My Alien # on I-140 approval notice is different from my I-485 receipt notice, will this cause an issue ? I appreciate your service.
Thank you
sb
Thank you
sb
wallpaper selena gomez 2011 june.
I haven't seen the ROW dates to be current since 2005 when everything got retrogressed (except the crazy thing that happened last summer).
As far as I know there were A LOT more cases approved in that July fiasco that were from India, I believe the number in June/July was about 3 times the anual quota.
I know you're probably VERY frustrated because of the ROW move while the India cutoff dates are still in 2001 but please don't start the discussion on ROW vs India/Chiana. It's not helping anybody.
I agree that country quotas are wrong and the number of GC per year is ridiculous. But getting people to argue against eachother is not a solution. Supporting the legislative/admin changes is (and I know you've done A LOT to make things happen)
The thing is, as long as there is this per-country quota rationing of green cards, ROW folks will keep moving to the HOV lane and each year, in Oct to Dec timeframe their dates will get current and they will get GCs.
As far as I know there were A LOT more cases approved in that July fiasco that were from India, I believe the number in June/July was about 3 times the anual quota.
I know you're probably VERY frustrated because of the ROW move while the India cutoff dates are still in 2001 but please don't start the discussion on ROW vs India/Chiana. It's not helping anybody.
I agree that country quotas are wrong and the number of GC per year is ridiculous. But getting people to argue against eachother is not a solution. Supporting the legislative/admin changes is (and I know you've done A LOT to make things happen)
The thing is, as long as there is this per-country quota rationing of green cards, ROW folks will keep moving to the HOV lane and each year, in Oct to Dec timeframe their dates will get current and they will get GCs.
Hello All,
First and foremost, i must thank everyone from IV, who is working tirelessly to resolve the issues of retrogression in the GC process. As an affected individual I am very grateful that leaders of IV are ready to contribute so much effort for its goals. And even though I do not actively work for the IV agenda, I have contributed money to some IV action items.
I have a question/suggestion regarding the IV agenda. On IV's about page, pt number 2 asserts amongst other things,
The Discriminatory Per-Country Rationing of Green Cards That Exacerbates the Delays.
and further in the same point
We do not allow employers to discriminate hiring based on their nationality or country of origin. Therefore, the employment-based immigration, which is a derivative benefit of employment, should also be free from rationing based on nationality or country of birth.
I am curious to know what is the "legal" strength of these assertions is. Are they just "moral" statements or can the validity of these statements be tested in the legal framework of this country? In other words, my question is what is the constitutionality of the "Per Country Caps" in Employment / Family Based Immrigration procedures.
A lot of Laws and Statutes have been challenged in the Judicial System of USA. And many more are challenged every year. And if the laws are not constitutional then they can be repealed.
I am sure the leaders of IV must have thought about this argument however a quick search of the forums with 'constitutionality' as the search term did not return any results.
IV's efforts to utilize Lobbying to bring about change to alleviate/eliminate retrogression are certainly beneficial. However, if IV has not already considered and eliminated this legal argument, then it should explore whether there is any substance to this approach.
Hence this post. Below are some of the links that might be relevant.
wikipedia article on constitutionality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutionality)
wikipedia category on US immigration case law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_immigration_and_naturalizat ion_case_law)
thanks and sincerely,
--soljabhai
First and foremost, i must thank everyone from IV, who is working tirelessly to resolve the issues of retrogression in the GC process. As an affected individual I am very grateful that leaders of IV are ready to contribute so much effort for its goals. And even though I do not actively work for the IV agenda, I have contributed money to some IV action items.
I have a question/suggestion regarding the IV agenda. On IV's about page, pt number 2 asserts amongst other things,
The Discriminatory Per-Country Rationing of Green Cards That Exacerbates the Delays.
and further in the same point
We do not allow employers to discriminate hiring based on their nationality or country of origin. Therefore, the employment-based immigration, which is a derivative benefit of employment, should also be free from rationing based on nationality or country of birth.
