Bpositive
10-07 12:37 PM
USCIS decided to take our $604 and give me an my wife APs in 9 days! They seem really efficient when they have to take money from us. But really slow when they have to approve GC applications (EB2, PD of Dec 2004). USCIS just seems to be interested in 'extortion' payments to employ USCIS staff - more a lawless mafia than a organization upholding the law!
wallpaper Beijing Olympics Cycling
crystal
07-11 09:32 AM
Thats cool Glus
This is about me. I was photographed yesterday!!
This is about me. I was photographed yesterday!!
feedfront
09-24 05:57 PM
Got the CPO mails for myself and spouse.
11 years wait is over finally. I wish all the best for the remaining folks !!
Congratz!!! You got it on right time, celebrate whole weekend..
11 years wait is over finally. I wish all the best for the remaining folks !!
Congratz!!! You got it on right time, celebrate whole weekend..
2011 on cycle Free Wallpaper
poddar007
01-16 05:15 PM
Can some one please clarify what this case number is. Do we get the case number when we apply for visa, or this is just the approval notice number.
I am going for my interview on 23rd January to Mumbai. I was just trying to find out whether I can call KCC before leaving US to find out if my approval notice is in the PIMS system or not.
Hi,
I'd posted a note earlier. I haven't received any updates yet. I am in contact with 4 other people who interviewed on 4th Jan and are still awaiting a reply. The kentucky number mentioned in one of the replys confirms the date on which our H1 was approved. When you call up the number, on mentioning your case #, it pulls up the date on which H1b was approved.
Could anyone who's received a email/ call please post a message to the group, indicating the wait time and date of the first interview?
Thanks!
I am going for my interview on 23rd January to Mumbai. I was just trying to find out whether I can call KCC before leaving US to find out if my approval notice is in the PIMS system or not.
Hi,
I'd posted a note earlier. I haven't received any updates yet. I am in contact with 4 other people who interviewed on 4th Jan and are still awaiting a reply. The kentucky number mentioned in one of the replys confirms the date on which our H1 was approved. When you call up the number, on mentioning your case #, it pulls up the date on which H1b was approved.
Could anyone who's received a email/ call please post a message to the group, indicating the wait time and date of the first interview?
Thanks!
more...
Macaca
12-05 05:27 PM
AMY GOODMAN: Let me ask you about national sovereignty�
LOU DOBBS: Sure.
AMY GOODMAN: �in a moment. But first, I want to turn to an excerpt of your show from August 22nd.
LOU DOBBS: This year?
AMY GOODMAN: This year.
LOU DOBBS: All right!
LOU DOBBS: Just one day after President Bush signed legislation here in Washington to build a border fence, the government of Mexico is threatening the sovereignty and national security of the United States. President Vicente Fox and President-Elect Felipe Calderon are both asserting that the United States has no right to build such a fence along our southern border. At the same time, the White House and its allies in corporate America appear determined to create a new North American Union, incorporating Canada, Mexico and the United States. Such a union would, in effect, create a giant nation.
AMY GOODMAN: Lou Dobbs, August 22, 2007.
LOU DOBBS: Sure.
AMY GOODMAN: Juan?
JUAN GONZALEZ: Well, this concept of a giant nation, could you expand on it?
LOU DOBBS: The North American Union?
JUAN GONZALEZ: Yes.
LOU DOBBS: Well, coming from the 2005 meeting with Stephen Harper, the prime minister of Canada, Vicente Fox, then the president of Mexico, and George W. Bush�I�m sure you�re still delighted to know he�s president of the United States�met and laid out the foundation through the Security and Prosperity Partnership. What has ensued since then, there have been a number of high-level meetings�military, business, and governmental leaders�all of which had been closed to the press and all toward harmonizing, if you will, relations between the two and diminishing the border and the encumbrances to commerce moving straight ahead.
AMY GOODMAN: Just to be clear, it could have been 2006, that report, so I want to be factually accurate. It was either this year or last year.
LOU DOBBS: Well, I forgive you, no matter what it was.
LOU DOBBS: Sure.
AMY GOODMAN: �in a moment. But first, I want to turn to an excerpt of your show from August 22nd.
LOU DOBBS: This year?
AMY GOODMAN: This year.
LOU DOBBS: All right!
LOU DOBBS: Just one day after President Bush signed legislation here in Washington to build a border fence, the government of Mexico is threatening the sovereignty and national security of the United States. President Vicente Fox and President-Elect Felipe Calderon are both asserting that the United States has no right to build such a fence along our southern border. At the same time, the White House and its allies in corporate America appear determined to create a new North American Union, incorporating Canada, Mexico and the United States. Such a union would, in effect, create a giant nation.
