desi485
11-26 01:19 PM
Ron Gotcher Latest ' ImmInfo Newsletter' states clearly 485 denial is illegal
***********
CIS issuing illegal AOS denials based on I-140 revocations
Recently, the CIS has been issuing denials ofadjustment of status applications in cases where the applicant has an approved I-140, and an AOS application pending for more than 180 days, but the petitioning employer has attempted to revoke the approved I-140.
These denials are patently illegal. They violate both CIS policy and statutory law. Both statutory law and explicit CIS policy are clear on this subject: An employer may not revoke an approved I-140 petition after an adjustment of status application has
been pending for at least 180 days. While we have not seen denials of any of our cases, we have seen a number of such denials by applicants who have contacted our office to assist them with filing motions to reconsider. It is shocking that the CIS
continues to issue denials even after the first MTRs were submitted. They are issuing these denials with full knowledge that there is no legal basis for what they are doing and that their actions violate existing law.
Anyone who receives such a denial must file a motion to reconsider immediately. The CIS has said that they are processing MTRs within 60 days. If the MTR does not result in a reversal of the denial within 60 days, the applicant should proceed in US District Court immediately to see a reversal. Immediate action is necessary to prevent the accumulation of unlawful presence following the denial.
*************************
Hmmm....I am still wondering...
1> How much money an applicant will spend on MTR? on self, on dependents?
2> How much money an applicant will bleed to move to US District Court?
3> If an applicant is working on EAD during all this farce, would he be able to continue working (atleast seeing paycheck) or will seat at home and bleed more?
4> if he looses EAD job, will CIS again punish him for not having a job?
5> Even after doing all these above, what if he accumulates 180 days of unlawful(?) presence? will he be deported for following the laws?
6> Last question: Are those undocumented workers are better positioned to get legal citizenship in long run than those legal skilled immigrants from retrogressed countries?
(sorry for my language, but I can't understand the logic behind such a serious painful punishment to an innocent lawful AC-21 user without any fault of his own? is there justice? what do I not understand here? I am sure I am missing something. Please guide!!!)
***********
CIS issuing illegal AOS denials based on I-140 revocations
Recently, the CIS has been issuing denials ofadjustment of status applications in cases where the applicant has an approved I-140, and an AOS application pending for more than 180 days, but the petitioning employer has attempted to revoke the approved I-140.
These denials are patently illegal. They violate both CIS policy and statutory law. Both statutory law and explicit CIS policy are clear on this subject: An employer may not revoke an approved I-140 petition after an adjustment of status application has
been pending for at least 180 days. While we have not seen denials of any of our cases, we have seen a number of such denials by applicants who have contacted our office to assist them with filing motions to reconsider. It is shocking that the CIS
continues to issue denials even after the first MTRs were submitted. They are issuing these denials with full knowledge that there is no legal basis for what they are doing and that their actions violate existing law.
Anyone who receives such a denial must file a motion to reconsider immediately. The CIS has said that they are processing MTRs within 60 days. If the MTR does not result in a reversal of the denial within 60 days, the applicant should proceed in US District Court immediately to see a reversal. Immediate action is necessary to prevent the accumulation of unlawful presence following the denial.
*************************
Hmmm....I am still wondering...
1> How much money an applicant will spend on MTR? on self, on dependents?
2> How much money an applicant will bleed to move to US District Court?
3> If an applicant is working on EAD during all this farce, would he be able to continue working (atleast seeing paycheck) or will seat at home and bleed more?
4> if he looses EAD job, will CIS again punish him for not having a job?
5> Even after doing all these above, what if he accumulates 180 days of unlawful(?) presence? will he be deported for following the laws?
6> Last question: Are those undocumented workers are better positioned to get legal citizenship in long run than those legal skilled immigrants from retrogressed countries?
(sorry for my language, but I can't understand the logic behind such a serious painful punishment to an innocent lawful AC-21 user without any fault of his own? is there justice? what do I not understand here? I am sure I am missing something. Please guide!!!)
wallpaper Peter Pilotto: Fall 2009 RTW 2:24
Mouns
04-30 03:26 PM
Due to 9/11?
Do you understand the frustration among people who want to make this work and who want to defend the system?