I am curious to know what is the "legal" strength of these assertions is. Are they just "moral" statements or can the validity of these statements be tested in the legal framework of this country? In other words, my question is what is the constitutionality of the "Per Country Caps" in Employment / Family Based Immrigration procedures.
A lot of Laws and Statutes have been challenged in the Judicial System of USA. And many more are challenged every year. And if the laws are not constitutional then they can be repealed.
I am sure the leaders of IV must have thought about this argument however a quick search of the forums with 'constitutionality' as the search term did not return any results.
IV's efforts to utilize Lobbying to bring about change to alleviate/eliminate retrogression are certainly beneficial. However, if IV has not already considered and eliminated this legal argument, then it should explore whether there is any substance to this approach.
Hence this post. Below are some of the links that might be relevant.
wikipedia article on constitutionality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutionality)
wikipedia category on US immigration case law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_immigration_and_naturalizat ion_case_law)
thanks and sincerely,
--soljabhai
2011 selena gomez 2011 june.
IV admins, Chandu,
Please delete this thread or move this away from the main page.
This thread is a good fodder for antis.
Deleting this thread does not change the facts nor does IMV will gain anything out of it. The reason we even discuss these things here other than immigration is because we have immigrated and we have a common bonding.
Please delete this thread or move this away from the main page.
This thread is a good fodder for antis.
Deleting this thread does not change the facts nor does IMV will gain anything out of it. The reason we even discuss these things here other than immigration is because we have immigrated and we have a common bonding.
-- Deleted ---
-- Deleted ---
Does any one on this forum happen to know an approximate dollar amount that would cost for if we (IV team) is planning to proceed further with this class action law suite on USCIS?? the reason I am asking for is if we have known dollar amount/target amount in hand it makes it easy for all to start contributing towards this target amount and proceed further with law suite.
I am sure someone on IV team would create a separate bucket for this specific class action law suite task and keep track of amount that's been collected...
Yes, I totally support this class action suite and also willing to support as mush as I can financially....
I think the good start is to consult with Rajiv Khanna. He has an experience in class-actions/federal litigation and will tell whether it is feasible to go this way. It will cost $600 (approximately). To file a class-action complaint will cost around $10k. The rest depends on the lenght of the proceedings, but my estimate is another 20-30k. Peanuts comparing to lobbying :) IV may not want to go this way, as Mark Bartosik once explained, it may hurt its other efforts. If that's the case, potential plaintiffs can work with lawyers directly.
I am sure someone on IV team would create a separate bucket for this specific class action law suite task and keep track of amount that's been collected...
Yes, I totally support this class action suite and also willing to support as mush as I can financially....
I think the good start is to consult with Rajiv Khanna. He has an experience in class-actions/federal litigation and will tell whether it is feasible to go this way. It will cost $600 (approximately). To file a class-action complaint will cost around $10k. The rest depends on the lenght of the proceedings, but my estimate is another 20-30k. Peanuts comparing to lobbying :) IV may not want to go this way, as Mark Bartosik once explained, it may hurt its other efforts. If that's the case, potential plaintiffs can work with lawyers directly.
2010 images justin bieber selena
Thanks Thampi, people let us post some more avoidance techniques to be used subtle or not, this is a scourge we need to get rid of.
lordoftherings, I doubt there is a country in the world that would fit all. I also doubt such a thing as "ideal immigration policy" exists. It is always good to have a job offer before you immigrate, but it's ultimately up to the immigrant to find out what it'll take to get on his/her feet in the new country.
After reading (and watching videos of) all those sob stories on notcanada.com and the like about doctors, nurses, engineers who can't get a job or have to study for years to get a Canadian license to practice, I wonder how much of a research those folks did prior to coming to Canada. If a medical occupation requires studying for additional time and taking exams, then you should have learned about it. If engineers of your specialty are not in high demand, you can figure it out by going through Canadian job postings and contacting employers. If you are not willing to look for a job elsewhere but Toronto, then it's your problem: perhaps in Calgary the opportunities are more readily available. I have a friend in Montreal who owns an IT recruitment company. He told me that they are sending IT folks from Ontario to Alberta, since Alberta unemployment rate for IT professionals is currently at 0.5%.