AMY GOODMAN: Lou Dobbs, August 22, 2007.
LOU DOBBS: Sure.
AMY GOODMAN: Juan?
JUAN GONZALEZ: Well, this concept of a giant nation, could you expand on it?
LOU DOBBS: The North American Union?
JUAN GONZALEZ: Yes.
LOU DOBBS: Well, coming from the 2005 meeting with Stephen Harper, the prime minister of Canada, Vicente Fox, then the president of Mexico, and George W. Bush�I�m sure you�re still delighted to know he�s president of the United States�met and laid out the foundation through the Security and Prosperity Partnership. What has ensued since then, there have been a number of high-level meetings�military, business, and governmental leaders�all of which had been closed to the press and all toward harmonizing, if you will, relations between the two and diminishing the border and the encumbrances to commerce moving straight ahead.
AMY GOODMAN: Just to be clear, it could have been 2006, that report, so I want to be factually accurate. It was either this year or last year.
LOU DOBBS: Well, I forgive you, no matter what it was.
aadimanav
01-03 12:56 AM
Part 2 continued....
USCIS delays have become so excessive in this arena that many foreign nationals have sought relief in federal court. The Administrative Procedure Act of 1946 (APA), which governs federal agency actions and decisions, requires that an agency resolve a matter presented to it within a "reasonable" time frame. See 8 U.S.C. 555(b). Using the APA, foreign nationals have argued that waiting for two or more years for a decision on an immigration application is "unreasonable" under the statute. The cases are divided, but a majority of courts have agreed that making a foreign national wait years and years just for a decision on his or her application is unreasonable. As a result, many judges have ordered the FBI and USCIS to complete pending name check cases within 60 or 90 days where a foreign national has been waiting for two or more years. Some judges have noted that security concerns are not to be taken lightly, but this only reinforces the fact that such issues should be resolved in a matter of weeks as opposed to years.
The success or failure of litigation in this arena ultimately turns on the court's reading of a jurisdiction-stripping provision embedded in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), as amended by the Real ID Act of 2005. The INA precludes judicial review of any "decision or action" of the USCIS that is "specified [under INA] to be in the discretion" of the USCIS. See 8 U.S.C. 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii). In defending challenges to delayed applications, the U.S. Attorney's office has argued that the adjudication of a green card application, including the pace of adjudication, is committed to the sole discretion of the USCIS, because the INA specifies that a decision to approve or deny a green card application is within the discretion of the USCIS. See 8 U.S.C. 1255(a).
None of the circuit courts have ruled on this issue, but the relationship between USCIS delay and the role of the judiciary has become a "national judicial debate" at the district court level. See Saleem v. Keisler , 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 80044 (W.D. Wis. Oct. 26, 2007). Some courts have bought the government's argument, holding that a discretionary "action" includes every interim action taken along the way leading up to an ultimate decision on an application. See Safadi v. Howard , 466 F.Supp. 2d 696, 699 (E.D. Vir. 2006). Under this theory, a stalled name check is simply action along the way to a final decision. The majority of courts have rejected this reading of the statute, holding that USCIS' discretion only applies to the ultimate decision on an application, not the pace of its adjudication. As one court stated, "it would require Orwellian twisting of the word ["action"] to conclude that it means a failure to adjudicate." Saleem v. Keisler, supra. Similarly, U.S. District Judge Stewart Dalzell recognized that the INA grants discretion to the USCIS to grant or deny a green card application, but "national security does not require that it also have absolute discretion to delay such an application to Dickensian lengths." Cao v. Upchurch , 496 F.Supp. 2d 569, 574 (E.D. Pa 2007). Put simply, "there is a difference between the [USCIS'] discretion over how to resolve an application and the [USCIS'] discretion over whether it resolves an application." Singh v. Still , 470 F. Supp. 2d 1064, 1068 (N.D. Cal. 2007).
The U.S. Attorney's office has also argued that the USCIS is not required to make a decision on green card or naturalization applications since the INA does not specify a time frame for the agency's decision. See Assadzadeh v. Mueller , 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 80915 (E.D. Pa. Oct. 31, 2007). The government's argument is based on Norton v. So. Utah Wilderness Alliance , 542 U.S. 55 (2004), where the U.S. Supreme Court held that a plaintiff can succeed in compelling an agency to act under the APA if and only if the action sought to be compelled is a "discrete action" that the agency is "legally required" to take. Under the government's theory, the USCIS cannot be compelled to act where its organic statute fails to require it to make a decision. But, under Norton , an agency's regulation with the force of law can create a legal duty. Arguably, the USCIS is legally required to act on applications presented to it, as its own regulations provide that it inform applicants of its decisions. See 8 C.F.R. 245.2(a)(5)(i) (green card applications); 8 C.F.R. 316.14(b)(1) (naturalization applications). Most judges in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania appear to accept this argument. For example, in Kaplan v. Chertoff , 481 F. Supp. 2d 370, 399 (E.D. Pa. 2007), Judge Eduardo Robreno held that the USCIS has a duty to adjudicate green card and naturalization applications, based, in part, on the agency's own regulations.
