gsrknth
08-22 12:16 PM
My RD is 7/2/08, still waiting for approval, not even an LUD after notice date. I see EB2 folks getting renewals within 30 days or so. Isn't this descrimination?
I am EB2 and EAD approval tool almost 60 days. Some folks got it in 30 days during June/July before implementing 2 yr EAD. I didnot hear anyone getting it in 30 days or less . May be some lucky ones are getting.
I am EB2 and EAD approval tool almost 60 days. Some folks got it in 30 days during June/July before implementing 2 yr EAD. I didnot hear anyone getting it in 30 days or less . May be some lucky ones are getting.
wallpaper maria shriver and arnold schwarzenegger_10. Arnold Palmer Shoes of Girls
cbpds
04-07 02:18 PM
Hope the may bulletin is published by tommorow as Obama has threatened to veto any stop gap bill
Obama vows to veto short-term bill - Washington Times (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/apr/7/senate-leader-reid-government-headed-shutdown/)
Obama vows to veto short-term bill - Washington Times (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/apr/7/senate-leader-reid-government-headed-shutdown/)
md_jul_03
08-06 03:55 PM
I took some time to compile the list of INDIA only EB3 and EB2 categories for past 2 years and from the trend, it is very easy to predict the Oct bulletin.
It does not need a attorney or spies. You just need to work up the numbers.
I did this only for INDIA. Any chinese can complile it for China.
MONTH EB2 EB3
Aug 05 C 01APR01
Sep 05 C U
Oct 05 01NOV99 01JAN98
Nov 05 01NOV99 01JAN98
Dec 05 01JUL00 1-Jan-99
Jan 06 01JAN01 01JUN99
Feb 06 01AUG01 01JAN00
Mar 06 01JAN02 01JAN01
Apr 06 01JUL02 01FEB01
May 06 01JAN03 01MAR01
Jun 06 01JAN03 08APR01
Jul 06 01JAN03 15APR01
Aug 06 U 01APR01
Sep 06 U 15APR01
Oct 06 15JUN02 22-Apr-01
Nov 06 01JAN03 APRIL01
Dec 06 08JAN03
Jan 07 Jan03 May01
Feb 07 Jan03 May01
Mar 07 Jan03 May01
Apr 07 Jan03 May01
May 07 Jan03 May01
Jun 07 Apr04 Jun03
Jul 07 C C
Aug 07 U U
Sep 07 Jan03 May01
Oct 07 Jan03 May01
Nov 07 Jul03 June02
Dec 07 Jul03 Jun02
Jan 08 Jan04 Jun02
Feb 08 Jan04 Jun02
Here is my analysis.
Bulletin dates moves by six months as max jump for EB2 and 1 month for EB3.
Begining of New year in Oct, they conservatively pull back the numbers so as to flush out pending apps.
Now since they have already flushed apps in June/July, in Nov they will move EB2 by six months and possibly either stop there or make it one full year by moving it by another six months.
For EB3, they like to get it stuck at mid year so Jun02.
Guys, give a thought to this trend and see if you can guess more accurately.
Interesting analysis.
I found an additional prediction on this link http://www.murthy.com/news/n_oct07vb.html
It does not need a attorney or spies. You just need to work up the numbers.
I did this only for INDIA. Any chinese can complile it for China.
MONTH EB2 EB3
Aug 05 C 01APR01
Sep 05 C U
Oct 05 01NOV99 01JAN98
Nov 05 01NOV99 01JAN98
Dec 05 01JUL00 1-Jan-99
Jan 06 01JAN01 01JUN99
Feb 06 01AUG01 01JAN00
Mar 06 01JAN02 01JAN01
Apr 06 01JUL02 01FEB01
May 06 01JAN03 01MAR01
Jun 06 01JAN03 08APR01
Jul 06 01JAN03 15APR01
Aug 06 U 01APR01
Sep 06 U 15APR01
Oct 06 15JUN02 22-Apr-01
Nov 06 01JAN03 APRIL01
Dec 06 08JAN03
Jan 07 Jan03 May01
Feb 07 Jan03 May01
Mar 07 Jan03 May01
Apr 07 Jan03 May01
May 07 Jan03 May01
Jun 07 Apr04 Jun03
Jul 07 C C
Aug 07 U U
Sep 07 Jan03 May01
Oct 07 Jan03 May01
Nov 07 Jul03 June02
Dec 07 Jul03 Jun02
Jan 08 Jan04 Jun02
Feb 08 Jan04 Jun02
Here is my analysis.