Bottom line is: research for yourself, ask different people, be flexible about where you want to live in the new country (hey, it's the country's demands you need to adjust to, not the other way around!) -- this will save you from many unpleasant surprises.
After reading (and watching videos of) all those sob stories on notcanada.com and the like about doctors, nurses, engineers who can't get a job or have to study for years to get a Canadian license to practice, I wonder how much of a research those folks did prior to coming to Canada. If a medical occupation requires studying for additional time and taking exams, then you should have learned about it. If engineers of your specialty are not in high demand, you can figure it out by going through Canadian job postings and contacting employers. If you are not willing to look for a job elsewhere but Toronto, then it's your problem: perhaps in Calgary the opportunities are more readily available. I have a friend in Montreal who owns an IT recruitment company. He told me that they are sending IT folks from Ontario to Alberta, since Alberta unemployment rate for IT professionals is currently at 0.5%.
Bottom line is: research for yourself, ask different people, be flexible about where you want to live in the new country (hey, it's the country's demands you need to adjust to, not the other way around!) -- this will save you from many unpleasant surprises.
hair selena gomez 2011 june
I agree with you. This guy applied his GC in 2001 and got it in 2003. In just 2 years. He made a stupid decision to leave MSFT and then lost 3 jobs in a short span. He is some nut mental case who is happy seeing others getting screwed. Maybe he works his way up by pushing others down.
I dont understand as to why you are so enamoured about MSFT ? Is leaving MSFT a stupid decision ? Why do you jump to conclusions in a public forum without understanding the facts behind a decision ? Let me give you some facts about MSFT and my decision to leave. Draw your conclusions accordingly. As a techie, atleast then, MSFT was among the top notch companies to work for. The work was satisfying and not to mention the pay was rewarding too (atleast in 1994). Back then MSFT's core cash cow products were MS Office and Windows. That is the case even today. MS Office's 2000 release and Windows NT releases were path breakers. In my opinion, if you are in any group other than these 2 groups within MSFT, I dont think the work is truly satisfying. If your concern is a stable paycheck then ignore my opinion.
Back in late 2000, the labor queue in WA, CA, NY and TX states was way too huge and the processing times were long. I surveyed the land for labor certification times and chose to move to MN or IA inorder to get thru this process faster. I chose a dot com company in MN and my labor and I140 flew fast before the 9/11 disaster struck. Oh BTW I was millionaire "on paper" for about 28 days :-). You may think that I went thru the entire GC for just 2 years. You need to check with people who had been GC during that time of the times we were in. In those days, in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, every immigrant in the midwest was scorned with hatred. Google immigrant tales and you will know. I had planned hard, gave up a stable paycheck and went thru 3 layoffs to get my GC. I believe that the long queues atleast in labor and I140 are due to a large number of people applying from NY and CA. I hope you would realize that people think through issues before making decisions. If you have not done the same dont scoff at people who do so.
One last tid bit - MSFT is not the greatest of organizations that you think it is. As I said, if a stable paycheck is all you care for then you are right. If you are looking for real exciting action on the prfessional front, just in my humble opinion, think Hedge funds.
I dont understand as to why you are so enamoured about MSFT ? Is leaving MSFT a stupid decision ? Why do you jump to conclusions in a public forum without understanding the facts behind a decision ? Let me give you some facts about MSFT and my decision to leave. Draw your conclusions accordingly. As a techie, atleast then, MSFT was among the top notch companies to work for. The work was satisfying and not to mention the pay was rewarding too (atleast in 1994). Back then MSFT's core cash cow products were MS Office and Windows. That is the case even today. MS Office's 2000 release and Windows NT releases were path breakers. In my opinion, if you are in any group other than these 2 groups within MSFT, I dont think the work is truly satisfying. If your concern is a stable paycheck then ignore my opinion.