Once a court determines that its jurisdiction is not stripped under the INA, it usually faces little difficulty finding a cause of action under the APA. Of course, determining whether an agency has acted unreasonably is a fact-intensive inquiry, but the government's position does not look promising where the USCIS has failed to perform three distinct background checks for two or more years without any indication of special circumstances. See, e.g., Saleem v. Keisler, supra . The government has argued that flagging agency resources are to blame, but many courts find little sympathy for such posturing. In addressing the issue of agency resources, one court stated that the USCIS should take its complaints up with Congress. See Liang v. Attorney General , 07-cv-2349-CW (N.D. Cal. Oct. 30, 2007). "The executive branch must decide for itself how best to meet its statutory duties; this Court can only decide whether or not those duties have been met." Id . Even factoring in flagging appropriations, the court held that a two-and-a-half-year delay is unreasonable as a matter of law. Id .
With more than 340,000 cases in the name check backlog, it is not clear when some foreign nationals will ever have their cases resolved at the agency level. At least with the advantageous decisions handed down from the federal district courts, foreign nationals have the hope of going into court to request an expeditious resolution to their name checks. In the majority of situations, it appears that litigation is the only option, but at least an option exists.
Please email the author at gforney@wolfblock.com with questions about this article.
USCIS delays have become so excessive in this arena that many foreign nationals have sought relief in federal court. The Administrative Procedure Act of 1946 (APA), which governs federal agency actions and decisions, requires that an agency resolve a matter presented to it within a "reasonable" time frame. See 8 U.S.C. 555(b). Using the APA, foreign nationals have argued that waiting for two or more years for a decision on an immigration application is "unreasonable" under the statute. The cases are divided, but a majority of courts have agreed that making a foreign national wait years and years just for a decision on his or her application is unreasonable. As a result, many judges have ordered the FBI and USCIS to complete pending name check cases within 60 or 90 days where a foreign national has been waiting for two or more years. Some judges have noted that security concerns are not to be taken lightly, but this only reinforces the fact that such issues should be resolved in a matter of weeks as opposed to years.
The success or failure of litigation in this arena ultimately turns on the court's reading of a jurisdiction-stripping provision embedded in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), as amended by the Real ID Act of 2005. The INA precludes judicial review of any "decision or action" of the USCIS that is "specified [under INA] to be in the discretion" of the USCIS. See 8 U.S.C. 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii). In defending challenges to delayed applications, the U.S. Attorney's office has argued that the adjudication of a green card application, including the pace of adjudication, is committed to the sole discretion of the USCIS, because the INA specifies that a decision to approve or deny a green card application is within the discretion of the USCIS. See 8 U.S.C. 1255(a).
None of the circuit courts have ruled on this issue, but the relationship between USCIS delay and the role of the judiciary has become a "national judicial debate" at the district court level. See Saleem v. Keisler , 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 80044 (W.D. Wis. Oct. 26, 2007). Some courts have bought the government's argument, holding that a discretionary "action" includes every interim action taken along the way leading up to an ultimate decision on an application. See Safadi v. Howard , 466 F.Supp. 2d 696, 699 (E.D. Vir. 2006). Under this theory, a stalled name check is simply action along the way to a final decision. The majority of courts have rejected this reading of the statute, holding that USCIS' discretion only applies to the ultimate decision on an application, not the pace of its adjudication. As one court stated, "it would require Orwellian twisting of the word ["action"] to conclude that it means a failure to adjudicate." Saleem v. Keisler, supra. Similarly, U.S. District Judge Stewart Dalzell recognized that the INA grants discretion to the USCIS to grant or deny a green card application, but "national security does not require that it also have absolute discretion to delay such an application to Dickensian lengths." Cao v. Upchurch , 496 F.Supp. 2d 569, 574 (E.D. Pa 2007). Put simply, "there is a difference between the [USCIS'] discretion over how to resolve an application and the [USCIS'] discretion over whether it resolves an application." Singh v. Still , 470 F. Supp. 2d 1064, 1068 (N.D. Cal. 2007).
