digital2k
05-07 04:20 PM
Vowww
It feels great to have called everyone and making sure friends call as well ..
Pls Don't wait any longer, pick up your phone and be part of it NOW
Make sure you motivate others also
Let those phones be busy for the GOOD
For your convenience here are all the details :
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum85-action-items-for-everyone/1391371-cir-national-phone-campaign-29th-april-2010-to-14th-may-2010-a-post1751338.html#post1751338 (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum85-action-items-for-everyone/1391371-cir-national-phone-campaign-29th-april-2010-to-14th-may-2010-a-post1751338.html#post1751338)
This is The call
Don't miss the chance
IV and We suceeded in July, 2 Year EAD and many more ...
Pls pick up the phone and do your bit
IV is YOU and is Your Best Friend
It feels great to have called everyone and making sure friends call as well ..
Pls Don't wait any longer, pick up your phone and be part of it NOW
Make sure you motivate others also
Let those phones be busy for the GOOD
For your convenience here are all the details :
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum85-action-items-for-everyone/1391371-cir-national-phone-campaign-29th-april-2010-to-14th-may-2010-a-post1751338.html#post1751338 (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum85-action-items-for-everyone/1391371-cir-national-phone-campaign-29th-april-2010-to-14th-may-2010-a-post1751338.html#post1751338)
This is The call
Don't miss the chance
IV and We suceeded in July, 2 Year EAD and many more ...
Pls pick up the phone and do your bit
IV is YOU and is Your Best Friend
wallpaper Luisa Beccaria Fall 2010
caliguy
09-09 03:05 AM
Good luck guys! Thanks for all the hard work each of you are putting in.
Transaction ID: 8NY02905F8401260H
Contributions so far: $440
Transaction ID: 8NY02905F8401260H
Contributions so far: $440
anantc
09-03 10:56 AM
Arrived in the US in Sep 1999
Started the GC process in Apr 2003.
Labor filed in Oct 2003
Waiting... :D
Started the GC process in Apr 2003.
Labor filed in Oct 2003
Waiting... :D
2011 (Jennifer Nettles in Luisa
Jimi_Hendrix
11-19 12:43 PM
I see that most of the people who initially responded to my first post about the southern california state chapters have some recent activity i.e. they have visited this website in the last 2 days after my last posting requesting you to e-mail me about your availability for a conference call today. Not one of you has responded to my request to e-mail me.
I just want to make you all aware that IV core members can do a limited amount of work. They are definitely not superhumans although we expect them to be as such. If we fail in our efforts to secure any retrogression relief we will have only ourselves to blame in such a situation. Besides this is a very ripe time to be active and talk to politicians here in Southern California region. I would like to reschedule the conference call for the coming week/weekend depending on your availability.
In the end our best intentions and best wishes are not going to get us the immigration relief we want. We also cannot blame IV core team if we do not start working and lending them a hand. The choice is clearly ours. I hope that all of us will be more forthcoming and open to spending some time on IV work in the future.
Regards
Amit
I just want to make you all aware that IV core members can do a limited amount of work. They are definitely not superhumans although we expect them to be as such. If we fail in our efforts to secure any retrogression relief we will have only ourselves to blame in such a situation. Besides this is a very ripe time to be active and talk to politicians here in Southern California region. I would like to reschedule the conference call for the coming week/weekend depending on your availability.
In the end our best intentions and best wishes are not going to get us the immigration relief we want. We also cannot blame IV core team if we do not start working and lending them a hand. The choice is clearly ours. I hope that all of us will be more forthcoming and open to spending some time on IV work in the future.