In other way, what good is there to follow the law while illegals have it easier?
Great question!
--- Answer
yes we understand (sure...). Two kinds of backlogs:
1) Processing backlogs, due to the surge and other issues. We try to provide services timely, we understand our responsibility (no info as to what is being done and how this will change in the future)
2) Limitations due to law: (PDs). Demands is greater than the visa numbers (China, India, Mexico, Philipine: You are screwed here!) => 20 years or more of waiting.
Do you understand the frustration among people who want to make this work and who want to defend the system?
In other way, what good is there to follow the law while illegals have it easier?
Great question!
--- Answer
yes we understand (sure...). Two kinds of backlogs:
1) Processing backlogs, due to the surge and other issues. We try to provide services timely, we understand our responsibility (no info as to what is being done and how this will change in the future)
2) Limitations due to law: (PDs). Demands is greater than the visa numbers (China, India, Mexico, Philipine: You are screwed here!) => 20 years or more of waiting.
sushilup
07-11 08:38 AM
Hello whitecollarslave,
There are Reciept date or Notice Date?
Thanx
Pause and take a moment to rejoice. Then turn all eyes to processing dates.
TSC July 17 2007
NSC July 28 2007
There are Reciept date or Notice Date?
Thanx
Pause and take a moment to rejoice. Then turn all eyes to processing dates.
TSC July 17 2007
NSC July 28 2007
2011 PETER PILOTTO - THE SEQUEL
ronhira
07-06 02:06 AM
Funds will follow if people see viability. Anywaz nothing is coming out of lobbying efforts so currently how does it even matter ?
and hence a jesus is born. but let me ask you this - if nothing will come out of lobbying effort, then why is every tom dick and harry spending more and more money on lobbying. if lobbying won't work, what should we do.
wwbd - what would bawa do?
and hence a jesus is born. but let me ask you this - if nothing will come out of lobbying effort, then why is every tom dick and harry spending more and more money on lobbying. if lobbying won't work, what should we do.
wwbd - what would bawa do?
more...
GOTGC
07-24 08:41 AM
I think I have been very lucky so far. I don't think USCIS processes based on anything concrete, I think it's a little random. Or maybe I am just lucky.
I applied for PERM in Sep 2006 - EB3 - India.
I got approved for PERM in Mar 2007.
I applied for I-140 and I-485 concurrently in Jun 2007.
I-140 got approved July 20, 2007 and on July 23, 2007 I received all 4 receipts for I-140, I-485, EAD and AP. So my approval came before my receipt. I live in California so everything went to Nebraksa.
Lawyers emailed saying they also received the EAD card yesterday July 23, 2007.
Now I have to wait for only AP and Adjustment. And I still have 5 years left on my H1-B (2 years on this visa and then another extension).
So I say, anything is possible. I wake up every morning and pray to USCIS because they made my life better :) :) :)
POSSIBLE ONLY IF YOU APPLIED UNDER EB1 ..IMPOSSIBLE FOR EB3 CATEGORY(EVEN ROW).. AND EB2(RETROGRESSED COUNTRIES)..
WHATEVER MENTIONED ABOVE IS IMPOSSIBLE
I applied for PERM in Sep 2006 - EB3 - India.
I got approved for PERM in Mar 2007.
I applied for I-140 and I-485 concurrently in Jun 2007.
I-140 got approved July 20, 2007 and on July 23, 2007 I received all 4 receipts for I-140, I-485, EAD and AP. So my approval came before my receipt. I live in California so everything went to Nebraksa.
Lawyers emailed saying they also received the EAD card yesterday July 23, 2007.
Now I have to wait for only AP and Adjustment. And I still have 5 years left on my H1-B (2 years on this visa and then another extension).
So I say, anything is possible. I wake up every morning and pray to USCIS because they made my life better :) :) :)
POSSIBLE ONLY IF YOU APPLIED UNDER EB1 ..IMPOSSIBLE FOR EB3 CATEGORY(EVEN ROW).. AND EB2(RETROGRESSED COUNTRIES)..
