Immigration Voice - Forums
Register Get Involved Contact Lawmakers Advocacy Discussion Image Image Image Image

Go Back   Immigration Voice > Immigration Voice Issues and Congressional updates > Sept 18th Rally: Car-pooling, Group Reservations for Air travel, hotel etc.
Click to log in with Facebook
Sept 18th Rally: Car-pooling, Group Reservations for Air travel, hotel etc. This forums is for threads that are pertinent to Sept 18th rally. If you want to carpool to DC, travel by Air and looking for group reservation for cheaper rates with other members in your city, group reservation for Hotels, rental cars etc, please put threads here and then communicate with local IV members.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #46 (permalink)  
Old 02-12-2008, 07:15 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
Mar-07
Category
:
EB2
I140 Mailed Date
:
07/26/2007
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-140+I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
07/26/2007
Compare
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 714
kaisersose has much to be proud of kaisersose has much to be proud of kaisersose has much to be proud of kaisersose has much to be proud of kaisersose has much to be proud of kaisersose has much to be proud of kaisersose has much to be proud of kaisersose has much to be proud of kaisersose has much to be proud of kaisersose has much to be proud of
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by grupak View Post
To fix the problem for everybody need both (1) increase in visa numbers and (2) remove/increase country quota, IMHO.
Only India and China & one or two more countries will support the removal of country limit. The rest of the world will actually oppopse this move as it will have a negative impact on their processing times greatly.

There was a discussion on this on sometime ago.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #47 (permalink)  
Old 02-12-2008, 07:26 PM
Donor
Priority Date
:
Feb-07
Category
:
EB3
I140 Mailed Date
:
03/05/2007
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
07/17/2007
Compare
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 812
Blog Entries: 1
walking_dude has a reputation beyond repute walking_dude has a reputation beyond repute walking_dude has a reputation beyond repute walking_dude has a reputation beyond repute walking_dude has a reputation beyond repute walking_dude has a reputation beyond repute walking_dude has a reputation beyond repute walking_dude has a reputation beyond repute walking_dude has a reputation beyond repute walking_dude has a reputation beyond repute walking_dude has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Wake up, buddy. This is IV. Not !

Removal of Country caps was, is and will be one of the top agendas of IV , whether beneficiaries of a discriminatory system like you support it or not. It's morally and ethically repugnant to see discrimination based on country of birth in the 21st century. Just because it benefits some like you, it doesn't become right.

Employability has nothing to do with Country of Birth. When we are selected based on merit, skill and education by our employer, why should we suffer just because we are born in the wrong country?

It's time to throw away this last vestige of discrimination inherited from the previous centuries and move to a future where every individual is valued for what he/she is individually and not based on whether he was born in India or Sri Lanka.



Quote:
Originally Posted by kaisersose View Post
Only India and China & one or two more countries will support the removal of country limit. The rest of the world will actually oppopse this move as it will have a negative impact on their processing times greatly.

There was a discussion on this on sometime ago.
__________________
Truth Will Set You Free
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #48 (permalink)  
Old 02-12-2008, 07:36 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
Aug-06
Category
:
EB2
I140 Mailed Date
:
03/28/2007
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
N/A
I485 Mailed Date
:
06/30/2007
Compare
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,087
abhijitp has a reputation beyond repute abhijitp has a reputation beyond repute abhijitp has a reputation beyond repute abhijitp has a reputation beyond repute abhijitp has a reputation beyond repute abhijitp has a reputation beyond repute abhijitp has a reputation beyond repute abhijitp has a reputation beyond repute abhijitp has a reputation beyond repute abhijitp has a reputation beyond repute abhijitp has a reputation beyond repute
Thumbs down

No matter which side you are on, the quota system sucks. Period.

1) Once you start receiving benefits out of being born in a particular country/ race/ sex/ religion, a notion of "entitlement" quickly builds up within you. This adversely affects your ability to perform, for you just don't have to work hard enough!
2) If you are punished for being born in a particular country/ race/ sex/ religion, you have no incentive to perform, as you won't get what you deserve no matter how hard you work!

How about this... during every Olympics, most number of Gold Medals are won by Americans. Now imagine a rule that prevents more than 7% of all Gold Medals going to people born in any one country. How does that sound?

I will myself hate it if athletes from India (who haven't won anything in the Olympics till date) started winning gold medals simply because other countries cannot receive more than 7%!