Bulletin dates moves by six months as max jump for EB2 and 1 month for EB3.
Begining of New year in Oct, they conservatively pull back the numbers so as to flush out pending apps.
Now since they have already flushed apps in June/July, in Nov they will move EB2 by six months and possibly either stop there or make it one full year by moving it by another six months.
For EB3, they like to get it stuck at mid year so Jun02.
Guys, give a thought to this trend and see if you can guess more accurately.
Interesting analysis.
I found an additional prediction on this link http://www.murthy.com/news/n_oct07vb.html
2011 maria shriver and arnold schwarzenegger_10. Arnold Schwarzenegger
prioritydate
07-28 11:48 PM
Where is the presence of other guys? how many of them responded to "the country of birth" poll? People of other nations doesn't suffer as much as people of India.
more...
rskanth
08-08 06:19 PM
And you know this how?:confused:
rajuseattle
08-04 01:23 PM
Sorry to hear about your friend's situation.
From your answers it looks like she is on H-4 which is dependent spouse for H1B.
If she is qualified enough ask her to find a new employer who is willing to sponsor her a H1B.
She can transfer her status from H-4 to H1B and it will not be counted against the annual H1B quota.
Once she finds new employer she can start her GC process.
If she cant find job here and be in H1B status, the only option is to go back to her Home country...or another option is to remarry with someone who has legal status here and then she can derive the dependent status.
From your answers it looks like she is on H-4 which is dependent spouse for H1B.
If she is qualified enough ask her to find a new employer who is willing to sponsor her a H1B.
She can transfer her status from H-4 to H1B and it will not be counted against the annual H1B quota.
Once she finds new employer she can start her GC process.
If she cant find job here and be in H1B status, the only option is to go back to her Home country...or another option is to remarry with someone who has legal status here and then she can derive the dependent status.
more...
asanghi
09-15 02:15 PM
We can send these to Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid. I am in. However it will only be effective if we manage PR well. The only reason flower campaign worked so well was because it was all over in the news. So I guess we should either copy some reporters (which I think may be too much data for them to appreciate) or make a press release through IV.
2010 maria shriver and arnold schwarzenegger_10. Arnold Schwarzenegger Pictures
nixstor
07-11 11:09 AM
Why not? USCIS already approved 60K 485 applications in 2 weeks time. How come they cannot do the same with some extra money (i.e. premium processing). They can do anything if want to do.
:mad:
Premium processing does not necessarily mean that it should be done in 15 days. It depends on the complexity of the application. We all know how complex 485 is because of the name check.
The premium processing can cost 1000-1500/more for 485 and should be done in 6 months. They can use the PP money to expedite their name checks. I am not sure what kind of issues USCIS will have implementing this
:mad:
Premium processing does not necessarily mean that it should be done in 15 days. It depends on the complexity of the application. We all know how complex 485 is because of the name check.
The premium processing can cost 1000-1500/more for 485 and should be done in 6 months. They can use the PP money to expedite their name checks. I am not sure what kind of issues USCIS will have implementing this
more...
arunkotte
08-10 03:48 PM
21. The Department Of Homeland Security And The Department Of Labor Will Study And Report On Potential
Administrative Reforms To Visa Programs For Highly Skilled Workers.
Administrative Reforms To Visa Programs For Highly Skilled Workers.
hair Arnold Schwarzenegger And Son
gg_ny
08-21 09:20 AM
Is there a chance to attach SKIL provisions towards higher degree GC retrogressed applicants to this appropriation efforts?