WHATEVER MENTIONED ABOVE IS IMPOSSIBLE
texanmom
09-12 12:23 PM
Please post a draft of all the letters here so we can use them/ modify them if necessary.
more...
eager_immi
07-18 04:22 PM
I love the idea of monthly subscription website what does the core think. This works just like AILA does.
I know many of friends who use IV as recourse for NEWS but they don't register nor contribute. Even after multiple reminders and sarcastic comments they don't. I feel pity for them, they don't understand by registering and contributing they help them self and others. Shouldn�t we make IV a monthly subscription web site? That way we will have only serious members.
I know many of friends who use IV as recourse for NEWS but they don't register nor contribute. Even after multiple reminders and sarcastic comments they don't. I feel pity for them, they don't understand by registering and contributing they help them self and others. Shouldn�t we make IV a monthly subscription web site? That way we will have only serious members.
2010 of Peter Pilotto#39;s SS11
dpp
07-06 12:09 PM
They have just linked the two things together making it more explicit.
Yah, thats true. What is necessity for them to edit that right now? May be they want to make sure that people read July bulletin must read revised bulletin also.
Yah, thats true. What is necessity for them to edit that right now? May be they want to make sure that people read July bulletin must read revised bulletin also.
more...
Kodi
06-16 01:57 PM
Mine is just over a month but won't be clearing for a while since there's lot more cases pending that were filed before me. Can I still email/Call?
They don't seem to be going in any order. Some applications from April was cleared recently where as Feb March is still pending..
They don't seem to be going in any order. Some applications from April was cleared recently where as Feb March is still pending..
hair peter pilotto ss11
lost_in_migration
10-01 10:39 AM
EB must also get some additional visa numbers from FB as an 'interest' for these 'loaned' visas from EB to FB. Now we have to finalize the 'interest' rate. How about 100%? ;)
Thanks to Macaca, now we know that during the previous years some of the unused EB visas were effectively used for Family based GCs.
My question (and suggestion) is, can the reverse happen in 2007-2008?
I know, this is an opportunistic and shameless suggestion from my part. But the fact of the matter is, we are rightfully entitled to the same number of visa numbers that we effectively 'loaned' to the FB visa category in the previous years.
What is important is that this sort of give and take can happen with out any law change. We only need to cry louder than FB folks, and USCIS may give unused FB visas to EB category.
Thanks to Macaca, now we know that during the previous years some of the unused EB visas were effectively used for Family based GCs.
My question (and suggestion) is, can the reverse happen in 2007-2008?
I know, this is an opportunistic and shameless suggestion from my part. But the fact of the matter is, we are rightfully entitled to the same number of visa numbers that we effectively 'loaned' to the FB visa category in the previous years.
What is important is that this sort of give and take can happen with out any law change. We only need to cry louder than FB folks, and USCIS may give unused FB visas to EB category.
more...
addsf345
11-21 02:49 PM
In addition to my above post, one can be on h1b and keep getting h1b extensions and apply for consular processing instead of AOS.
You know what, my head is going bananas. What you said makes sense too. May be it finally boils down to what IO thinks who is handling your case and LUCK!
You know what, my head is going bananas. What you said makes sense too. May be it finally boils down to what IO thinks who is handling your case and LUCK!
hot London Fashion Week SS11 - Peter Pilotto
immm
07-19 02:07 PM
Since both A and B were current at the time of AOS approval. Person with earlier RD will take precedence. however if the cut off date were April 2003, person B will get the visa.
Not necessarily. Here is a hypothetical scenario:
PersonA = PD of May 30th, 2003 and RD of June 15th, 2007.
Assume that an additional 150,000 I-485 applications were filed petween PersonA and PersonB
PersonB = PD of May 15, 2002 and RD of July 15th 2007.
USCIS starts pre-adjudicating cases based on Receipt date. Assume that by October 1, 2007, they have pre-adjudicated PersonA plus 9,000 of the 150,000 applications and haven't reached PersonB's application yet (they go by RD).
Assuming that the visa cutoff date in Oct, 2007 bulletin is June, 2003 making both PersonA and personB current:
PersonA (PD of 2003) will get a visa number and get the case approved while PersonB (PD of 2002) with an older priority date will have to wait a while because his case hasn't been touched by USCIS yet due to the additional 150,000 filings in between that have to be pre-adjudicated first based on RD even if they have 2004/2005/2006/2007 priority dates!!