Of course, removing country caps will face opposition, but it should still happen, just because it is the right thing!
__________________
Not legal advice!
Proud member of North California state chapter.
1) $300 between June 07- July 07, $50 monthly between Aug 2007 - June 2010
2) Flowers campaign, SJ rally, Youtube Video Campaign, Attended DC Rally & co-ordinated Airfare Sponsorships, Gathered and mailed over 300 letters in Admin Fix campaign
PD: Aug 2006. I-485: July, August 2007 @ TSC. I-485 approved on June 15, 2011
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #49 (permalink)  
Old 02-12-2008, 07:51 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
Jul-04
Category
:
EB3
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Russia
Processing Stage
:
I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
06/21/2007
Compare
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 234
styrum is a jewel in the rough styrum is a jewel in the rough styrum is a jewel in the rough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by maalelsi View Post
I just got home from work and logged in and I thought I was dreaming !!!!!
My priority date is June 2003!!!!! I already have approved petition and AOS. When should I be expeting my GC in the mail considering no need to wait for FBI check any more ?
Hold your horses, brother. Remember that the official position of USCIS now is: "Oh we got so many applications last June-August, that it will be by the end of 2010 when maybe we will return to processing times we had before last summer". So now even with PD current I don't even know anymore when we actually will get it. Also remember that there are rumors they threw people onto processing citizenship applications because that issue got some public visibility. Guess from where they took thos adjudicators. You are right - from 485 processing.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #50 (permalink)  
Old 02-12-2008, 08:14 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
N/A
Category
:
N/A
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Philippines
Processing Stage
:
N/A
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 651
JunRN is a splendid one to behold JunRN is a splendid one to behold JunRN is a splendid one to behold JunRN is a splendid one to behold JunRN is a splendid one to behold JunRN is a splendid one to behold JunRN is a splendid one to behold
Default

We are all expecting that the VB will go back to June 2007 figure...it looks like that RoW has been so fast in getting the latest PD back which could come in a very few months time.

I was not expecting this to come too soon but in June 2008.
__________________
_________

I am not a lawyer....all my comments are my own beliefs, please respect it. I do respect yours!
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #51 (permalink)  
Old 02-12-2008, 08:32 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
Aug-06
Category
:
EB2
I140 Mailed Date
:
03/28/2007
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
N/A
I485 Mailed Date
:
06/30/2007
Compare
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,087
abhijitp has a reputation beyond repute abhijitp has a reputation beyond repute abhijitp has a reputation beyond repute abhijitp has a reputation beyond repute abhijitp has a reputation beyond repute abhijitp has a reputation beyond repute abhijitp has a reputation beyond repute abhijitp has a reputation beyond repute abhijitp has a reputation beyond repute abhijitp has a reputation beyond repute abhijitp has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JunRN View Post
We are all expecting that the VB will go back to June 2007 figure...it looks like that RoW has been so fast in getting the latest PD back which could come in a very few months time.

I was not expecting this to come too soon but in June 2008.
We are???? I am not expecting a C against all categories ever again! If anything can move the dates significantly, it is things like recapturing of unused visa numbers. Oh BTW, did you send your letter?
__________________
Not legal advice!
Proud member of North California state chapter.
1) $300 between June 07- July 07, $50 monthly between Aug 2007 - June 2010
2) Flowers campaign, SJ rally, Youtube Video Campaign, Attended DC Rally & co-ordinated Airfare Sponsorships, Gathered and mailed over 300 letters in Admin Fix campaign
PD: Aug 2006. I-485: July, August 2007 @ TSC. I-485 approved on June 15, 2011
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #52 (permalink)  
Old 02-12-2008, 08:55 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
N/A
Category
:
N/A
I140 Mailed Date
:
Chargeability
:
Philippines
Processing Stage
:
N/A
I485 Mailed Date
:
Compare
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 651
JunRN is a splendid one to behold JunRN is a splendid one to behold JunRN is a splendid one to behold JunRN is a splendid one to behold JunRN is a splendid one to behold JunRN is a splendid one to behold JunRN is a splendid one to behold
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by abhijitp View Post
We are???? I am not expecting a C against all categories ever again! If anything can move the dates significantly, it is things like recapturing of unused visa numbers. Oh BTW, did you send your letter?
I am not saying "C" nor am I saying "July 2007 VB". I am talking about "June 2007 VB". It is just a matter of time when we can see the VB back to June 2007 figure again.