Regards
Amit
more...
thomachan72
06-03 09:07 AM
The whole thing is very confusing sir. Just like the bible, for which different groups come up with different interpretations, we are being confronted with many intrepretations for this bill. Lets look at what the IV has to provide in the bill summary they have posted. Most probably that is a version prepared by the "patton-boggs" law firm.
paskal
07-11 12:16 PM
is there any way, any way in this whole freakin process, that we can get some sort of explanation for eb3-I first hand from DOS or USCIS? i mean there needs to be some justification for the acts? i know there are laws to interpret these dates, but how do we know that those laws are interpreted correctly by DOS or USCIS? though i am in eb3-I , jan 2003, i personally know atleast 3 folks who are in 2002 - eb3-I. Can we get some sort of guidance here.
i will ask the iv folks who keep in touch with USCIS if they know anything. AFAIK though, USCIS has come out with no answers other than quoting the non availability of adequate visa numbers. if there is any more info i will let you know...
i will ask the iv folks who keep in touch with USCIS if they know anything. AFAIK though, USCIS has come out with no answers other than quoting the non availability of adequate visa numbers. if there is any more info i will let you know...
more...
vedicman
05-12 09:34 AM
Called all the offices this morning. Will post the feed backs later in the afternoon. It was encouraging with a few senators.
2010 Luisa Beccaria
SGP
10-21 02:37 PM
Hi All,
My EB2 I-140 Approved in 2 days (Premium Processing).
Service Center: Texas
Application Received Date: 10/12/2010
Application Approved Date: 10/14/2010
This is just to share with all of you.
Thank you.
Mubarak Ho (Congratulations). Do include something for IV in your celebration spree (if you can):)
My EB2 I-140 Approved in 2 days (Premium Processing).
Service Center: Texas
Application Received Date: 10/12/2010
Application Approved Date: 10/14/2010
This is just to share with all of you.
Thank you.
Mubarak Ho (Congratulations). Do include something for IV in your celebration spree (if you can):)
more...
drona
07-20 04:56 PM
Sent you an email regarding your post.
hair Luisa Beccaria
GCBy3000
07-06 04:49 PM
What does this statement mean?
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/ReceiptingTimes06Jul07.pdf
per existing policies and procedures, requests for Premium Processing Service will continue to be processed within 15 days. USCIS wishes to assure all customers that the original received date (the date which the document is date stamped) will be honored and recorded on the receipt notice. This date will appear in the "Received Date" box on Form I-797, Notice of Action. The received date is different from the "Notice Date", which also appears on Form I-797. The Notice Date is the date the receipt notice was actually generated.
Why USCIS suddenly did this press release? Something fishy?
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/ReceiptingTimes06Jul07.pdf
per existing policies and procedures, requests for Premium Processing Service will continue to be processed within 15 days. USCIS wishes to assure all customers that the original received date (the date which the document is date stamped) will be honored and recorded on the receipt notice. This date will appear in the "Received Date" box on Form I-797, Notice of Action. The received date is different from the "Notice Date", which also appears on Form I-797. The Notice Date is the date the receipt notice was actually generated.
Why USCIS suddenly did this press release? Something fishy?
more...
sanjay
04-30 04:03 PM
They are done with the hearing?? WTF???? Have they got any fruitful information out of it? I feel so deceived..!! I think its all a farse..
Damn u USCIS and Damn u congress who hold our cause hostage to those illegal immigrants.
No fruitful results. As expected nothing happened. Actually, I would had got surprised if something had happened. plight of a legal immigrant from retrogated countries remains the same.
Back to work now.
Damn u USCIS and Damn u congress who hold our cause hostage to those illegal immigrants.
No fruitful results. As expected nothing happened. Actually, I would had got surprised if something had happened. plight of a legal immigrant from retrogated countries remains the same.
Back to work now.
hot From Luisa Beccaria champagne
Buran
10-13 11:25 AM
For FY2006 (Oct 1st, 2005 - Sep 30, 2006) a total of 30,512 Schedule "A" visas were used.
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/yearbook/2006/table07d.xls
Schedule "A" was current from June 1, 2005 till October 31, 2006
According to DHS statistics 5,125 schedule "A" visas were used in FY2005 (June 1st, 2005 - Sep 30, 2006).
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/yearbook/2005/table07.xls
So, from June 1, 2005 till September 30, 2006 only 36,367 Schedule "A" visas were used.