You forgot that there were another 150,000 applications in this example with RD prior to PersonB and it is very likely that many of them could have the PD of April, 2003. Therefore, PersonB will still not get it even though he/she has an older Priority date!!
I think that after this stampede of application filings in June/July/August, USCIS needs to sort them by PD first otherwise people with older priority dates will suffer simply due to the volume of applications filed!!
Not necessarily. Here is a hypothetical scenario:
PersonA = PD of May 30th, 2003 and RD of June 15th, 2007.
Assume that an additional 150,000 I-485 applications were filed petween PersonA and PersonB
PersonB = PD of May 15, 2002 and RD of July 15th 2007.
USCIS starts pre-adjudicating cases based on Receipt date. Assume that by October 1, 2007, they have pre-adjudicated PersonA plus 9,000 of the 150,000 applications and haven't reached PersonB's application yet (they go by RD).
Assuming that the visa cutoff date in Oct, 2007 bulletin is June, 2003 making both PersonA and personB current:
PersonA (PD of 2003) will get a visa number and get the case approved while PersonB (PD of 2002) with an older priority date will have to wait a while because his case hasn't been touched by USCIS yet due to the additional 150,000 filings in between that have to be pre-adjudicated first based on RD even if they have 2004/2005/2006/2007 priority dates!!
You forgot that there were another 150,000 applications in this example with RD prior to PersonB and it is very likely that many of them could have the PD of April, 2003. Therefore, PersonB will still not get it even though he/she has an older Priority date!!
I think that after this stampede of application filings in June/July/August, USCIS needs to sort them by PD first otherwise people with older priority dates will suffer simply due to the volume of applications filed!!
more...
house SS11注目新作quot;Peter Pilotto for
chanduv23
10-24 03:19 PM
jsut follweod up with my lawyer and Iwas told that my old company doesnot usaully revoke 140's unless the person left the company b4 the setforth dates as part of GC agreement (4yrs or b4 getting gc ) or the person discharged for some other reason...
HOWEVER i am still not taking chances and am participating int his campn. and alreay sent email as requested..tx guys
Lets none of us assume that if ex employer does not revoke 140 we are fine. We must ensure that erroneous denials are stopped.
HOWEVER i am still not taking chances and am participating int his campn. and alreay sent email as requested..tx guys
Lets none of us assume that if ex employer does not revoke 140 we are fine. We must ensure that erroneous denials are stopped.
tattoo LFW SS11, Peter Pilotto,
deba
09-09 12:50 PM
Contributed $300 for rally. Go IV!
Deb
Contrib $600 so far + $300 for rally
EB2 India PD 03/05
I140 09/07
I485 07/07
Deb
Contrib $600 so far + $300 for rally
EB2 India PD 03/05
I140 09/07
I485 07/07
more...
pictures Mr Peter Pilotto.
john2255
07-20 12:20 PM
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00266
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r110:1:./temp/~r110f0ODXJ:e32253:
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''.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r110:1:./temp/~r110f0ODXJ:e32253:
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''.
dresses Kirkwood for Peter Pilotto
pankajkakkar
08-08 12:17 PM
Stuck for years
In the debate over illegal immigration, don't forget the many legal immigrants waiting for their turn.
by Pankaj Kakkar
Legislators in Congress are as divided over the issue of illegal immigration as Americans are. Opinions are strong, debate is passionate, and no end is in sight. Proponents of quick reform, from both sides of the divide, stress the urgency of the issue and the need for a solution soon. In this debate, however, the plight of legal immigrants is forgotten.
The path to legally acquiring US residency and eventual citizenship is long and unnecessarily complicated, yet many deserving immigrants attempt it every year. Legal immigrants are roughly divided into two categories - family based immigrants and employment based immigrants. These immigrants face years of waiting due to anachronistic laws, discriminatory quotas, onerous bureaucratic hurdles and paper files needlessly being pushed through the system. They also face mounting legal and other tangible and intangible costs. Through all this, they work hard, pay their taxes, and live upright, lawful lives. It is in the interest of the United States as a whole, and Americans individually, to expedite the immigration process for both employment based and family based immigrants.