I can assure you that I have done my part without telling anyone. I am a silent doer.
__________________
_________

I am not a lawyer....all my comments are my own beliefs, please respect it. I do respect yours!
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #53 (permalink)  
Old 02-12-2008, 09:21 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
Apr-07
Category
:
EB3
I140 Mailed Date
:
04/25/2007
Chargeability
:
Bangladesh
Processing Stage
:
I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
05/09/2007
Compare
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 148
hazishak is on a distinguished road
Default It works like DV program

I understand that per country cap is painful for certain countries. But i think they want the employment based immigrant community to be as versatile as possible. I have never heard someone complaining about the DV program where certain countries are not allowed to participate. The reason behind is that they want people from all over the world not just from certain parts of the world.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #54 (permalink)  
Old 02-12-2008, 09:21 PM
Member
Priority Date
:
Mar-06
Category
:
EB3
I140 Mailed Date
:
03/03/2007
Chargeability
:
Bangladesh
Processing Stage
:
I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
03/08/2007
Compare
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 59
kuhelica2000 is a jewel in the rough kuhelica2000 is a jewel in the rough kuhelica2000 is a jewel in the rough
Default How is it discrimination?

Per country limit applies to every country in exactly the same way. It doesn't discriminate between Chad or China. So, how is it discrimination? And think about it- in Olympics soccer/basketball every country can send only one team. Should China and India be allowed to send more teams since they have a larger population? We should try to increase the number of GCs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by abhijitp View Post
No matter which side you are on, the quota system sucks. Period.

1) Once you start receiving benefits out of being born in a particular country/ race/ sex/ religion, a notion of "entitlement" quickly builds up within you. This adversely affects your ability to perform, for you just don't have to work hard enough!
2) If you are punished for being born in a particular country/ race/ sex/ religion, you have no incentive to perform, as you won't get what you deserve no matter how hard you work!

How about this... during every Olympics, most number of Gold Medals are won by Americans. Now imagine a rule that prevents more than 7% of all Gold Medals going to people born in any one country. How does that sound?

I will myself hate it if athletes from India (who haven't won anything in the Olympics till date) started winning gold medals simply because other countries cannot receive more than 7%!

Of course, removing country caps will face opposition, but it should still happen, just because it is the right thing!
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #55 (permalink)  
Old 02-12-2008, 09:37 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
Nov-02
Category
:
EB2
I140 Mailed Date
:
07/27/2006
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
07/27/2006
Compare
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 281
mallu has a spectacular aura about mallu has a spectacular aura about mallu has a spectacular aura about
Default 193 countries in the world. So 725 visa numbers per country.

http://www.state.gov/s/inr/rls/4250.htm
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #56 (permalink)  
Old 02-12-2008, 09:44 PM
Donor
Priority Date
:
Jan-06
Category
:
EB2
I140 Mailed Date
:
04/06/2006
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
07/31/2007
Compare
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 113
sroyc is a splendid one to behold sroyc is a splendid one to behold sroyc is a splendid one to behold sroyc is a splendid one to behold sroyc is a splendid one to behold sroyc is a splendid one to behold sroyc is a splendid one to behold
Default wrong example, right argument

I don't think Abhijit chose the right analogy, so your response to that makes sense.

India and China are not sending multiple skilled-immigrant teams to the US. They have come here on their own either to work or study and they are being hired by American companies on the basis of merit, same as everyone else.

Other than the fact that there is a large talent pool of high-tech workers in India and China, there's nothing that stops them for hiring more skilled immigrants from other countries.

If the US truly believes in a quota system for employment based immigration, it should reflect in the workforce first. Enforce the quota system while issuing F1/H1 visas. Then you will also ensure true diversity (only among immigrants) in the workforce.

What you have is two classes of immigrant workers in the same company - those who belong to retrogressed categories and those who are not, with similar qualifications and with similar roles. The difference is that in a few years, the workers who get the green card sooner will have the ability to pursue other opportunities while the other class of workers grind away. With the current scenario, a future colleague from a ROW country can join 6-8 years after me and still get the green card ahead of me. How can you say that it is not discrimination?