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/313/5789/898
Congress Quietly Tries to Craft Bill To Maintain U.S. Lead in Science
Jeffrey Mervis
In the dog days of August, while most members of Congress are back home campaigning for reelection or on holiday, a small group of staffers is at work in Washington, D.C., on legislation that could influence science spending for years to come. Their goal is to craft a broad bill aimed at bolstering U.S. competitiveness that Congress could pass before the November elections.
They face long odds. The White House has already expressed reservations about some aspects of the legislation, and the congressional calendar is short and already very crowded. Although Senate leaders say they are committed to the goal, House leaders appear less enthusiastic. But a powerful coalition of forces, including business leaders who can bend a member's ear, is keen for Congress to act. "Legislation would show the public that our nation's leaders have a long-range plan of action on U.S. competitiveness," says Susan Traiman of the Business Roundtable, a consortium of 160 CEOs from across U.S. industry.
The legislation draws upon several efforts over the past year examining the status of U.S. science and technology, including the National Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm report and the National Summit on Competitiveness (Science, 21 October 2005, p. 423; 16 December 2005, p. 1752). In February, the Bush Administration proposed starting a 10-year doubling of basic research at the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Science, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) core labs (Science, 17 February, p. 929) as part of its 2007 budget request. And the initial funding for what the Administration has dubbed the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI) is working its way through the legislative process.
Science advocates can't say enough about the importance of ACI. But they believe even more is needed to improve math and science education and enhance U.S. innovation. Taking their cue from Gathering Storm and other reports, legislators from both parties introduced a fistful of bills earlier this year that would expand existing research and education activities at several agencies and set up new programs (see table).
Unlike annual appropriations bills, which determine how much each federal agency can spend in a given year, these authorization bills set desired funding levels over several years. Although they don't provide the cash, they can build political support for ongoing spending increases. Notes one university lobbyist: "You want Congress on record and the key committees behind an authorization bill, so that they can bail out appropriators when they hit rough seas."
The goal of the quiet negotiations taking place this summer is a single bill. But the calls for increased spending are a sticking point for a Republican Party whose president, George W. Bush, has repeatedly pledged to reduce the federal deficit and whose congressional leaders hope to campaign this fall on their success in shrinking government. Several of the bills also expand NSF's role in science and math education, a position that clashes with the Administration's plans for the Department of Education to lead efforts to improve math and science education and manage all the ACI's education components.
Presidential science adviser Jack Marburger emphasized those points in hard-line letters this spring to the chairs of the committees as they prepared to vote out one of the Senate bills (S. 2802) and two House bills (HR 5356/5358). The Senate measure, Marburger warned Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) on 17 May, "would undermine and delay" ongoing research at the three agencies, "duplicate or complicate existing education and technology programs," and "compete with private investment" in both areas. The House bills, he told Representative Sherry Boehlert (R-NY) on 5 June, "would diminish the impact" of the requested increases for the three ACI agencies.
Boehlert says he was "quite disappointed" by Marburger's letter, noting the president's declaration in his January State of the Union address that the country "must continue to lead the world in human talent and creativity." Boehlert added, "I thought that we had been working with OSTP on these issues," referring to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy that Marburger heads.
Three weeks after the House committee passed both bills, �berstaffer Karl Rove, new domestic policy chief Karl Zinsmeister, and a score of high-tech industry and academic lobbyists met at the White House to discuss the pending legislation. Although nothing was resolved--some participants say Rove and Marburger scolded them for supporting the bills, whereas others say there was confusion over the various components--the White House told the lobbyists that its Office of Legislative Affairs, led by Candida Wolff, would be taking the lead in trying to craft an acceptable bill, pushing OSTP to the sidelines. In the Senate, lobbyists are heartened by the willingness of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) to negotiate with the three chairs whose panels must sign off on the legislation--Stevens, Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM), who leads the Energy and National Resources Committee, and Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY), who heads the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. Another important player, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN), acknowledged when he introduced a trio of bills in January that some of his colleagues "may wince at the price tag" of the legislation. But he cautioned that "maintaining America's brainpower advantage will not come on the cheap."