The benefits are easier to see for employment based immigration. This category has attracted the best researchers and entrepreneurs of the world for the last half century. Immigrants from this category have started companies that employ hundreds of thousands of Americans (with some of these companies featured in the Fortune 500 list). Others have done research and invented technologies that have earned them the highest awards in their fields, such as the Nobel Prize. Even those who haven't been as successful have been an indispensable part of America's economic growth and progress, especially in technology, over the last half century. In my country of birth, India, the phenomenon of the best minds leaving for the US was called the "brain drain" - it isn't hard to see that India's "brain drain" is but America's "brain gain".
Family based immigrants also benefit the US, although in less economically tangible ways. The best minds of the world, immigrating to the US through the first category, would be most comfortable and most productive in an environment where they're close to their family. These family members themselves contribute to American society by being productive, law abiding, and patriotic citizens.
Typical legal immigrants have to wait 5-10 years, and some family based immigrants as long as 20-25 years, before they can even get a Green Card, after which another 5 year wait for acquiring citizenship ensues. These long waits have already persuaded several potential immigrants, many of whom could have been founders of Fortune 500 companies or Nobel Prize winners themselves, to go back to their countries of origin. Quite a few have also immigrated or are considering immigrating to countries where immigration laws are friendlier and less bureaucratic, such as Canada, Ireland and the U.K. While legal immigrants benefit the United States greatly, America does them, and herself, a disservice by making them suffer through an interminable immigration process and countless bureaucratic hurdles. America can and should do right by them.
Congressman Shadegg (R-AZ) has introduced a bill, called the SKIL (Securing Knowledge, Innovation and Leadership) Act, in the House of Representatives. This bill, which has 9 Republican co-sponsors, including Congressman Mike Pence (R-CO), a leader on the issue of immigration, will significantly ameliorate the wait times and hurdles that legal immigrants face, while also benefiting the American economy by making sure that the technology leaders of tomorrow innovate and invent in the United States, and not elsewhere in the world. A similar bill has already passed the Senate. The House should consider it soon, and pass it as well.
=================
Added by pappu
Published on oct 02, 2006
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=27239#post27239
http://news.newamericamedia.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=71b07f51db4b780d19530 b364b3d6b9f
news.newamericamedia.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=71b07f51db4b780d19530 b364b3d6b9f
In the debate over illegal immigration, don't forget the many legal immigrants waiting for their turn.
by Pankaj Kakkar
Legislators in Congress are as divided over the issue of illegal immigration as Americans are. Opinions are strong, debate is passionate, and no end is in sight. Proponents of quick reform, from both sides of the divide, stress the urgency of the issue and the need for a solution soon. In this debate, however, the plight of legal immigrants is forgotten.
The path to legally acquiring US residency and eventual citizenship is long and unnecessarily complicated, yet many deserving immigrants attempt it every year. Legal immigrants are roughly divided into two categories - family based immigrants and employment based immigrants. These immigrants face years of waiting due to anachronistic laws, discriminatory quotas, onerous bureaucratic hurdles and paper files needlessly being pushed through the system. They also face mounting legal and other tangible and intangible costs. Through all this, they work hard, pay their taxes, and live upright, lawful lives. It is in the interest of the United States as a whole, and Americans individually, to expedite the immigration process for both employment based and family based immigrants.
The benefits are easier to see for employment based immigration. This category has attracted the best researchers and entrepreneurs of the world for the last half century. Immigrants from this category have started companies that employ hundreds of thousands of Americans (with some of these companies featured in the Fortune 500 list). Others have done research and invented technologies that have earned them the highest awards in their fields, such as the Nobel Prize. Even those who haven't been as successful have been an indispensable part of America's economic growth and progress, especially in technology, over the last half century. In my country of birth, India, the phenomenon of the best minds leaving for the US was called the "brain drain" - it isn't hard to see that India's "brain drain" is but America's "brain gain".
Family based immigrants also benefit the US, although in less economically tangible ways. The best minds of the world, immigrating to the US through the first category, would be most comfortable and most productive in an environment where they're close to their family. These family members themselves contribute to American society by being productive, law abiding, and patriotic citizens.