If you remove the per country quota, the ROW candidates might have to wait for 3 years instead of 1, but the Indian/Chinese candidates will have to wait for 3 years instead of 8-10. I don't think removing the per country quota will harm ROW folks as much as it'll benefit Indians and Chinese AND it'll ensure fairness.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kuhelica2000 View Post
Per country limit applies to every country in exactly the same way. It doesn't discriminate between Chad or China. So, how is it discrimination? And think about it- in Olympics soccer/basketball every country can send only one team. Should China and India be allowed to send more teams since they have a larger population? We should try to increase the number of GCs.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #57 (permalink)  
Old 02-12-2008, 10:04 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
Sep-04
Category
:
EB3
I140 Mailed Date
:
09/01/2005
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
07/24/2007
Compare
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,503
logiclife has a reputation beyond repute logiclife has a reputation beyond repute logiclife has a reputation beyond repute logiclife has a reputation beyond repute logiclife has a reputation beyond repute logiclife has a reputation beyond repute logiclife has a reputation beyond repute logiclife has a reputation beyond repute logiclife has a reputation beyond repute logiclife has a reputation beyond repute logiclife has a reputation beyond repute
Default Wrong comparison

Quote:
Originally Posted by kuhelica2000 View Post
Per country limit applies to every country in exactly the same way. It doesn't discriminate between Chad or China. So, how is it discrimination? And think about it- in Olympics soccer/basketball every country can send only one team. Should China and India be allowed to send more teams since they have a larger population? We should try to increase the number of GCs.
That is an apples to dinosaur analogy.

The per-country ceiling was originally created in order to establish and maintain proportionality in various immigrants coming from different countries in FAMILY BASED IMMIGRATION.

Family based immigration is driven by family relationship. Its not driven by talent or economic contribution. Therefore its important to make sure that no country completely dominates the family based immigration system by getting a head start. If one country is ahead initially in sending immigrants (like the Irish in the 1920s and Italians in 1930s), then that country's immigrants would sponsor their family and that new family would in turn sponsor their relatives and so on. Whichever country has an advantage in the begining would keep building on that advantage and eat up the entire family based quota. That's why when they wrote the INA in 1965 by codifying a bunch of loose federal regulations that governed immigration, they inserted the per-country ceiling. And that makes sense even today in Family based immigration.

Every country in the world has unlimited potential to send family members and relatives to America. But every country in the world does not have unlimited potential to send Ph.Ds and skilled labor. That ability is disproportionately huge with India, China, Mexico and Phillipines.

The per-country ceilings got INHERITED into employment based system because our legislators were too lazy to spot the difference in two systems. One system gives you a green card because you are related to someone. Other system gives you a green card because you have skills that are wanted by an employer here.

Benefits driven by family relationship should be rationed and given out propotionally because an Irish family, Italian family and a Chinese family all love their families equally and the value of family re-unification is the same. You cant say that the Irish love their sibilings more than the Chinese or Indians do. HENCE THE COUNTRY LIMITS IN FAMILY BASED SYSTEM.


But in employment based system, what the system is doing is that an Irish guy, (or any ROW guy) with Bachelor's degree in EB3 is getting green card sooner than an Indian guy or Chinese guy with masters degree in EB2. THAT IS DISCRIMINATION. Yes, that is discrimination not matter how you slice it and dice it with your olympic analogies.
__________________
--------------------------------------------------
Status : I-485 pending, PD Nov 2004, EB3 - India.
--------------------------------------------------
Religion is an insult to human dignity. Without it you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
- Steven Weinberg, Nobel Prize winning physicist.
--------------------------------------------------
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #58 (permalink)  
Old 02-12-2008, 10:12 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
Jun-06
Category
:
EB2
I140 Mailed Date
:
09/02/2006
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
09/15/2007
Compare
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 132
vivekm1309 is just really nice vivekm1309 is just really nice vivekm1309 is just really nice vivekm1309 is just really nice
Default class lawsuit

Quote:
Originally Posted by logiclife View Post
That is an apples to dinosaur analogy.

The per-country ceiling was originally created in order to establish and maintain proportionality in various immigrants coming from different countries in FAMILY BASED IMMIGRATION.

Family based immigration is driven by family relationship. Its not driven by talent or economic contribution. Therefore its important to make sure that no country completely dominates the family based immigration system by getting a head start. If one country is ahead initially in sending immigrants (like the Irish in the 1920s and Italians in 1930s), then that country's immigrants would sponsor their family and that new family would in turn sponsor their relatives and so on. Whichever country has an advantage in the begining would keep building on that advantage and eat up the entire family based quota. That's why when they wrote the INA in 1965 by codifying a bunch of loose federal regulations that governed immigration, they inserted the per-country ceiling. And that makes sense even today in Family based immigration.

Every country in the world has unlimited potential to send family members and relatives to America. But every country in the world does not have unlimited potential to send Ph.Ds and skilled labor. That ability is disproportionately huge with India, China, Mexico and Phillipines.

The per-country ceilings got INHERITED into employment based system because our legislators were too lazy to spot the difference in two systems. One system gives you a green card because you are related to someone. Other system gives you a green card because you have skills that are wanted by an employer here.