Now if 50,000 were available under schedule "A" what happen to 50,000-36,367=14,363 visas? I doubt very much that so many petitions were filed in October 2006 - the last month when this category was current and for new applicants the only option was AOS, even considering the fact that consulates conducted interviews in October, 2006 and November, 2006 they could not use 14,363 visas! Especially considering the fact that not all applications got approved (because of the Visacreen, etc).
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/yearbook/2006/table07d.xls
Schedule "A" was current from June 1, 2005 till October 31, 2006
According to DHS statistics 5,125 schedule "A" visas were used in FY2005 (June 1st, 2005 - Sep 30, 2006).
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/yearbook/2005/table07.xls
So, from June 1, 2005 till September 30, 2006 only 36,367 Schedule "A" visas were used.
Now if 50,000 were available under schedule "A" what happen to 50,000-36,367=14,363 visas? I doubt very much that so many petitions were filed in October 2006 - the last month when this category was current and for new applicants the only option was AOS, even considering the fact that consulates conducted interviews in October, 2006 and November, 2006 they could not use 14,363 visas! Especially considering the fact that not all applications got approved (because of the Visacreen, etc).
more...
house Must-Have Dress The next
paskal
07-06 01:05 PM
Man, in frustration people do not even know what to say and what not! Be very careful of what you spin and what you say. From the looks of it, this stuff has every chance of spinning out of control and it may have already started the ball rolling.Think about it for a second!. Once it goes that way, trust me, we will all live to regret that.
Yes, DHS approved upwards of 25000 GCs over the weekend, leading up to July 2nd. And some people are pissed off at that, err..why?
Remember, those 25000 are one of us. Once,they too were in line for Labor certifications, I-140s, medical exams and all that crap. And some of them were in the so called "FBI Name check" black-hole for an extended period of time. We should be rejoicing in the fact that most of those backlogs got cleaned up. Instead we have people questioning the validity of those newly approved GCs.My dear friends, god willing, we will all have GCs one day and tell me, how would you feel if someone else comes screaming at you just because he did not get one too.
Putting a "security lapse" spin on this could be very dangerous and should be avoided at any cost. I hope one of those anti-immigrant lobbies do not pick it up and start running with that. I prey that they do not revoke those already approved GCs, because if they do, then those poor 25000 souls will go through much more agony than what we are going through now.
It's very tough to get the genie back in the bottle once it is out, so think before you start popping that cork.
~AMK
you are right.
therefore iv's stand on this has been very careful.
we are happy that uscis is showing great efficiency. the fact they screwed up with the original visa bulletin is a whole separate issue, the question is- why are we suffering for their mistake?
all iv memmbers are encouraged not to harp the security issue, it's not in our interest.
Yes, DHS approved upwards of 25000 GCs over the weekend, leading up to July 2nd. And some people are pissed off at that, err..why?
Remember, those 25000 are one of us. Once,they too were in line for Labor certifications, I-140s, medical exams and all that crap. And some of them were in the so called "FBI Name check" black-hole for an extended period of time. We should be rejoicing in the fact that most of those backlogs got cleaned up. Instead we have people questioning the validity of those newly approved GCs.My dear friends, god willing, we will all have GCs one day and tell me, how would you feel if someone else comes screaming at you just because he did not get one too.
Putting a "security lapse" spin on this could be very dangerous and should be avoided at any cost. I hope one of those anti-immigrant lobbies do not pick it up and start running with that. I prey that they do not revoke those already approved GCs, because if they do, then those poor 25000 souls will go through much more agony than what we are going through now.
It's very tough to get the genie back in the bottle once it is out, so think before you start popping that cork.
~AMK
you are right.
therefore iv's stand on this has been very careful.
we are happy that uscis is showing great efficiency. the fact they screwed up with the original visa bulletin is a whole separate issue, the question is- why are we suffering for their mistake?
all iv memmbers are encouraged not to harp the security issue, it's not in our interest.
tattoo gown from Luisa Beccaria.
priti8888
07-23 03:30 PM
my PD were current in 2005.
One thing is confirmed:
When PD are "current" they approve cases based on RD.