Back in late 2000, the labor queue in WA, CA, NY and TX states was way too huge and the processing times were long. I surveyed the land for labor certification times and chose to move to MN or IA inorder to get thru this process faster. I chose a dot com company in MN and my labor and I140 flew fast before the 9/11 disaster struck. Oh BTW I was millionaire "on paper" for about 28 days :-). You may think that I went thru the entire GC for just 2 years. You need to check with people who had been GC during that time of the times we were in. In those days, in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, every immigrant in the midwest was scorned with hatred. Google immigrant tales and you will know. I had planned hard, gave up a stable paycheck and went thru 3 layoffs to get my GC. I believe that the long queues atleast in labor and I140 are due to a large number of people applying from NY and CA. I hope you would realize that people think through issues before making decisions. If you have not done the same dont scoff at people who do so.
One last tid bit - MSFT is not the greatest of organizations that you think it is. As I said, if a stable paycheck is all you care for then you are right. If you are looking for real exciting action on the prfessional front, just in my humble opinion, think Hedge funds.
http://digg.com/politics/Rep_Lofgren_Issues_Statement_on_Updated_Visa_Bulle tin
http://digg.com/politics/U_S_Withdraws_Offer_of_60_000_Job_Based_Visas_Ange ring_Immigration_Lawyer/who
http://digg.com/politics/U_S_Withdraws_Offer_of_60_000_Job_Based_Visas_Ange ring_Immigration_Lawyer/who
hot June 20th, 2011
Very sad to hear about this.
I don't know what else to say. I am sorry to hear that this happened.
I'm sorry, I haven't monitored the web-site since my last posting.
Today reality hit me very hard. I am in my late thirties and I haven't had much adversity in my life regarding financial, career, family, etc.
However; today reality really hit me hard.
One gentlemen, his name was Raja Pitchai. He had asked me to help him file his I-140 and ask for cross chargeability to his wife's place of birth (singapore). USCIS accepted his package and his 140 got approved in a couple of months. (his priority date; india became available one month later anyways (he was from india eb2).
He was the one of the nicest guys I have talked to. Very courteous fellow.
They couldn't approve his case because he was stuck in name check. Well, his wife called me today and told me that he passed away last week (brain tumor). He had two U.S. citizen children but him and his wife have no relatives here.
She doesn't seem to be interested to stay here (she wouldn't be able to keep the greencard process going anyways because the death of the petitioner is automatic denial). She is leaving USA and was going through all the things she needs to wind up. I don't know if she would have stayed here if she got the greencard and I didn't want to task. Reality really him home today.
I need a couple of days to get over this.
I don't know what else to say. I am sorry to hear that this happened.
I'm sorry, I haven't monitored the web-site since my last posting.
Today reality hit me very hard. I am in my late thirties and I haven't had much adversity in my life regarding financial, career, family, etc.
However; today reality really hit me hard.
One gentlemen, his name was Raja Pitchai. He had asked me to help him file his I-140 and ask for cross chargeability to his wife's place of birth (singapore). USCIS accepted his package and his 140 got approved in a couple of months. (his priority date; india became available one month later anyways (he was from india eb2).
He was the one of the nicest guys I have talked to. Very courteous fellow.
They couldn't approve his case because he was stuck in name check. Well, his wife called me today and told me that he passed away last week (brain tumor). He had two U.S. citizen children but him and his wife have no relatives here.
She doesn't seem to be interested to stay here (she wouldn't be able to keep the greencard process going anyways because the death of the petitioner is automatic denial). She is leaving USA and was going through all the things she needs to wind up. I don't know if she would have stayed here if she got the greencard and I didn't want to task. Reality really him home today.
I need a couple of days to get over this.
house Selena Gomez performing at the
I am not sure if I agree with doing two things at the same time. We can try to solve 12 things at the same time, but at the end are we effective? As an organization,If by focusing on eliminating EB1 fraud gives us significant advantage in short and long term then I am all for it. Numbers do not suggest that.However if we focus our energy on legislative fixes to eliminate the backlog, most of the categories will benefit.Question is do we suggest 20 things and dont complete anything or take one important initiative to the finish line. In my limited experience, I have seen second one works better.