Although none of the staffers involved would speak on the record, several confirmed that talks are taking place "on a regular basis." They say Frist is determined to cobble together a single bill--with lower authorization levels and fewer new programs than in any of the pending versions--that the Senate could adopt during a 4-week window in September. Prospects in the House are less certain, although Boehlert says, "Hope springs eternal that we'll get an opportunity to go to the floor in September."
Optimists, who hope that all sides will view a competitiveness bill as an asset heading into the November elections, dream of an Administration that accepts a competitiveness bill in return for getting its ACI education programs authorized. Pessimists worry that the House leadership will scuttle the effort by portraying the bills as a vehicle for "wasteful spending" and "a bloated bureaucracy." And although nobody's betting that Congress will act this year, nobody has thrown in the towel.
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/313/5789/898
Congress Quietly Tries to Craft Bill To Maintain U.S. Lead in Science
Jeffrey Mervis
In the dog days of August, while most members of Congress are back home campaigning for reelection or on holiday, a small group of staffers is at work in Washington, D.C., on legislation that could influence science spending for years to come. Their goal is to craft a broad bill aimed at bolstering U.S. competitiveness that Congress could pass before the November elections.
They face long odds. The White House has already expressed reservations about some aspects of the legislation, and the congressional calendar is short and already very crowded. Although Senate leaders say they are committed to the goal, House leaders appear less enthusiastic. But a powerful coalition of forces, including business leaders who can bend a member's ear, is keen for Congress to act. "Legislation would show the public that our nation's leaders have a long-range plan of action on U.S. competitiveness," says Susan Traiman of the Business Roundtable, a consortium of 160 CEOs from across U.S. industry.
The legislation draws upon several efforts over the past year examining the status of U.S. science and technology, including the National Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm report and the National Summit on Competitiveness (Science, 21 October 2005, p. 423; 16 December 2005, p. 1752). In February, the Bush Administration proposed starting a 10-year doubling of basic research at the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Science, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) core labs (Science, 17 February, p. 929) as part of its 2007 budget request. And the initial funding for what the Administration has dubbed the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI) is working its way through the legislative process.
Science advocates can't say enough about the importance of ACI. But they believe even more is needed to improve math and science education and enhance U.S. innovation. Taking their cue from Gathering Storm and other reports, legislators from both parties introduced a fistful of bills earlier this year that would expand existing research and education activities at several agencies and set up new programs (see table).
Unlike annual appropriations bills, which determine how much each federal agency can spend in a given year, these authorization bills set desired funding levels over several years. Although they don't provide the cash, they can build political support for ongoing spending increases. Notes one university lobbyist: "You want Congress on record and the key committees behind an authorization bill, so that they can bail out appropriators when they hit rough seas."
The goal of the quiet negotiations taking place this summer is a single bill. But the calls for increased spending are a sticking point for a Republican Party whose president, George W. Bush, has repeatedly pledged to reduce the federal deficit and whose congressional leaders hope to campaign this fall on their success in shrinking government. Several of the bills also expand NSF's role in science and math education, a position that clashes with the Administration's plans for the Department of Education to lead efforts to improve math and science education and manage all the ACI's education components.
Presidential science adviser Jack Marburger emphasized those points in hard-line letters this spring to the chairs of the committees as they prepared to vote out one of the Senate bills (S. 2802) and two House bills (HR 5356/5358). The Senate measure, Marburger warned Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) on 17 May, "would undermine and delay" ongoing research at the three agencies, "duplicate or complicate existing education and technology programs," and "compete with private investment" in both areas. The House bills, he told Representative Sherry Boehlert (R-NY) on 5 June, "would diminish the impact" of the requested increases for the three ACI agencies.