My guess is in Oct or Nov 2007 PD would retrogress to jan/may-2004 for EB3 India. So hang in there guys!!..They will approve a lot of cases with older RD by Sept 30. They are hell bent on not wasting any visa numbers henceforth.
One thing is confirmed:
When PD are "current" they approve cases based on RD.
My guess is in Oct or Nov 2007 PD would retrogress to jan/may-2004 for EB3 India. So hang in there guys!!..They will approve a lot of cases with older RD by Sept 30. They are hell bent on not wasting any visa numbers henceforth.
more...
pictures Luisa Beccaria
cheg
07-23 04:00 PM
Thanks for the quick reply. So in my case since my husband doesn't have a RD yet for our I-485 then once we do get our RD, we can calculate that 2 yrs from that time we'll have our card ordered as well. :D :D :D I'm crossing my fingers!
my PD Aug 2004
RD Feb 2005
eb3 india
Last fingerprint in March 2007
my PD Aug 2004
RD Feb 2005
eb3 india
Last fingerprint in March 2007
dresses Luisa Beccaria Spring 2009
john2255
07-20 04:35 PM
Kindly understand that
Yea- YES
Nay- NO
Not- Absent from voting.
Obama was absent from voting- A clever diplomacy.
Hilary Clinton- Nay(double talk)
Senators from California- both no ( Big Surprise)
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00266
Text of the amemdment.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r110:1:./temp/~r110xIKs1t:e32253:
Here is the Senators and their voting pattern.
Alabama: Sessions (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Nay Pryor (D-AR), Nay
California: Boxer (D-CA), Nay Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Colorado: Allard (R-CO), Yea Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Nay Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Florida: Martinez (R-FL), Yea Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Nay Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Yea Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Kansas: Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Nay Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Massachusetts: Kennedy (D-MA), Nay Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Nay Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Yea Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Missouri: Bond (R-MO), Yea McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Tester (D-MT), Nay
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Yea Reid (D-NV), Nay
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Yea Sununu (R-NH), Yea
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Nay Domenici (R-NM), Yea
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Dole (R-NC), Yea
North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Nay Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Nay Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Nay Specter (R-PA), Yea
Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Nay Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Nay Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Virginia: Warner (R-VA), Yea Webb (D-VA), Nay
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia: Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Wisconsin: Feingold (D-WI), Nay Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea
That means we have lost around 2,40,000 unused visas. I heard that there is a total amount of 3,00,000 unused employment visas of the previous years due to the great efficiency of USCIS. Out of this 61,000 is kept apart for Schedule A nurses and PT's and the remaining 2,40,000 thousand would have been divided amoung employment catagories if the amendment had passed,clearing lot of our backloggs.
REMEMBER, THE RECAPTURE OF UNUSED VISAS IS ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT PRIORITIES OF CORE AND THE DOOR IS SLAMMED ON OUR FACES AGAIN BY HYPOCRITES LIKE HILARY AND CALIFORNIA SENATORS.
Its the high time we convince the senators who said NAYS. Lets start SOME KIND OF CAMPAIN aiming these guys. I am sure that core's hands are there behind this amendment. Well done IV. Don't get dissappointed, keep trying for Skill bill or for similar amendments. Its really unfortunate that we lost a very very big chance. Lets do something immediately.
Following is the text of amendment.
`(ii) DISTRIBUTION OF VISAS.--The total number of visas made available under paragraph (1) from unused visas from fiscal years 1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006 shall be distributed as follows:
``(I) The total number of visas made available for immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor shall be 61,000.
``(II) The visas remaining from the total made available under subclause (I) shall be allocated equally among employment-based immigrants with approved petitions under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (and their family members accompanying or following to join).''.
(b) H-1B Visa Availability.--Section 214(g)(1)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(g)(1)(A)) is amended--
(1) in clause (vi), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) by redesignating clause (vii) as clause (ix); and
(3) by inserting after clause (vi) the following:
``(vii) 65,000 in each of fiscal years 2004 through 2007;
``(viii) 115,000 in fiscal year 2008; and''.
Yea- YES
Nay- NO
Not- Absent from voting.
