http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19127991/site/newsweek/
38/50 dems voted for bill
Only 7/38 rep voted for bill.
There is a good chance that Bush will get 15 more out of 38 to favor the bill.
38/50 dems voted for bill
Only 7/38 rep voted for bill.
There is a good chance that Bush will get 15 more out of 38 to favor the bill.
wallpaper Cerwin-Vega-Fans.com • View
What is the meaning of this?
The bill also includes a variety of other provisions, including one that would prohibit employers from hiring H-1B workers and then outsourcing them to other businesses and another that would require companies to pay prevailing wages to both H-1B and L-1 visa holders
Is that means Bodyshopping cannot be done by H1 or L1?
?? A new bill in senate to reform H1B ???
I was just watching LuDobb's show on CNN and saw a clip on a proposed bill (being prepared by Sen.Durbin and another whose name I forgot) to revamp/reform H1B program. From the brief discussion, got the impression that the bill is more concentrated on controlling the h1B program with more checks and rules etc. Obviously Dobbs liked it - not sure if there are any other measures in that bill. Also not sure why another bill if CIR/STRIVE act is in works which is supposed to cover all immigration issues. Anyone else saw any related news elsewhere?
Also saw this article (sorry if its already discussed somewhere):
http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/04/03/HNsenateh1bbill_1.html
The bill also includes a variety of other provisions, including one that would prohibit employers from hiring H-1B workers and then outsourcing them to other businesses and another that would require companies to pay prevailing wages to both H-1B and L-1 visa holders
Is that means Bodyshopping cannot be done by H1 or L1?
?? A new bill in senate to reform H1B ???
I was just watching LuDobb's show on CNN and saw a clip on a proposed bill (being prepared by Sen.Durbin and another whose name I forgot) to revamp/reform H1B program. From the brief discussion, got the impression that the bill is more concentrated on controlling the h1B program with more checks and rules etc. Obviously Dobbs liked it - not sure if there are any other measures in that bill. Also not sure why another bill if CIR/STRIVE act is in works which is supposed to cover all immigration issues. Anyone else saw any related news elsewhere?
Also saw this article (sorry if its already discussed somewhere):
http://www.infoworld.com/article/07/04/03/HNsenateh1bbill_1.html
........
2011 Live Sound : Speakers : Cerwin-Vega EL-36CX Earthquake Folded Horn Subwoofer
done...and recommended to friends already.
Guru's
I have a small doubt on AC -21 especially the same / similar interpretation. in Perm Application there are two places where there is job description. One is Section H field 11 ( Job Opportunity/ job duties) and other one is Section F field 2 ( Prevailing Wage/ SOC code) now both define what the job is the Section H is company specific and Section F is list of USCIS codes under which this particular job falls as subset.
The question is will USCIS judge using section F or Section H for same/ similar interpretation because Section F is pretty Generic and as long as you are in same field it works example in IT if you were say DBA and now data modeler or Systems Analyst or coder they are pretty much same. Here is an example of one such code
15-1051 Computer Systems Analysts
Analyze science, engineering, business, and all other data processing problems for application to electronic data processing systems. Analyze user requirements, procedures, and problems to automate or improve existing systems and review computer system capabilities, workflow, and scheduling limitations. May analyze or recommend commercially available software. Exclude persons working primarily as "Engineers" (17-2011 through 17-2199), "Mathematicians" (15-2021), or "Scientists" (19-1011 through 19-3099). May supervise computer programmers.
But in case they try to interpret Section H is it very complex and has specific tools that can get outdated or obselete with time. So it will be difficult to do an Ac -21 with that Example if they mention SQL Server or Ab-Initio in section H and now you take a full time in company using Oracle or Informatica will that cause an issue?
I have a small doubt on AC -21 especially the same / similar interpretation. in Perm Application there are two places where there is job description. One is Section H field 11 ( Job Opportunity/ job duties) and other one is Section F field 2 ( Prevailing Wage/ SOC code) now both define what the job is the Section H is company specific and Section F is list of USCIS codes under which this particular job falls as subset.
The question is will USCIS judge using section F or Section H for same/ similar interpretation because Section F is pretty Generic and as long as you are in same field it works example in IT if you were say DBA and now data modeler or Systems Analyst or coder they are pretty much same. Here is an example of one such code
15-1051 Computer Systems Analysts
Analyze science, engineering, business, and all other data processing problems for application to electronic data processing systems. Analyze user requirements, procedures, and problems to automate or improve existing systems and review computer system capabilities, workflow, and scheduling limitations. May analyze or recommend commercially available software. Exclude persons working primarily as "Engineers" (17-2011 through 17-2199), "Mathematicians" (15-2021), or "Scientists" (19-1011 through 19-3099). May supervise computer programmers.