The U.S. Attorney's office has also argued that the USCIS is not required to make a decision on green card or naturalization applications since the INA does not specify a time frame for the agency's decision. See Assadzadeh v. Mueller , 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 80915 (E.D. Pa. Oct. 31, 2007). The government's argument is based on Norton v. So. Utah Wilderness Alliance , 542 U.S. 55 (2004), where the U.S. Supreme Court held that a plaintiff can succeed in compelling an agency to act under the APA if and only if the action sought to be compelled is a "discrete action" that the agency is "legally required" to take. Under the government's theory, the USCIS cannot be compelled to act where its organic statute fails to require it to make a decision. But, under Norton , an agency's regulation with the force of law can create a legal duty. Arguably, the USCIS is legally required to act on applications presented to it, as its own regulations provide that it inform applicants of its decisions. See 8 C.F.R. 245.2(a)(5)(i) (green card applications); 8 C.F.R. 316.14(b)(1) (naturalization applications). Most judges in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania appear to accept this argument. For example, in Kaplan v. Chertoff , 481 F. Supp. 2d 370, 399 (E.D. Pa. 2007), Judge Eduardo Robreno held that the USCIS has a duty to adjudicate green card and naturalization applications, based, in part, on the agency's own regulations.
Once a court determines that its jurisdiction is not stripped under the INA, it usually faces little difficulty finding a cause of action under the APA. Of course, determining whether an agency has acted unreasonably is a fact-intensive inquiry, but the government's position does not look promising where the USCIS has failed to perform three distinct background checks for two or more years without any indication of special circumstances. See, e.g., Saleem v. Keisler, supra . The government has argued that flagging agency resources are to blame, but many courts find little sympathy for such posturing. In addressing the issue of agency resources, one court stated that the USCIS should take its complaints up with Congress. See Liang v. Attorney General , 07-cv-2349-CW (N.D. Cal. Oct. 30, 2007). "The executive branch must decide for itself how best to meet its statutory duties; this Court can only decide whether or not those duties have been met." Id . Even factoring in flagging appropriations, the court held that a two-and-a-half-year delay is unreasonable as a matter of law. Id .
With more than 340,000 cases in the name check backlog, it is not clear when some foreign nationals will ever have their cases resolved at the agency level. At least with the advantageous decisions handed down from the federal district courts, foreign nationals have the hope of going into court to request an expeditious resolution to their name checks. In the majority of situations, it appears that litigation is the only option, but at least an option exists.
Please email the author at gforney@wolfblock.com with questions about this article.
more...
mallu
08-06 02:43 PM
Why would you say EAD and H1B will be denied??
if one is taunting , " Look FBI bosses , i am stuck in security check, still i am a working with my H1B/EAD . How dare you allow to people remain here - for many years - if you suspect something is fishy with their record "
if one is taunting , " Look FBI bosses , i am stuck in security check, still i am a working with my H1B/EAD . How dare you allow to people remain here - for many years - if you suspect something is fishy with their record "
2010 Shimano Sh Ro75 Cycling Shoes
seekerofpeace
10-05 10:53 PM
Caliguy,
POJ method can be used for all cases that are current and in the processing window...just keep on trying ur luck and I am sure you'll land a decent CSR who will be much much more useful and worth your trials and efforts.
Be persistent and you have every right to be after all you came this far.
Write to Janet Napolitano and mention that you are unfairly getting delayed and that you want to know what is holding your application and all checks and clearances done and visa number is available...
SoP
POJ method can be used for all cases that are current and in the processing window...just keep on trying ur luck and I am sure you'll land a decent CSR who will be much much more useful and worth your trials and efforts.
Be persistent and you have every right to be after all you came this far.
Write to Janet Napolitano and mention that you are unfairly getting delayed and that you want to know what is holding your application and all checks and clearances done and visa number is available...
SoP
more...
jsb
09-25 03:51 PM
Thanks. I did sent email and fax last week.
What action do we expect on our letters/faxes to Congressmen, besides a routine reply USCIS is used to. This is not the first time that somebody is bothering them in their leizurely work. If they have tons of filings all over their offices, how do you expect them to find your case out of them.
USCIS continue to say that they have loads and loads of filings yet to be entered.
What action do we expect on our letters/faxes to Congressmen, besides a routine reply USCIS is used to. This is not the first time that somebody is bothering them in their leizurely work. If they have tons of filings all over their offices, how do you expect them to find your case out of them.
USCIS continue to say that they have loads and loads of filings yet to be entered.
hair Sports - Cycling Wallpaper
amitjoey
07-09 07:00 PM
I am telling you, this is all great!!. It is working, do not doubt it. It has to be this way for a news story. This makes a great story. Also canceling orders sends wrong messages, we care for the troops fighting for us, Why cancel.
more...
shouldIwait
05-10 05:37 PM
Few responses to Mr. Hunter.
