener especially for folks on consulting company assignments and those who are self-sponsored or who want to do their own business. Finding a new H1 sponsor would be extremely difficult as well (AC21 folks beware).

Now getting a new H1 or a transfer or a renewal, may be subject to very stringent scrutiny.

This memo has the potential to throw a lot of small boutique Consulting companies out of business and along with it many of their employees - whether they use H1 or not.

Wish the best for all affected folks.
Pray and hope the GC dream is realized faster for all.

Best Wishes

My friend ..I care for you.

MC
Ahh MC you are a charming person using your charm to hit below the belt
Now what do i do with you....

I guess i will let this slide because i am not sure what your intentions
If your next post are more informative maybe there would be a better reply (I know not that you care)
Cherio

Next years numbers are not consequential to EB2I movement to be honest. Any realistic movement will depend on spillover. Consider that EB2I is statutorily limited to about 2800 visas(inclusive of family members) without spillover. Whereas spillover has the potential to contribute tens of thousands of visas.

Very true. My speculation :) is most EB2-I upto mid 2006 will be cleared up and the puny new numbers will trickle to keep the PD around June 2006, or slightly earlier rather than going to 2004 or earlier.

By Septemebre 2010, EB3-india wll be in the mid of 2002.
Do you think EB-2 India will cross 2005 by Sept. 2010? Thanks.

Most of the Bollywood movies are junk ( vulgar dances etc.) . As more and more people mature in the north, the market for stars like SRK will dwindle. I request everybody to follow classic Bengali/Mallu movies.

I didn't generalize. I said preponderence meaning "a lot of" cases with L1/B1/H1 and I am also not denying the fact the India is doing a great job in producing IT skills in great numbers. I am saying how they end up in America in greater numbers than any other country. China, Pakistan, Israel also produces lots of IT gradutes but they don't have the bodyshop connection to land here with an NIIT certificate.

Delusional? Quite a few European countries spring to mind before this one.

Wrong! Stop assuming dude. People are here because they need the Green Card. We don't take an oath to renounce loyalties when we get it. Of course your intention is clear and I am thankful that we Indians don't need to count on you. Of course, its interesting that you are quite happy being a US Citizen when it's the US which has called the LTTE a terrorist organization. Hmm, I hope you did your research. Anyway, too late. We don't need you anymore in India and like I said earlier, good riddance. All the best!

Thanks for being the self-designated, unpaid spokesperson for "we indians" and keeping track of accountable indians :)

If the prior experience was related to your field, then I don't see why not. You may want to hurry because if USIS comes with 45-day labor expiration rule soon (which they may), you may not be able to use the prior approved labor.

arent you in conflict with chanduv23's reply? i am stuck between both of the ideas:) not worried about the bill, its not a law yet..

IV in past has looked into all options. It is not possible to sue USCIS because the law protects them for what they are doing. they are following the law.

If people think we have a case, please take initiative and lead this - you will know how ready the community is. All those who are talking big here on this thread will run away u will see them running 180 degrees the other side if you ask them to come for the class action.

We are not able to generate enough letters - people tend to be rude when asked to sign letters and fight us finding fault with us.

The only way we can achieve something is if we unite and that has to happen through community building exercises and inculcating a sense for the community in the people.

I am ready to support this initiative if it is feasable - so please do not get me wrong or think that I am pessimist. The ckind of community we are dealing with, things are not that easy that we open a thread on IV and everyone follow it.

How many sent flowers? Close to 300
How many attended rally? - close to 2000
How many sending letters ? - close to 2000

All this after so much of cajoling and motivating. needhelp and gang working tirelessly trying hard to get signatures, standing outside grocery stores, standing in train stations, being so focussed - why can others not see what they are doing? The only way our community is going to succeed is by more people coming forward and complimenting efforts of needhelp and and this must keep increasing.

Is the community ready to stand up and rise in unity? Or just opening threads and discussing anonymously and then burying the threads deep below?

Can we walk the talk?

Were you kidding???? :)

No, really.... ? :)

Thanks for asking anyways. The "content" is covered by Creative Commons license. :)
do you mind using what you wrote for emaling the media ?

thanks.

I advocate talking to policymakers, writing to them, and calling in on any talkshow on the radio/tv - where ever there is an opportunity.
I am not sure if we can challenge the legality of the system. However, I do question the motivation behind this policy. It is morally and ethically wrong and does not make any economic sense. It is probably hurting the economy, if you get my drift. My thought is that it can be adressed by enlightening the very people who put this policy in place - the congressmen/women.