But in case they try to interpret Section H is it very complex and has specific tools that can get outdated or obselete with time. So it will be difficult to do an Ac -21 with that Example if they mention SQL Server or Ab-Initio in section H and now you take a full time in company using Oracle or Informatica will that cause an issue?
Here is what I would do:
- Fast track the H-1B application using premium processing so that you know for sure whether you have it or not.
- If they approve your petition, it will have a start date of Oct 1. Since your L1 is expiring in Sept, they will not approve the change of status. So, you will get the approval notice without the attached I-94.
- Once you have the approval notice in hand, set up an appointment for your H-1B visa in your home country. Leave the country before your L1 I-94 expires.
- Get the H-1B visa and come back in Oct to work for your new employer.
If you decide to do the L1 extension now, then you get into issues of which petition was approved last by the USCIS - last action rule. Keep it straightforward with minimal complications so that your future applications, such as GC, are also less complicated.
Also, a word to the wise - make sure you are not unpaid/on bench, no nonsensical bonds etc. when you come in on H-1. These things create unnecessary complications in the future.
Thanks AMGC. need one clarification.
do you mean to say that because my L1 is expiring in September, the COS will not be allowed, but the H1 itself will be approved ?
or will it be like because L1 expires before Oct1, the entire h1B petiton will be rejected outright ?
I have this thread on this topic.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=253917
- Fast track the H-1B application using premium processing so that you know for sure whether you have it or not.
- If they approve your petition, it will have a start date of Oct 1. Since your L1 is expiring in Sept, they will not approve the change of status. So, you will get the approval notice without the attached I-94.
- Once you have the approval notice in hand, set up an appointment for your H-1B visa in your home country. Leave the country before your L1 I-94 expires.
- Get the H-1B visa and come back in Oct to work for your new employer.
If you decide to do the L1 extension now, then you get into issues of which petition was approved last by the USCIS - last action rule. Keep it straightforward with minimal complications so that your future applications, such as GC, are also less complicated.
Also, a word to the wise - make sure you are not unpaid/on bench, no nonsensical bonds etc. when you come in on H-1. These things create unnecessary complications in the future.
Thanks AMGC. need one clarification.
do you mean to say that because my L1 is expiring in September, the COS will not be allowed, but the H1 itself will be approved ?
or will it be like because L1 expires before Oct1, the entire h1B petiton will be rejected outright ?
I have this thread on this topic.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=253917
printed mine .. will post tomorrow!
10/16 - Posted
10/16 - Posted
2010 Ran a cerwin vega stroker 18.
My H1B visa stamp has expired, but I have the approval papers extending my H1B until Jan 2011. My company filed for bankruptcy. Another company bought parts of my company (not the entire company) in which I work. So I got absorbed by the buyer.
What happens to my visa? Does the new company have to file for an amended petition? If so, how long does that take?
I have to travel to India in two months. If they file the petition and I travel out of the country before I get the approval, will that be safe?
Thanks very much.
What happens to my visa? Does the new company have to file for an amended petition? If so, how long does that take?
I have to travel to India in two months. If they file the petition and I travel out of the country before I get the approval, will that be safe?
Thanks very much.
I'm kind of dissapointed people are voting due to realistic proportions... I wanted people to vote on artistic show
hair you choose Cerwin-Vega!
Not for us but for some one they will meet and discuss
http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/calendar.html
If Zoe can bring this up then we may be able to push for HR 5882. Seems like no one is interested in HR 5882.
Come on ! some one from california should help us in this one.. Call Zoe's office and find out where we are on HR 5882.
http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/calendar.html
If Zoe can bring this up then we may be able to push for HR 5882. Seems like no one is interested in HR 5882.
Come on ! some one from california should help us in this one.. Call Zoe's office and find out where we are on HR 5882.
Finally, notarized and faxed the letter today.
hot Cerwin Vega Ab36 In A Concrete
Does anyone have numbers for spillover last year category wise? I mean, last year how many EB4, EB5 and EB1 left out visas got spilled over to EB2? Thanks...