I'm not blind to stereotyping in this forum or elsewhere. It's not you vs. them kinda thing. You ARE stereotyping based upon some TRUE things but it is still stereotyping, isn't it.
Also, you understood some of my comments wrong. All I was saying is that due to big ISV's like TCS/INFY/WIPRO and mushrooms of bodyshops the actual worker gets pennies on a dollar and they keep the booty. So it's not the worker who causes wage depression it's the circumvention of the spirit of law that these companies do which causes it. I say "spirit of law" because they still stay within the legal framework. As far as offshoring is concerned it's a big discussion in itself and forces of capitalism and globalization are at work. None of us can prevent that but we can counter it by moving up in the value chain.
The scenario you described about modus operandi of big Indian ISV's is 100% correct but to generally imply that Indians are 1/5th as good as Americans when it comes to IT (50 member team vs. 10-12 member team) is a supremacist attitude and completely untrue.
It is true that the Indian counterparts are usually of much younger age but rarely substandard for the job. Companies realize that IT is no-longer considered rocket-science and they can save a few bucks. Try to think objectively keeping personal impact aside.
Now regarding overall economic input of immigrants there are issues broader and larger than you mentioned. Some of the smaller points you mentioned are true but you are completely missing the big picture. We can discuss that in a different thread :)
When Bill Gates says best-and-brightest it applies to individuals and not a VISA category, he's not lying. Among the 65K every year you'll find people from all skill levels, cream-of-the-cream to just-about-ok, and a few rotten-apples too. The immigration system is not designed to test skill level. Overall it's old, irrelevant and doesn't help anyone. It needs to be re-designed but unfortunately people are divided on fake lines and ignore the real issues or rather real solutions.
Although you have said it differently but you are right that solution to mine and your problems lie at the same spot, a modern, common-sense, immigration system that promotes best-and-the-brightest (Indian and American) and discourages exploitation.
I'm not blind to stereotyping in this forum or elsewhere. It's not you vs. them kinda thing. You ARE stereotyping based upon some TRUE things but it is still stereotyping, isn't it.
Also, you understood some of my comments wrong. All I was saying is that due to big ISV's like TCS/INFY/WIPRO and mushrooms of bodyshops the actual worker gets pennies on a dollar and they keep the booty. So it's not the worker who causes wage depression it's the circumvention of the spirit of law that these companies do which causes it. I say "spirit of law" because they still stay within the legal framework. As far as offshoring is concerned it's a big discussion in itself and forces of capitalism and globalization are at work. None of us can prevent that but we can counter it by moving up in the value chain.
The scenario you described about modus operandi of big Indian ISV's is 100% correct but to generally imply that Indians are 1/5th as good as Americans when it comes to IT (50 member team vs. 10-12 member team) is a supremacist attitude and completely untrue.
It is true that the Indian counterparts are usually of much younger age but rarely substandard for the job. Companies realize that IT is no-longer considered rocket-science and they can save a few bucks. Try to think objectively keeping personal impact aside.
Now regarding overall economic input of immigrants there are issues broader and larger than you mentioned. Some of the smaller points you mentioned are true but you are completely missing the big picture. We can discuss that in a different thread :)
When Bill Gates says best-and-brightest it applies to individuals and not a VISA category, he's not lying. Among the 65K every year you'll find people from all skill levels, cream-of-the-cream to just-about-ok, and a few rotten-apples too. The immigration system is not designed to test skill level. Overall it's old, irrelevant and doesn't help anyone. It needs to be re-designed but unfortunately people are divided on fake lines and ignore the real issues or rather real solutions.
Although you have said it differently but you are right that solution to mine and your problems lie at the same spot, a modern, common-sense, immigration system that promotes best-and-the-brightest (Indian and American) and discourages exploitation.
hot Cycling Wallpapers
ryan
04-06 10:15 AM
always amazes me how so many folks depend upon these immigration attorney websites and get disappointed...we are better off supporting IV advocacy and get first hand information on what is going on in DC, USCIS and DOS.
This is not the first time and I'm sure it won't be the last time these AILA folks generate sensational news! Help IV to help you!
Exactly. It's like some have gone berserk on the possible 12K unused visa bit. There are scientific (perhaps, even astrological) calculations, assumptions, predictions from lawyers, "Gurus" and just about everyone else..yet, the support to help IV, in order to help each and everyone is minimal to non-existent. Isn’t being at the Advocacy day (or contributing to the day) -- speaking to the powers-that-be, the MOST effective way to get the backlog issues addressed?! It all feels a bit headless chicken central.