Reporting to USCIS about possible L1/ EB1 fraud should not take too much efforts so as to impact the effectiveness. Its just about bringing to attention to the USCIS about the possible misuse of EB1 by these consulting firms. Ultimately its upto USCIS to make a judgement about a particular case but with our help of informing them this is happening will make the adjudicating process tough for these people.
Reporting to USCIS about possible L1/ EB1 fraud should not take too much efforts so as to impact the effectiveness. Its just about bringing to attention to the USCIS about the possible misuse of EB1 by these consulting firms. Ultimately its upto USCIS to make a judgement about a particular case but with our help of informing them this is happening will make the adjudicating process tough for these people.
tattoo selena gomez 2011 june.
Well, explain to me, if an american celebrity, such as Brad Pitt or George Clooney is detained at IGI for 66 mins, taken aside for secondary in another chamber, made to wait,
if robert gates (defense secretary), is asked to remove his shirt
if ex president bush or clinton is frisked for secondary, would that be acceptable to americans?
NO. We agree on the answer atleast. Do people in India have to KNOW them?
Question is why such things are not done in India?
Answer is: The security system there is like Swiss cheese -- Full of holes.
They would by pass the rules for celebrities!
Why do you expect USA to do the same?
if robert gates (defense secretary), is asked to remove his shirt
if ex president bush or clinton is frisked for secondary, would that be acceptable to americans?
NO. We agree on the answer atleast. Do people in India have to KNOW them?
Question is why such things are not done in India?
Answer is: The security system there is like Swiss cheese -- Full of holes.
They would by pass the rules for celebrities!
Why do you expect USA to do the same?
pictures Selena Gomez defies death
Its just that you chose not to leave. The correct description of the situation is - you are imposing slavery upon yourself and asking for remedy from the government. Isn't that correct? Jazzy is simply saying that you can leave if you don't like it. So you are not a slave. Its that simple.
.
A person can kill himself to solve all his problems. But that is not the point. If I have come here to work and you have things setup in a way that it can be used to exploit you ( e.g. employer holding back your pay for no valid reason) that amounts to indirectly supporting slave business. The word "slave" doesn't make high tech workers comfortable because they don't want to be categorized as such. But the trouble they are going through is similar to that of the slaves that were taken by the brits in olden days for working at different places in their colonies. If you look at the way most of us work here, it is almost same. Someone (called ur employer) brings you here, he puts you in a place to work reporting to a differnet master sometime many. This exactly how slave trade was working in olden days, but today instead of us working in plantations or laying highways we are working on the building the IT super highway.
I rest my case here for now
.
A person can kill himself to solve all his problems. But that is not the point. If I have come here to work and you have things setup in a way that it can be used to exploit you ( e.g. employer holding back your pay for no valid reason) that amounts to indirectly supporting slave business. The word "slave" doesn't make high tech workers comfortable because they don't want to be categorized as such. But the trouble they are going through is similar to that of the slaves that were taken by the brits in olden days for working at different places in their colonies. If you look at the way most of us work here, it is almost same. Someone (called ur employer) brings you here, he puts you in a place to work reporting to a differnet master sometime many. This exactly how slave trade was working in olden days, but today instead of us working in plantations or laying highways we are working on the building the IT super highway.
I rest my case here for now
dresses Selena Gomez - 2011 MuchMusic
when i do that, it just says I have a splendid aura or some shit like that.
Use the tooltip.
Hover the mouse over the red dot and see the comment pop-up as a tool-tip.
Use the tooltip.
Hover the mouse over the red dot and see the comment pop-up as a tool-tip.
makeup selena gomez 2011 june.