Here are the details for last year and years before:
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
Here are the details for last year and years before:
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
house (Cerwin-Vega) has died
"Although USCIS stated in its 2006 Annual Report Response (at p. 8) that it provides detailed data to DOS, the tri-agency group identified gaps in USCIS’ data. Through these discussions, the Ombudsman learned that accounting and processing methods differ at the Nebraska and Texas Service Centers (where USCIS processes employment-based petitions)."
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/CISOMB_Annual%20Report_2007.pdf
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/CISOMB_Annual%20Report_2007.pdf
tattoo Live Sound : Speakers : Cerwin-Vega EL-36CX Earthquake Folded Horn Subwoofer
As far as dates for India goes, its out. Bulletin on USCIS website will have details for all other countries as well which doesn't matter much to us...
How sweet of you, but guess what it does matter to some people, like me.
What I do not understand is how EB3 row only moves so little because there isnt a lot of people left before 2005. Anyone have an answer for that?
But I hope things will eventually improve for all of us!
How sweet of you, but guess what it does matter to some people, like me.
What I do not understand is how EB3 row only moves so little because there isnt a lot of people left before 2005. Anyone have an answer for that?
But I hope things will eventually improve for all of us!
pictures Used Cerwin Vega SL-36 amp;
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3761.html
Not bad for EB2 India/China ,the dates are the same as june bulletin
Not bad for EB2 India/China ,the dates are the same as june bulletin
dresses Cheap CERWIN-VEGA CMX-12S-NA 12quot; CMX SERIES POWERED SUBWOOFER Buy Now!
PD Aug 2006
I 140 Filed in June 2007. Pending @ TSC
I 485 Filed on 10th Aug 2007
FP Notice received.
I 140 Filed in June 2007. Pending @ TSC
I 485 Filed on 10th Aug 2007
FP Notice received.
makeup Cerwin Vega R-24s
I agree with you 100% for her delayed letter when everything falls in right place and may want to claim credit later on. But on other side, it is still good that she wrote a letter to add pressure on DHS. My 2 cents.
This is just a stunt. WHy did she wait allthese days to write this letter. Now when everything falls in place by others efforts, she wants people to think it is because her effort all these things are happening. I hate murthy or your murfhy.
This is just a stunt. WHy did she wait allthese days to write this letter. Now when everything falls in place by others efforts, she wants people to think it is because her effort all these things are happening. I hate murthy or your murfhy.
girlfriend Cerwin-Vega JE-36B Junior Earthquake Folded Subwoofer
Just sent.
hairstyles Cerwin Vega CV Series
It's good to have money and the
things money can buy,
but it's good, too,
to check up
once in a while and
make sure that
you haven't lost
the things money can't buy
George Horace Lorimer
things money can buy,
but it's good, too,
to check up
once in a while and
make sure that
you haven't lost
the things money can't buy
George Horace Lorimer
There is no wastage. Just because people are not getting green cards does not mean wastage. Show me where in the bulletin or official document you can see wastage.
Both of the flights were on the same itinerary and were booked through Thai. United was asking for money for international part of the travel because he said that Thai would charge United for the extra weight if United checked in the luggage all the way to Bangkok, which isn't really true because Thai did allow 70 LB then. I am not sure what the regulation is now.
I think you are right that the guy was probably ignorant and didn't really care becasue I wasn't flying United after LA anyways.
i have never had that problem
may have been because you booked those flights separately, if they are on the same itinerary and both were booked through Thai, United should not do that, guess they don't care because you are not continuing on United. btw how could they demand money for the international part of the flight- they are not Thai and their rules don't apply...i also think the person you dealt with was ignorant...
the problem i have seen- you fly into the US and have a connecting flight onwards- if you take it withing 24 hrs ie same day- bags just continue- if not you are stuck with domestic rules. now it no longer matters on american carriers at least, intl allowance has also been decreased to 50 lbs.
I think you are right that the guy was probably ignorant and didn't really care becasue I wasn't flying United after LA anyways.
i have never had that problem
may have been because you booked those flights separately, if they are on the same itinerary and both were booked through Thai, United should not do that, guess they don't care because you are not continuing on United. btw how could they demand money for the international part of the flight- they are not Thai and their rules don't apply...i also think the person you dealt with was ignorant...
the problem i have seen- you fly into the US and have a connecting flight onwards- if you take it withing 24 hrs ie same day- bags just continue- if not you are stuck with domestic rules. now it no longer matters on american carriers at least, intl allowance has also been decreased to 50 lbs.