This is not the first time and I'm sure it won't be the last time these AILA folks generate sensational news! Help IV to help you!
Exactly. It's like some have gone berserk on the possible 12K unused visa bit. There are scientific (perhaps, even astrological) calculations, assumptions, predictions from lawyers, "Gurus" and just about everyone else..yet, the support to help IV, in order to help each and everyone is minimal to non-existent. Isn’t being at the Advocacy day (or contributing to the day) -- speaking to the powers-that-be, the MOST effective way to get the backlog issues addressed?! It all feels a bit headless chicken central.
more...
house Seacoast Cycling wallpaper
punjabi77
11-20 10:31 PM
When you buy a home you sign a contract saying you will pay the loan amount at the end of the loan term with interest. There was a commitment made. And you are saying people who walk away without fulfilling their obligation are smart? Fool!
And who do you think is footing the bill for bailing out those banks? its you and me! You are not only not honest and ethical, you must be really dumb if you think you are not going to be paying for the mistakes of people like punjabi when they "walk away" from their homes!
I was asking for Ideas.. it is not just Kumar or some more people giving an idea that one should leave the house if the value of the house has gone down and now you have to move because of ur job and it is hard selling ur house where u may have to bear a loss ..
I already had conversation with american people ( not any desi's) in my office and they also had the same opinion as to leave a house if u have to leave because of job..
U tell me how wise it is to give a loan to a person without a down payment..The reason i said that other people are stupid is because.. i took an ARM loan of 5 years,, where i knew that i am not going to live in the house for more than 3 years and will later sell it..and there are people who knew that they are going to stay in the same house for more than their ARM period.. but didnt realize that they wont be able to make payment once the rate is re-adjusted.. i am calling those people's decision as stupid..
about me making a bad decision about buying a house.. well not 2 years ago..
i can sell the house for a loss of may be 20,000.. but why should i pay that money from my pocket.. i can keep that in my savings account and use it in my bad time..
And who do you think is footing the bill for bailing out those banks? its you and me! You are not only not honest and ethical, you must be really dumb if you think you are not going to be paying for the mistakes of people like punjabi when they "walk away" from their homes!
I was asking for Ideas.. it is not just Kumar or some more people giving an idea that one should leave the house if the value of the house has gone down and now you have to move because of ur job and it is hard selling ur house where u may have to bear a loss ..
I already had conversation with american people ( not any desi's) in my office and they also had the same opinion as to leave a house if u have to leave because of job..
U tell me how wise it is to give a loan to a person without a down payment..The reason i said that other people are stupid is because.. i took an ARM loan of 5 years,, where i knew that i am not going to live in the house for more than 3 years and will later sell it..and there are people who knew that they are going to stay in the same house for more than their ARM period.. but didnt realize that they wont be able to make payment once the rate is re-adjusted.. i am calling those people's decision as stupid..
about me making a bad decision about buying a house.. well not 2 years ago..
i can sell the house for a loss of may be 20,000.. but why should i pay that money from my pocket.. i can keep that in my savings account and use it in my bad time..
tattoo Cycling Sports iPhone
needhelp!
01-11 02:44 PM
furthering the displacement of skilled American workers (programmers, engineers, scientists, etc.)How will I displace an American worker if I get a green card sooner? I am already here and already doing a job that DOL certified no other American is willing qualified or able to do!! :D
This is beyond ridiculous!!
Guys we need to send in our letters!!
This is beyond ridiculous!!
Guys we need to send in our letters!!
more...
pictures Sport Wallpapers - GB Cycling
sledge_hammer
11-22 07:57 PM
Real mature! You make shitty decisions of buying expensive homes, you don't own up your mistakes, you don't keep up your commitment of paying back the loan you have taken, you screw up people who ARE paying their mortgages, then blame the banks ALONE for the mess you are in!
What banks did was "predatory" lending. Now I would sympathize with if someone with no education to fall into such a mess and balme it on the lender. You and others like you who balme the banks all consider yourselves "higly educated" and "higly skilled". Hell you are even demanding congress to hand you a green card claiming to be one. But now that you have gotten yourself into a financial mess you blame the banks for all of your problems?
punjabi77 has claimed that his loss would be in the 20K ballpark. So he's not even in such a financial mess that he has to foreclose. He is merely looking for better opportunities in other cities. Then how is his decision to foreclose a "smart" thing to do? Last time I checked what he is trying to do is absolutely unethical! Nothing "wise" there!
Didn't your parents ever tell you what it means to be an adult? You ARE responsible for your actions and decisions. I guess they didn't instill any moral or ethics in you now did they?