Welcome to the board... we are just analyzing which way to fight is better. Mark is saying lobbying is the only way, some other say exploring to challenge in court worth a try...some say not worth it-forget it. Have your opinion pitch in please.:)

I sent the email to my local congress man who has an anti-immigrant stance.

Here is the response I got from him( It is probably a standard response for financial crisis)

---message starts------
Thank you for contacting me regarding our country's financial crisis and the administration's bailout proposal. It is good to hear your thoughts on this very important situation facing our country and I share in your concerns.

As you know, Treasury Secretary Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke testified recently before Congress about their proposal to spend $700 billion to purchase the debt of financial institutions, improve our credit situation, and stabilize our economy. I reviewed the proposal carefully and, like you, I had serious concerns about this proposal such as the blanket authority removing Congressional or legal oversight, the implied reward for unwise financial behaviors at the expense of honest Americans, and the long-term expense to tax payers without a mechanism to press criminal charges upon those who are responsible for this situation.

As a consequence, I offered an alternative measure. According to the Department of Treasury, there are two problems that need to be addressed: the short term liquidity emergency, and the long-term toxic mortgage asset holdings. To address the liquidity emergency, my plan would reduce all personal and corporate capital gains taxes to zero percent for one year, reduce the Federal Funds Rate (FFR) to zero percent for one month with a reoccurring month to month option, and allow the Department of Treasury to loan current funds to lending institutions at the rate of inflation plus three percent or LIBOR plus three percent. This plan would get the markets moving and allow Congress adequate time to address the mortgage assets situation while we investigate those corporations or government regulators who may be criminally negligent.


One of my most important roles as your Congressman is to be a responsible steward of tax payer funds and, while my proposal remains an option, there are many proposals still being debated and it is unclear what the final product will look like. I will be sure to keep you informed of what happens as we move forward.

---message ends------

Yes, mine was approved a month back without any hassles and bought the home ....

Has anybody really tried to get a mortgage recently? I have been denied by 8 lenders so far simply because I don't have a green card. Most lenders have tightened their underwriting guidelines. They will give mortgages only to U.S.Citizens or somebody who is a permanent resident aka having a green card. There are very very few lenders who will give mortgages to somebody on a visa and the rates may not be very favorable.

I got the below email from multiple friends. I don't know what is the source, who wrote this analysis because there is no links. I did NOT mean to spread the fear. Just sharing the contents unaltered.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, this is how many could read RECENT (Jan 8, 2010) actions / announcement by USCIS towards Consulting companies, which engages or merely places their employees at the client sites for various projects.

� No new H1B application will be approved, as per the new guidelines provided USCIS on Jan 08, 2010 memorandum � for 3rd Party Consulting company.
� No new H1B extension/stamping will be approved, as per the new guidelines provided USCIS on Jan 08, 2010 memorandum � for 3rd Party Consulting company.
� If an employee has H1B approved or extension approved, and if he/she comes back to US from a vacation or from an emergency, he/she would be deported back to his/her home country from the Port of Entry (PoE) � for 3rd Party Consulting company.


Why?

Because of 2 recent events:

1) USCIS gave new memorandum (which is now guidelines for USCIS professionals working on the H1B petitions/extensions) on Jan 08th, 2010. (Attached the PDF file for the memorandum).
2) Recently (Jan 2010) several H1B Employees were sent back (in some forum, its mentioned � all of them) to their home country from Newark, NJ and JFK, NY Port of Entry � these were the H1B employees, who went to spend Christmas/New Year vacation to their home countries.


What does the memorandum mention, specifically, about 3rd Party Consulting companies?

Link to the memorandum (PDF attached) � http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2010/H1B%20Employer-Employee%20Memo010810.pdf


Employer-Employee Relationship:

As per the memorandum, some previous H1B Law defines, the definition of an �US Employer�. Somewhere in that definition (Page 2 of memo), it mentions the word �Employer-Employee relationship�. Till now, it seems that there was no clear guidance on what kind of relationship was considered having Employer-Employee relationship. So, it was being, probably, interpreted independently or ambiguously. Now, on Jan 8th, 2010, USCIS has published this memorandum for TRAINING USCIS OFFICIALS about understanding, Employer-Employee relationship. The memorandum seems to have been prepared with a clear understanding about it, along with the specific EXAMPLES.



Memorandum has given few specific examples, which would QUALIFY for having Employer-Employee relationship, on Page 4-5 of the Memo � including the nature of the job/business. On Page 5-6, memorandum gives few specific examples, which would NOT QUALIFY for having Employer-Employee relationship. Third Party Placement / �Job-Shop� (better version of �Body-shop�, probably) is NOT QUALIFIED for meeting Employer-Employee Relationships � meaning, 3rd Party placement (which most of the small consulting companies do) doesn�t meet H1B requirement, as defined by the law � meaning for this job, the new H1B or Extension or Stamping petitions CANNOT be approved!! Period !!