Boehlert says he was "quite disappointed" by Marburger's letter, noting the president's declaration in his January State of the Union address that the country "must continue to lead the world in human talent and creativity." Boehlert added, "I thought that we had been working with OSTP on these issues," referring to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy that Marburger heads.
Three weeks after the House committee passed both bills, �berstaffer Karl Rove, new domestic policy chief Karl Zinsmeister, and a score of high-tech industry and academic lobbyists met at the White House to discuss the pending legislation. Although nothing was resolved--some participants say Rove and Marburger scolded them for supporting the bills, whereas others say there was confusion over the various components--the White House told the lobbyists that its Office of Legislative Affairs, led by Candida Wolff, would be taking the lead in trying to craft an acceptable bill, pushing OSTP to the sidelines. In the Senate, lobbyists are heartened by the willingness of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) to negotiate with the three chairs whose panels must sign off on the legislation--Stevens, Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM), who leads the Energy and National Resources Committee, and Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY), who heads the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. Another important player, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN), acknowledged when he introduced a trio of bills in January that some of his colleagues "may wince at the price tag" of the legislation. But he cautioned that "maintaining America's brainpower advantage will not come on the cheap."
Although none of the staffers involved would speak on the record, several confirmed that talks are taking place "on a regular basis." They say Frist is determined to cobble together a single bill--with lower authorization levels and fewer new programs than in any of the pending versions--that the Senate could adopt during a 4-week window in September. Prospects in the House are less certain, although Boehlert says, "Hope springs eternal that we'll get an opportunity to go to the floor in September."
Optimists, who hope that all sides will view a competitiveness bill as an asset heading into the November elections, dream of an Administration that accepts a competitiveness bill in return for getting its ACI education programs authorized. Pessimists worry that the House leadership will scuttle the effort by portraying the bills as a vehicle for "wasteful spending" and "a bloated bureaucracy." And although nobody's betting that Congress will act this year, nobody has thrown in the towel.
more...
conchshell
09-21 09:31 AM
With US Govt. bailing out all banks from their debt, the house price will not fall so fast anymore. The reason is - banks are in not hurry anymore to sell the short sell or foreclosure properties because the losses are taken over by government. Normal house price will not compete with short sale/foreclousers anymore. This is what happened in 1989 too. This will stabilize the prices in coming months once congress makes the RTC a law.
hot maria shriver and arnold schwarzenegger_10. schwarzenegger shriver
renupond
10-04 10:46 PM
No I am not related to eadguru.
I simply need this info for my spouse.
Thanks
I simply need this info for my spouse.
Thanks
more...
house maria shriver and arnold schwarzenegger_10. arnold schwarzenegger
singhsa3
11-15 09:56 AM
As I've said earlier. IV is you, you are IV. If you are in the similar situation as we are and by expressing your desire to do something about it, you automatically become a member of IV.
But we do use this yahoo group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/immigrationvoiceny/
to communicate with our members. So please sign up...
Hello IV members : I am mad about discrimination agst Indian and China born applicants for GC processing times. I have read many posts in here and it states to join tri-state chapters .. What does it mean? How can we be part of this.. Pls. elaborate.
Thanks
But we do use this yahoo group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/immigrationvoiceny/
to communicate with our members. So please sign up...
Hello IV members : I am mad about discrimination agst Indian and China born applicants for GC processing times. I have read many posts in here and it states to join tri-state chapters .. What does it mean? How can we be part of this.. Pls. elaborate.
Thanks
tattoo maria shriver and arnold schwarzenegger_10. maria shriver and arnold_10.
yetanotherguyinline
01-18 09:17 PM
^^^^
more...
pictures Schwarzenegger, Shriver part
transpass
08-04 11:10 AM
me too...NSC filer, but transferred to TSC...
RD july 2, PD 12/2005
RD july 2, PD 12/2005
dresses maria shriver and arnold schwarzenegger_10. In This Photo: Arnold
dupedinjuly
07-18 05:00 PM
You Status date needs to be before USCIS receipt date.