I support kumar1 openion.
Buddy sledge_hammer this is the mess mortgage companies created, they need to face it.fanie's and fadie's caused this mess and they to need face it ? Do you think the individual should sit in that home and hit on their head with the 'sledgehammer' when they are in this mess? I would say get the f**k out of that house and lead peaceful life.
Sledge_hammer, use the thing in your screen name on your head to make your thoughts work correctly. Hey don't get me started.
What banks did was "predatory" lending. Now I would sympathize with if someone with no education to fall into such a mess and balme it on the lender. You and others like you who balme the banks all consider yourselves "higly educated" and "higly skilled". Hell you are even demanding congress to hand you a green card claiming to be one. But now that you have gotten yourself into a financial mess you blame the banks for all of your problems?
punjabi77 has claimed that his loss would be in the 20K ballpark. So he's not even in such a financial mess that he has to foreclose. He is merely looking for better opportunities in other cities. Then how is his decision to foreclose a "smart" thing to do? Last time I checked what he is trying to do is absolutely unethical! Nothing "wise" there!
Didn't your parents ever tell you what it means to be an adult? You ARE responsible for your actions and decisions. I guess they didn't instill any moral or ethics in you now did they?
I support kumar1 openion.
Buddy sledge_hammer this is the mess mortgage companies created, they need to face it.fanie's and fadie's caused this mess and they to need face it ? Do you think the individual should sit in that home and hit on their head with the 'sledgehammer' when they are in this mess? I would say get the f**k out of that house and lead peaceful life.
Sledge_hammer, use the thing in your screen name on your head to make your thoughts work correctly. Hey don't get me started.
dresses Cycling wallpaper
coldcloud
09-23 04:24 PM
I guess we'll need to ADD to that number:
1. BEC stuck folks who could not file in July 07
2. PERM approvals starting August 07
to the 47,728. Plus multiply by 2.1( for dependents ). That'll give the total VISA numbers required for this category to make it Current.
If I have to guess-- (1) would be very less, may be 100-200 max
(2) around 5000 ( just a PUMA)
So, there are about 53000 EB2 I applications. and 2.1 * 53000 = 111300.
If we can create 111300, EB2 I visas then it'll be CURRENT. easy:)
I believe you dont need to multiply all of the 485 by 2.1 as already applied I485 will include the family?
1. BEC stuck folks who could not file in July 07
2. PERM approvals starting August 07
to the 47,728. Plus multiply by 2.1( for dependents ). That'll give the total VISA numbers required for this category to make it Current.
If I have to guess-- (1) would be very less, may be 100-200 max
(2) around 5000 ( just a PUMA)
So, there are about 53000 EB2 I applications. and 2.1 * 53000 = 111300.
If we can create 111300, EB2 I visas then it'll be CURRENT. easy:)
I believe you dont need to multiply all of the 485 by 2.1 as already applied I485 will include the family?
more...
makeup Cycling along the Himalaya
rock
06-22 10:30 PM
I am going for concurrent 140 & 485. Can I apply for EAD and AP now? or do I need to have my 140 cleared before I can apply for EAD and AP?
Hi Guys,
I am also in the same situation. Recently I changed the employer. My new employer is going to file I-140 and I-485 using the Labor substitution.
I also want to file EAD and AP but the company attorney is saying it is safer to file the EAD and AP once the I-140 is approved. Can any one please answer this is true or not? Should I wait for I-140 to be approved or should I try convince the attorney to file EAD and AP also along with I-140 and I-485.
I have one more question which is if We do not file the EAD and AP along with the I-485 and once the priority dates are retrogessed. Can we file
EAD and AP even though the priority dates are not current.
I would appreciate the answers.
Thanks
Hi Guys,
I am also in the same situation. Recently I changed the employer. My new employer is going to file I-140 and I-485 using the Labor substitution.
I also want to file EAD and AP but the company attorney is saying it is safer to file the EAD and AP once the I-140 is approved. Can any one please answer this is true or not? Should I wait for I-140 to be approved or should I try convince the attorney to file EAD and AP also along with I-140 and I-485.
I have one more question which is if We do not file the EAD and AP along with the I-485 and once the priority dates are retrogessed. Can we file
EAD and AP even though the priority dates are not current.
I would appreciate the answers.
Thanks
girlfriend Sports - Cycling Wallpaper
thakurrajiv
11-21 07:55 AM
I was asking for Ideas.. it is not just Kumar or some more people giving an idea that one should leave the house if the value of the house has gone down and now you have to move because of ur job and it is hard selling ur house where u may have to bear a loss ..
I already had conversation with american people ( not any desi's) in my office and they also had the same opinion as to leave a house if u have to leave because of job..