Typical legal immigrants have to wait 5-10 years, and some family based immigrants as long as 20-25 years, before they can even get a Green Card, after which another 5 year wait for acquiring citizenship ensues. These long waits have already persuaded several potential immigrants, many of whom could have been founders of Fortune 500 companies or Nobel Prize winners themselves, to go back to their countries of origin. Quite a few have also immigrated or are considering immigrating to countries where immigration laws are friendlier and less bureaucratic, such as Canada, Ireland and the U.K. While legal immigrants benefit the United States greatly, America does them, and herself, a disservice by making them suffer through an interminable immigration process and countless bureaucratic hurdles. America can and should do right by them.
Congressman Shadegg (R-AZ) has introduced a bill, called the SKIL (Securing Knowledge, Innovation and Leadership) Act, in the House of Representatives. This bill, which has 9 Republican co-sponsors, including Congressman Mike Pence (R-CO), a leader on the issue of immigration, will significantly ameliorate the wait times and hurdles that legal immigrants face, while also benefiting the American economy by making sure that the technology leaders of tomorrow innovate and invent in the United States, and not elsewhere in the world. A similar bill has already passed the Senate. The House should consider it soon, and pass it as well.
=================
Added by pappu
Published on oct 02, 2006
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=27239#post27239
http://news.newamericamedia.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=71b07f51db4b780d19530 b364b3d6b9f
news.newamericamedia.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=71b07f51db4b780d19530 b364b3d6b9f
more...
makeup Click To View the Fullsize
aquarianf
09-09 11:21 AM
I'm looking for homeloan options in India. Which bank would be good to apply for home loans.
Was thinking about ICICI bank but got scared after going through the other thread about how ICICI bank is into stealing.
I would appreciate it if anyone can give me few suggestions on this.
Thank you.
Avoid ICICI.
Was thinking about ICICI bank but got scared after going through the other thread about how ICICI bank is into stealing.
I would appreciate it if anyone can give me few suggestions on this.
Thank you.
Avoid ICICI.
girlfriend Peter Pilotto - 2 men as 1.
ramus
09-09 09:49 AM
Amma,
Thank you so much for your contribution.
Dear friends,
Contributed $ 300 today via google .
Keep going IV.
Amma
Thank you so much for your contribution.
Dear friends,
Contributed $ 300 today via google .
Keep going IV.
Amma
hairstyles screams Peter Pilotto!
santb1975
06-21 03:58 PM
you rekindled our hopes on this funding drive
another 100$ from IL
PayPal Receipt ID: 70125366SU56XXXXX
GO IV!!!!
another 100$ from IL
PayPal Receipt ID: 70125366SU56XXXXX
GO IV!!!!
santb1975
06-13 01:42 AM
will we reach 20k atleast??
Macaca
01-06 11:18 AM
Vivek Wadhwa Bio (http://www.soc.duke.edu/GlobalEngineering/project_facultystaff.html)
Vivek Wadhwa is an Executive in Residence/Adjunct Professor for the Pratt School of Engineering at Duke University and a Wertheim Fellow at the Labor and Worklife Program at the Harvard Law School.
He is also a technology entrepreneur and a columnist for BusinessWeek.com. Wadhwa was named a "Leader of Tomorrow" by Forbes.com, and his company Relativity Technologies was named as one of the 25 "coolest" companies in the world by Fortune Magazine.
Mr. Wadhwa holds a B.A. in Computing Studies from the Canberra University in Australia and an MBA from New York University.
Vivek Wadhwa is an Executive in Residence/Adjunct Professor for the Pratt School of Engineering at Duke University and a Wertheim Fellow at the Labor and Worklife Program at the Harvard Law School.
He is also a technology entrepreneur and a columnist for BusinessWeek.com. Wadhwa was named a "Leader of Tomorrow" by Forbes.com, and his company Relativity Technologies was named as one of the 25 "coolest" companies in the world by Fortune Magazine.
Mr. Wadhwa holds a B.A. in Computing Studies from the Canberra University in Australia and an MBA from New York University.
No comments:
Post a Comment