USCIS Receipt Date = Date the USCIS mail room assigns on the working day, when package is received.
Status date = I-94 Issue date.
You can come on August 15 at 11 pm, but if your filight is late by an hour then, you I-94 issue date will be Aug 16. ? You are cutting it too close.
I have not heard of them looking at time, they go by date. If you are in at 12:01 am then your date will be 8/16/07
Not clear if the I-94 is issued on Aug 16 and receipt date is Aug 16, then what will happen ?
It would be safe to mail the application on Aug 16 by Fedex with USCIS receipt date of Aug 17, it will take care, if your filight is delayed.
I-485 Courier Mailing address for Nebraska Service Center
USCIS Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
( Ref: P. O. Box 87485 )
Lincoln, NE - 68508
Find out the right Courier address for your service center if its not Nebraska.
Could somebody explain to me, please, how is it working with the receipt date?
I will be going to my home country on July 21st and coming back on August 15th, 11:00 PM.......
.....my question is: if my lawyer will send the I-485 package on August 15, at 4 PM.....( and I arrive in U.S on August 15 but at 11:00 PM)...the package hits the Uscis on August 16......is it ok? when Uscis sees that I'm physically in U.S?......is it the date when the package hits Uscis or the date when the package was sent by the lawyer......what is the postal mark that Uscis takes into consideration?: the date when Fedex is sending the package( exact date of delivery) OR the date the package arrives at Uscis mailroom?
OR ...Uscis will look at the I-94( when I'm coming back the officer at the port of entry will give me a new I-94) and Uscis will see that I arrived on August 15, at 11:00 PM?
Could someone please clarify this as depending on this I have to change the schedule of my plane flight.
I would really appreciate this.
Thank you in advance!
USCIS Receipt Date = Date the USCIS mail room assigns on the working day, when package is received.
Status date = I-94 Issue date.
You can come on August 15 at 11 pm, but if your filight is late by an hour then, you I-94 issue date will be Aug 16. ? You are cutting it too close.
I have not heard of them looking at time, they go by date. If you are in at 12:01 am then your date will be 8/16/07
Not clear if the I-94 is issued on Aug 16 and receipt date is Aug 16, then what will happen ?
It would be safe to mail the application on Aug 16 by Fedex with USCIS receipt date of Aug 17, it will take care, if your filight is delayed.
I-485 Courier Mailing address for Nebraska Service Center
USCIS Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
( Ref: P. O. Box 87485 )
Lincoln, NE - 68508
Find out the right Courier address for your service center if its not Nebraska.
Could somebody explain to me, please, how is it working with the receipt date?
I will be going to my home country on July 21st and coming back on August 15th, 11:00 PM.......
.....my question is: if my lawyer will send the I-485 package on August 15, at 4 PM.....( and I arrive in U.S on August 15 but at 11:00 PM)...the package hits the Uscis on August 16......is it ok? when Uscis sees that I'm physically in U.S?......is it the date when the package hits Uscis or the date when the package was sent by the lawyer......what is the postal mark that Uscis takes into consideration?: the date when Fedex is sending the package( exact date of delivery) OR the date the package arrives at Uscis mailroom?
OR ...Uscis will look at the I-94( when I'm coming back the officer at the port of entry will give me a new I-94) and Uscis will see that I arrived on August 15, at 11:00 PM?
Could someone please clarify this as depending on this I have to change the schedule of my plane flight.
I would really appreciate this.
Thank you in advance!
more...
makeup maria shriver and arnold
goan2005
05-31 09:27 AM
I really feel good about this. The IV' core teams todays message really touched my heart.
Even if i loose, i like to loose "winner" and dont like to loose a "looser".
Keep fighting.
Even if i loose, i like to loose "winner" and dont like to loose a "looser".
Keep fighting.
girlfriend maria shriver and arnold schwarzenegger_10. Biography - Arnold
morchu
04-21 08:46 AM
Depends on many variables.