U tell me how wise it is to give a loan to a person without a down payment..The reason i said that other people are stupid is because.. i took an ARM loan of 5 years,, where i knew that i am not going to live in the house for more than 3 years and will later sell it..and there are people who knew that they are going to stay in the same house for more than their ARM period.. but didnt realize that they wont be able to make payment once the rate is re-adjusted.. i am calling those people's decision as stupid..
about me making a bad decision about buying a house.. well not 2 years ago..
i can sell the house for a loss of may be 20,000.. but why should i pay that money from my pocket.. i can keep that in my savings account and use it in my bad time..
Well you seem to have same attitude problem as others in this situation. When people were making profit they were thankful, and now banks/system is there to blame.
Let's see how you are not different from those "stupid" people. Keyword here is "greed". You got greedy and bought house bcoz it will appreciate. People who knew they will be living for more than 5 yrs got ARM bcoz they have to pay less/month(max. leverage), house will appreciate and/or they can refinance when time comes. Do you see any similarity ??? So please stop using derogatory words like "stupid". Banks were lending bcoz they were greedy. All the parties have one thing in common greed.
Ok, coming back to your case. I do not have any experience with foreclosure. From your post it seems like you are losing $20k. Well this does not seem a very big amount. Consider the impact of foreclosure, bad credit will mean you will not get any loan. It will be tough to get auto or any other credit. You carry risk with background checks. I think the lending standards will get tough going forward which means you don't know for how long you will not qualify for home. In my opinion, if you have 20k and it is matter of losing some savings, not going to foreclosure looks better option.
I hope you will learn to own up to your own mistakes, it will only make you better person in life. Good luck.
I already had conversation with american people ( not any desi's) in my office and they also had the same opinion as to leave a house if u have to leave because of job..
U tell me how wise it is to give a loan to a person without a down payment..The reason i said that other people are stupid is because.. i took an ARM loan of 5 years,, where i knew that i am not going to live in the house for more than 3 years and will later sell it..and there are people who knew that they are going to stay in the same house for more than their ARM period.. but didnt realize that they wont be able to make payment once the rate is re-adjusted.. i am calling those people's decision as stupid..
about me making a bad decision about buying a house.. well not 2 years ago..
i can sell the house for a loss of may be 20,000.. but why should i pay that money from my pocket.. i can keep that in my savings account and use it in my bad time..
Well you seem to have same attitude problem as others in this situation. When people were making profit they were thankful, and now banks/system is there to blame.
Let's see how you are not different from those "stupid" people. Keyword here is "greed". You got greedy and bought house bcoz it will appreciate. People who knew they will be living for more than 5 yrs got ARM bcoz they have to pay less/month(max. leverage), house will appreciate and/or they can refinance when time comes. Do you see any similarity ??? So please stop using derogatory words like "stupid". Banks were lending bcoz they were greedy. All the parties have one thing in common greed.
Ok, coming back to your case. I do not have any experience with foreclosure. From your post it seems like you are losing $20k. Well this does not seem a very big amount. Consider the impact of foreclosure, bad credit will mean you will not get any loan. It will be tough to get auto or any other credit. You carry risk with background checks. I think the lending standards will get tough going forward which means you don't know for how long you will not qualify for home. In my opinion, if you have 20k and it is matter of losing some savings, not going to foreclosure looks better option.
I hope you will learn to own up to your own mistakes, it will only make you better person in life. Good luck.
hairstyles pro cycling manager 2004
ash27
06-13 01:08 PM
gc26...., It seems that you have missed the point again. Any logical person will have the capability to comprehend that this thread is against visa abuse in L1 category.. If you still didn't get it, objective is to explore the options to report abuse of L1. Benefits are: genuine people still get the opportunity, reduce over supply in market, not bring wages down etc.
Its that simple. If you can give me 1 good reason to not bring this issue up, I can definitely discuss the issue. But, stop giving me this crap about raising voice and being right...
Totally, non baseless argument by you and Ganguteli...
Its that simple. If you can give me 1 good reason to not bring this issue up, I can definitely discuss the issue. But, stop giving me this crap about raising voice and being right...
Totally, non baseless argument by you and Ganguteli...
GCVictim
08-24 12:37 PM
If you give my reference we both will get 2 months free.
Srikanth Vadlakonda
972-798-0307 (H)
friend.
Srikanth Vadlakonda
972-798-0307 (H)
friend.
waiting for GC
09-24 05:49 PM
Got the CPO mails for myself and spouse.
11 years wait is over finally. I wish all the best for the remaining folks !!
11 years wait is over finally. I wish all the best for the remaining folks !!