Obama was absent from voting- A clever diplomacy.
Hilary Clinton- Nay(double talk)
Senators from California- both no ( Big Surprise)
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00266
Text of the amemdment.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r110:1:./temp/~r110xIKs1t:e32253:
Here is the Senators and their voting pattern.
Alabama: Sessions (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Nay Pryor (D-AR), Nay
California: Boxer (D-CA), Nay Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Colorado: Allard (R-CO), Yea Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Nay Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Florida: Martinez (R-FL), Yea Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Nay Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Yea Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Kansas: Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Nay Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Massachusetts: Kennedy (D-MA), Nay Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Nay Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Yea Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Missouri: Bond (R-MO), Yea McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Tester (D-MT), Nay
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Yea Reid (D-NV), Nay
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Yea Sununu (R-NH), Yea
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Nay Domenici (R-NM), Yea
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Dole (R-NC), Yea
North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Nay Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Nay Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Nay Specter (R-PA), Yea
Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Nay Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Nay Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Virginia: Warner (R-VA), Yea Webb (D-VA), Nay
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia: Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Wisconsin: Feingold (D-WI), Nay Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea
That means we have lost around 2,40,000 unused visas. I heard that there is a total amount of 3,00,000 unused employment visas of the previous years due to the great efficiency of USCIS. Out of this 61,000 is kept apart for Schedule A nurses and PT's and the remaining 2,40,000 thousand would have been divided amoung employment catagories if the amendment had passed,clearing lot of our backloggs.
REMEMBER, THE RECAPTURE OF UNUSED VISAS IS ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT PRIORITIES OF CORE AND THE DOOR IS SLAMMED ON OUR FACES AGAIN BY HYPOCRITES LIKE HILARY AND CALIFORNIA SENATORS.
Its the high time we convince the senators who said NAYS. Lets start SOME KIND OF CAMPAIN aiming these guys. I am sure that core's hands are there behind this amendment. Well done IV. Don't get dissappointed, keep trying for Skill bill or for similar amendments. Its really unfortunate that we lost a very very big chance. Lets do something immediately.
Following is the text of amendment.
`(ii) DISTRIBUTION OF VISAS.--The total number of visas made available under paragraph (1) from unused visas from fiscal years 1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006 shall be distributed as follows:
``(I) The total number of visas made available for immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor shall be 61,000.
``(II) The visas remaining from the total made available under subclause (I) shall be allocated equally among employment-based immigrants with approved petitions under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (and their family members accompanying or following to join).''.
(b) H-1B Visa Availability.--Section 214(g)(1)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(g)(1)(A)) is amended--
(1) in clause (vi), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) by redesignating clause (vii) as clause (ix); and
(3) by inserting after clause (vi) the following:
``(vii) 65,000 in each of fiscal years 2004 through 2007;
``(viii) 115,000 in fiscal year 2008; and''.
more...
makeup Luisa Beccaria
kak1978
08-25 11:17 PM
Try IDBI, they have good rates.
girlfriend Luisa Beccaria
Green.Tech
06-11 10:46 AM
Let's see who the first HERO will be to break the pattern of 2 days of zero contributions...
hairstyles Finally, the gowns at Marchesa
iqube00
09-10 09:47 AM
Just contributed $100 through Paypal. Receipt # 7VK6980438556652Y. Great job IV!
gccovet
04-30 03:06 PM
SO IF they move PD's to 2006 dec then there is aposibility that all 2006 pd 's get GC's before 2001 pd's.:mad:
No, I think it then based on PD.
GCCovet
No, I think it then based on PD.
GCCovet
ksrk
02-25 06:28 PM
I would be the most happiest person if that happens :D
NOW (no order whatsoever) is what applies during that last quarter.
So, it doesn't really do anything for certain for anyone - except get us all on the edge of our seats "while supplies last".
Well, good luck to all! Let's see what happens.
NOW (no order whatsoever) is what applies during that last quarter.
So, it doesn't really do anything for certain for anyone - except get us all on the edge of our seats "while supplies last".
Well, good luck to all! Let's see what happens.
No comments:
Post a Comment