Benefits driven by family relationship should be rationed and given out propotionally because an Irish family, Italian family and a Chinese family all love their families equally and the value of family re-unification is the same. You cant say that the Irish love their sibilings more than the Chinese or Indians do. HENCE THE COUNTRY LIMITS IN FAMILY BASED SYSTEM.


But in employment based system, what the system is doing is that an Irish guy, (or any ROW guy) with Bachelor's degree in EB3 is getting green card sooner than an Indian guy or Chinese guy with masters degree in EB2. THAT IS DISCRIMINATION. Yes, that is discrimination not matter how you slice it and dice it with your olympic analogies.
Agreed this is discrimination, what stops us from fighting this discrimination using legal class action lawsuit? Is it the money required or did a lawsuit fail earlier that inhibits us to file class action lawsuit?
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #59 (permalink)  
Old 02-12-2008, 10:30 PM
Senior Member
Priority Date
:
Sep-05
Category
:
EB2
I140 Mailed Date
:
11/05/2005
Chargeability
:
Venezuela
Processing Stage
:
I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
11/05/2005
Compare
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 381
andy garcia has much to be proud of andy garcia has much to be proud of andy garcia has much to be proud of andy garcia has much to be proud of andy garcia has much to be proud of andy garcia has much to be proud of andy garcia has much to be proud of andy garcia has much to be proud of andy garcia has much to be proud of andy garcia has much to be proud of
Default Ina: Act 202 - Numerical Limitation To Any Single Foreign State

Quote:
Originally Posted by vivekm1309 View Post
Agreed this is discrimination, what stops us from fighting this discrimination using legal class action lawsuit? Is it the money required or did a lawsuit fail earlier that inhibits us to file class action lawsuit?
It is the law. You can try to sue congress.

INA: ACT 202 - NUMERICAL LIMITATION TO ANY SINGLE FOREIGN STATE
(a) Per Country Level. -

(1) Nondiscrimination. -

(A) Except as specifically provided in paragraph (2) no person shall receive any preference or priority or be discriminated against in the issuance of an IV because of the person's race, sex, nationality, place of birth, or place of residence.

(B) Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to limit the authority of the Secretary of State to determine the procedures for the processing of IV applications or the locations where such applications will be processed.

(2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. - Subject to 1a/ paragraphs (3), (4), and (5) the total number of IVs made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any FY may not exceed 7 percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or 2 percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.

(3) Exception if additional visas available. - If because of the application of paragraph (2) with respect to one or more foreign states or dependent areas, the total number of visas available under both subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who otherwise may be issued such a visa, paragraph (2) shall not apply to visas made available to such states or areas during the remainder of such calendar quarter.
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


  #60 (permalink)  
Old 02-12-2008, 10:33 PM
Donor
Priority Date
:
Jun-04
Category
:
EB2
I140 Mailed Date
:
08/05/2006
Chargeability
:
India
Processing Stage
:
I-485
I485 Mailed Date
:
07/02/2007
Compare
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 361
Blog Entries: 4
chintu25 has a reputation beyond repute chintu25 has a reputation beyond repute chintu25 has a reputation beyond repute chintu25 has a reputation beyond repute chintu25 has a reputation beyond repute chintu25 has a reputation beyond repute chintu25 has a reputation beyond repute chintu25 has a reputation beyond repute chintu25 has a reputation beyond repute chintu25 has a reputation beyond repute chintu25 has a reputation beyond repute
Question

I apologize for my ignorance but
what is ROW ??
__________________
Michigan State Chapter Leader

Chapter Link

All Michigan Members, please PM me your
First Name:
Last Name
Valid Phone Number:
IV id:
State:

To get IV ACTION UPDATES

Contribution:

TOTAL : $ 1800+ till date along with Recurring contributions since April 07
Bookmark and Share Compare Reply With Quote


Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
EB2 March 05 no GC yet soumya_bhatta Immigrant Visa 12 09-28-2010 09:19 PM
Immigration reform March! on Sunday, March 21 in Washington, D.C vdlrao Action Items for everyone 0 03-12-2010 01:38 AM
Lets March Again in DC. WILL YOU DO IT? needhelp! IV Agenda and Legislative Updates 5 11-24-2008 04:52 PM
BEC Update as of March willgetgc2005 Retrogression, priority dates and Visa bulletins 0 04-13-2007 07:33 PM
March 2007 VB out eb3_nepa Retrogression, priority dates and Visa bulletins 4 02-13-2007 06:27 PM



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:52 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c)ImmigrationVoice.org