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....!!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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....!!
girlfriend Justin Bieber And Selena Gomez
By the way Mccaid, next time someone from Indonesia experiences such an issue please also make a thread here and whine about it like we did. Atleast that will make us Indians realize that SRK BS is really BS!!! because we will have no idea about the person who you will be whining about and there will be a lot of indians who will shout at you saying "why is this thread even on IV???? who is this person that Mccaid is whining about???This thing happened to even the great SRK so why this whining???:D:D:D
If this happened to our prime minister Manmohan singh, I belive he would have just laughed. He would not have said "I am MM singh". The bottom line is there are certain rules and regulations and everybody (including SRK) is subject to them. Next time SRK travels he should consider carrying all the CDs of his movies with him to prove his "greatness".
If this happened to our prime minister Manmohan singh, I belive he would have just laughed. He would not have said "I am MM singh". The bottom line is there are certain rules and regulations and everybody (including SRK) is subject to them. Next time SRK travels he should consider carrying all the CDs of his movies with him to prove his "greatness".
hairstyles and selena gomez 2011
I usually just browse through these forums and I really appreciate the effort put in by the organizers. But this thread gave me an urge to respond and perhaps talk.
First of all, SRK is just a normal human, not a God. The TSA has even questioned many American celebrities. SRK is just a guy with Khan as last name. TSA is not going to take chances and will make sure they do what is needed to protect America. And SRK probably acted like a monkey again and annoyed the TSA guys so they held him up for 2 hours. OK, just kidding. But thing is, Indian government if anything should take a lesson from it. In india if you are SRK or Sanjay Dutt, there are no lines for you..any where. Indians should get angry at that, not this that just happened in the USA. And for God's sake, why would you even want to sympathesize with a character like SRK who has destroyed the indian movie industry?
Now don't tell me I am a traitor. I love India, I love America. I live in America because I like living in America and I have gotten used to the comfort and lifestyle. This doesnt mean that I hate India.
And to the guy who thinks that americasn think Indians are slumdogs or thrid class citizens...please go to india and free up the line for the rest of us. Its your belief that they think you are a slumdog. Perhaps you come across that way to them. Indians are more notorious when it comes to "grading" people based on their color or status and if a few rednecks in America did this to you, don't stereotype the entire country.
Enjoy the life. Life is good. In America and in India. Long wait for the GC? Yes it is a b**ch, but why have you rest your entire life on a decision by USCIS. Enjoy and take risks and blow your money on good things in life...even if you dont get the GC, on your flight back to India you will at least be proud of the fact that you enjoyed your stay in America. Go out, meet people, meet beautiful girls, eat good food, drink whiskey, watch movies, go hiking...so many things to do guys. And if you dont get the GC, tell your friends and family about the stuff you did in America.
Don't ever be that Indian guy in the office. Be a smart global citizen.
Oh... finally!
Welcome to IV
There is nothing special that you have written up there in your post. This is just normal stuff that most EB folks on this forum does. Why do you have to write such obvious things? You may agree or disagree with member's opinion but its sounds very naive to preach to this community about normal life.
Its apparent from post that you think the members other than yourself live a lower than average life? :D I guess you are mistaken.. Keep reading posts and you will eventually get to know better..
First of all, SRK is just a normal human, not a God. The TSA has even questioned many American celebrities. SRK is just a guy with Khan as last name. TSA is not going to take chances and will make sure they do what is needed to protect America. And SRK probably acted like a monkey again and annoyed the TSA guys so they held him up for 2 hours. OK, just kidding. But thing is, Indian government if anything should take a lesson from it. In india if you are SRK or Sanjay Dutt, there are no lines for you..any where. Indians should get angry at that, not this that just happened in the USA. And for God's sake, why would you even want to sympathesize with a character like SRK who has destroyed the indian movie industry?
Now don't tell me I am a traitor. I love India, I love America. I live in America because I like living in America and I have gotten used to the comfort and lifestyle. This doesnt mean that I hate India.
And to the guy who thinks that americasn think Indians are slumdogs or thrid class citizens...please go to india and free up the line for the rest of us. Its your belief that they think you are a slumdog. Perhaps you come across that way to them. Indians are more notorious when it comes to "grading" people based on their color or status and if a few rednecks in America did this to you, don't stereotype the entire country.