This is how memorandum has identified 3rd Party Placements and in Bold letters, why it disqualifies for the H1B petitions (comments are in Red):



�The petitioner is a computer consulting company (which is what all small consulting do). The petitioner has contract with numerous outside companies in which it supplies these companies with employee to fulfill specific staffing needs. The specific positions are not outlined in the contract between the petitioner and the third-party company but are staffed on an as-needed basis (this is nothing but, Service Agreement between the petitioner and the mid-vendor!). The beneficiary is a computer analyst (which is what many small consulting company�s employee are). The beneficiary has been assigned to work for the third-party company to fill a core position to maintain the third-party company�s payroll (this nothing but, Mid-Vendor�s or so-called Prime-Vendor�s or Consulting Partner�s Revenue). Once placed at the client company, the beneficiary reports to a manager who works for the third-party company (as it happens, when Consulting partner hires employee as a contractor). The beneficiary does not report to the petitioner for work assignments, and all work assignments are determined by the third-party company (petitioner just runs pay-rolls!). The petitioner does not control how the beneficiary will complete daily tasks, and no propriety information of the petitioner is used by the beneficiary to complete any work assignments (petitioner just runs pay-rolls!). The beneficiary�s end-product, the payroll (payroll of mid-vendor/prime vendor/consulting partner), is not in any way related to the petitioner�s line of business, which is computer consulting. The beneficiary�s progress reviews are completed by the client company, not the petitioner (petitioner just runs pay-rolls!). [Petitioner Has No Right to Control; No Exercise of Control].�



Right to Control:

Supreme Court has stated the definition of Employer-Employee Relationship (Page 3 of Memo), and there it was mentioned to have �Right to Control� over the work of the employee by the employer. From the entire memo, it sounds that Right control is well-established, ONLY WHEN, at least one supervisor from the petitioner�s company works with the beneficiary at the end-client site, and supervises beneficiary�s day-to-day work. So, big Consulting companies such as Wipro, Infosys, Accenture, Deloitte etc. will be good, as they would meet �Right to Control� and that way, they will satisfy H1B requirement by law, and their petitions for similar 3rd party consulting work, will be APPROVED, but not in case of, small consulting companies!! This is because, big consulting companies such as Accenture � have their entire or partial team � along with managers etc. � working at the same client site, where the beneficiary would be working, so they could supervise their work and so exercise control over their work etc., but that cannot be the case with the small consulting � because, their actual business has been, so far, to place employees and run pay-roll � not to get the client projects!




Why one could think that there are slim chances for this memorandum to get reversed in favor of small consulting companies?

This memorandum took care of big consulting companies such as Wipro, Infosys, Cognizant, Accenture etc. � meaning, these companies and their employees are NOT impacted. They can travel freely to-and-fro their home country etc. Since, big companies are not impacted, there will not be any big lobbying or oppositions to this memorandum, per say!! There don�t seem to be a platform for small consulting companies to gather and lobby, plus most the small consulting may not get involved, with fear of exposing themselves more to other issues!! So, it might be east to assume that this memorandum is permanent and not temporary. The recent deportation also indicates that the changes like this memorandum is for serious, not just the warning!



How this memorandum relates to the recent deportation events from NY and NJ airports?



There seems to be an anticipated link between these 2 events � Memorandum and recent Deportations � kind of an indication about the current level of government scrutiny and seriousness of the H1B program. Hence, there have been advices by others that � each employer and employee should operate by strictly following the H1B program requirements.



Link to Murthy.com front page posting about this � MurthyDotCom : NewsFlash! Note to H1Bs Traveling to U.S., Working for Consulting Companies (http://www.murthy.com/nflash/nf_h1conc.html)



What one could predict as happening sooner (trend)?

� Since, it seems big consulting companies (having their own consulting projects)/full-time end-clients and their beneficiaries are not impacted with these changes � there could be trend � employee moving from small companies to big companies for a better shelter for full-time positions � especially, when small consulting company�s immediate preventions / actions to this memo cannot ensure safety.
� Big consulting companies could buy small consulting companies or small consulting companies could sell their companies to big consulting companies (having their own consulting projects), to save their employee�s future/transition etc.


Good Luck my Friends....!!

Everyone knows what the impact would be...no one coming up with the solutions or ready to fight.