1. What is the field of your / your spouse's job? Can you find a good job in Canada?
2. Is there any other variables that force you to be in USA. (Relatives etc..)?
For a lot of middle category jobs Canada is even better than USA. Infact Canada is more industrial than USA and has very good quality of life. But if you are going to Canada for a "hi-tech" job, think twice..... (opportunities)..
"7 years" for US citizenship is tooo optimistic.
If you are from India, it "may" take 10 years for you to get even a Green Card, filed under EB3. Browse through the forums and you will see than many of the Indians here are waiting for more than 10 years.
-Morchu
well, that really sucks, I was not aware of the 180day rule. Many thanks for the information.
So I have no other option than start all over again. One question, can I apply directly to a new LC or PERM or I need to go thru H1B first?
My Plan B is Canada, already have Canadian Permanent Resident Card, I need to enter before May 2010....I might need to decide between just moving to Canada and in 3 years get citizenship Vs. Starting new PERM process in USA .....I will be aprox 7 years away from citizenship.
Any thoughts??
1. What is the field of your / your spouse's job? Can you find a good job in Canada?
2. Is there any other variables that force you to be in USA. (Relatives etc..)?
For a lot of middle category jobs Canada is even better than USA. Infact Canada is more industrial than USA and has very good quality of life. But if you are going to Canada for a "hi-tech" job, think twice..... (opportunities)..
"7 years" for US citizenship is tooo optimistic.
If you are from India, it "may" take 10 years for you to get even a Green Card, filed under EB3. Browse through the forums and you will see than many of the Indians here are waiting for more than 10 years.
-Morchu
well, that really sucks, I was not aware of the 180day rule. Many thanks for the information.
So I have no other option than start all over again. One question, can I apply directly to a new LC or PERM or I need to go thru H1B first?
My Plan B is Canada, already have Canadian Permanent Resident Card, I need to enter before May 2010....I might need to decide between just moving to Canada and in 3 years get citizenship Vs. Starting new PERM process in USA .....I will be aprox 7 years away from citizenship.
Any thoughts??
hairstyles eşi Maria Shriver#39;in
ksvreg
02-25 01:37 PM
PWD has nothing to do with you joining them. All DOL does in PWD is it assigns a salary range based on the location of the job and the minimum requirements defined for the position. BTW, it is infact taking 2-3 months to get PWD these days.
Thanks a lot for your input. So I can join after the PWD is done.
Thanks a lot for your input. So I can join after the PWD is done.
StuckInTheMuck
05-03 08:17 AM
Updating profile should fill up your information in the tracker.
Will make a not of it.
Thanks a lot.
GO IV GO
Recently I had some trouble updating my profile. The "Additional Information" section has a series of RFE-related (on I-485, I-140, EAD and AP) boxes, where one must enter a valid date in the specified format. Because I did not receive any RFE yet, I tried to get past this page by entering 00/00/0000 ("N/A" did not work), which did not work either, and finally I settled with my PD on all these RFE boxes (which is, of course, incorrect). So, maybe the powers-that-be can fix the problem, and, also remove these wrong entries from my profile?
Thanks.
Will make a not of it.
Thanks a lot.
GO IV GO
Recently I had some trouble updating my profile. The "Additional Information" section has a series of RFE-related (on I-485, I-140, EAD and AP) boxes, where one must enter a valid date in the specified format. Because I did not receive any RFE yet, I tried to get past this page by entering 00/00/0000 ("N/A" did not work), which did not work either, and finally I settled with my PD on all these RFE boxes (which is, of course, incorrect). So, maybe the powers-that-be can fix the problem, and, also remove these wrong entries from my profile?
Thanks.
acecupid
04-14 10:10 AM
One of my collegues who works for the same company and has the same priority date as myself (March, 05 EB3 ) got his GC last year. Thats the only person I know personally who got his GC out of turn. I havent heard of any other cases, so I am guessing its a pretty rare occurance.