Enjoy the life. Life is good. In America and in India. Long wait for the GC? Yes it is a b**ch, but why have you rest your entire life on a decision by USCIS. Enjoy and take risks and blow your money on good things in life...even if you dont get the GC, on your flight back to India you will at least be proud of the fact that you enjoyed your stay in America. Go out, meet people, meet beautiful girls, eat good food, drink whiskey, watch movies, go hiking...so many things to do guys. And if you dont get the GC, tell your friends and family about the stuff you did in America.
Don't ever be that Indian guy in the office. Be a smart global citizen.
Oh... finally!
Welcome to IV
There is nothing special that you have written up there in your post. This is just normal stuff that most EB folks on this forum does. Why do you have to write such obvious things? You may agree or disagree with member's opinion but its sounds very naive to preach to this community about normal life.
Its apparent from post that you think the members other than yourself live a lower than average life? :D I guess you are mistaken.. Keep reading posts and you will eventually get to know better..
I am willing to contribute $10 to get solid legal advice on this and I am willing to contribute a lot more in a lawsuit IF and ONLY IF there is a strong legal basis for it.
I appreciate IV for its efforts. Happy V'Day.
I will contribute for legal advice if some leaders for this initiative steps forward with firm commitment. It may sound silly to put conditions like this. But if such a big movement is here in making all of us excited about the prospect of having a law suit, then it is a responsibility of those who initiated this thread to lead this effort forward.
I appreciate IV for its efforts. Happy V'Day.
I will contribute for legal advice if some leaders for this initiative steps forward with firm commitment. It may sound silly to put conditions like this. But if such a big movement is here in making all of us excited about the prospect of having a law suit, then it is a responsibility of those who initiated this thread to lead this effort forward.
I am estimating around 75K EB2 AOS approvals this year. Please check my analysis here. The analysis is based on statistics, testimonies, and spill over from FB to EB as estimated by Ron Gother. The analysis was couple of months old. I believe it still stands.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=246481&postcount=1422
Apart from total number of EB2 visas this year, one thing that is crucial here is how many visas are already used up. And thus how many visas are left for this year.
In the USCIS testimony, it was stated that they already used up 65% of the "target" in 5 months. Assuming, they used up atleast 30% more in next 5 months, there is only 5% to 10% of visas left over from their "target" number of visas. Did their "target" included spill over? No one knows. Knowing that will put us in better position to estimate the PD progress.
Though the EB2 moved until June 2006, I am hoping that most of the people before 2005 March should get approved. In that case, even if it retrogresses, it will fall back to March 2005. Once we reach March 2005, we have all statistics from DOL. So, would be easier to estimate.
There are 20 K EB visas left from the regular EB category for this fiscal and there are minimum of 20k FB visas which spill over for EB.
Thus conservative estimate 40k visas are available for use before Sep 30th. Liberal estimate the numbers could be higher.
More likley to happen is most EB-2 upto Dec 2005 getting approved, many in early 2006 getting approved.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=246481&postcount=1422
Apart from total number of EB2 visas this year, one thing that is crucial here is how many visas are already used up. And thus how many visas are left for this year.
In the USCIS testimony, it was stated that they already used up 65% of the "target" in 5 months. Assuming, they used up atleast 30% more in next 5 months, there is only 5% to 10% of visas left over from their "target" number of visas. Did their "target" included spill over? No one knows. Knowing that will put us in better position to estimate the PD progress.
Though the EB2 moved until June 2006, I am hoping that most of the people before 2005 March should get approved. In that case, even if it retrogresses, it will fall back to March 2005. Once we reach March 2005, we have all statistics from DOL. So, would be easier to estimate.
There are 20 K EB visas left from the regular EB category for this fiscal and there are minimum of 20k FB visas which spill over for EB.
Thus conservative estimate 40k visas are available for use before Sep 30th. Liberal estimate the numbers could be higher.
More likley to happen is most EB-2 upto Dec 2005 getting approved, many in early 2006 getting approved.
