ag11
09-17 07:04 PM
I received I-485 approval letter from USCIS today which reads as follows:
"The above application has been approved. Prior to receiving your permanent resident card you may be required to report for biometrics processing (photo/fingerprint/signature). Please do not take any action at this time. If you are required to report for this processing, you will receive another notice advising you of the date, time and location to appear.
If you have not received your permanent resident card or the above mentioned notice to appear for biometrics processing within 90 days, please call this office at the number listed above."
Did anyone receive a notice like this? How many days did it take to get the biometric notice after this notice if anyone received the above?
My wife already received her physical green card although she is beneficary of my application.
I was planning on going to India in Nov, but can't book now as I don't know how long it will take :mad:
I don't think InfoPass will entertain me to request for Biometrics especially since this notice tells to wait.
Anyone with similar notice, any inputs are greatly appreciated. Thank you friends!!
"The above application has been approved. Prior to receiving your permanent resident card you may be required to report for biometrics processing (photo/fingerprint/signature). Please do not take any action at this time. If you are required to report for this processing, you will receive another notice advising you of the date, time and location to appear.
If you have not received your permanent resident card or the above mentioned notice to appear for biometrics processing within 90 days, please call this office at the number listed above."
Did anyone receive a notice like this? How many days did it take to get the biometric notice after this notice if anyone received the above?
My wife already received her physical green card although she is beneficary of my application.
I was planning on going to India in Nov, but can't book now as I don't know how long it will take :mad:
I don't think InfoPass will entertain me to request for Biometrics especially since this notice tells to wait.
Anyone with similar notice, any inputs are greatly appreciated. Thank you friends!!
wallpaper tattoo Emmy Awards Red Carpet
punjabi
03-29 09:51 AM
I didn't see any news like this on the website you mentioned. Can you please share the link?
pop
01-19 10:53 AM
You did not turn in your H-1B I-94 at the time of leaving? You have two I-94s right now or your attorney just wants your H-1B approval for filing the extension? Will he also attach a copy of your new I-94?
2011 Susan Lucci Walks Red Carpet
trueguy
01-24 03:08 PM
Recently I travelled by Jet Airways and I had very good experience. They provide world class service even for Domestic flights and their international flights are just awesome. Brand new aircraft with bigger tv screen and they fly ontime. Also, no transit visa required at Brussels so no hassle for TV.
The only drawback of this is that you are not allowed to carry any liquid (including liquor) from US. However, you can buy as much as you want at Brussels airport and the prices are same as in US.
Thanks.
The only drawback of this is that you are not allowed to carry any liquid (including liquor) from US. However, you can buy as much as you want at Brussels airport and the prices are same as in US.
Thanks.
more...
johnamit
06-25 07:58 AM
I have both I-94 attached to passport and also I-94 along with current I-797. I still confused which one to use?
Technicaly you should possess only one I-94. So when USCIS asks for a copy you should submit only the latest. If you submit extra copies you will create more confusion why you possess more than one I-94. My advice just send them the one that is valid and latest. USCIS can determine you live in this country legally from your records including ur passport, I-797, I-20 past EADS etc.
Technicaly you should possess only one I-94. So when USCIS asks for a copy you should submit only the latest. If you submit extra copies you will create more confusion why you possess more than one I-94. My advice just send them the one that is valid and latest. USCIS can determine you live in this country legally from your records including ur passport, I-797, I-20 past EADS etc.
leo2606
08-09 09:11 PM
You are right, with second set of application I just filed 485, did not apply for EAD and AP.
every lawyer who has OKed multiple 485s has specifically asked us to apply for EAD/AP on only one of the applications.
every lawyer who has OKed multiple 485s has specifically asked us to apply for EAD/AP on only one of the applications.
more...
malibuguy007
09-09 05:33 PM
Only 6 pages so far - we should be at 60!!!
2010 webby awards red carpet.
wantgc23
08-20 02:20 PM
Since it is a question of Interpretation of the law, It would be nice if someone in IV who has connections with AILA makes an inquiry with USCIS through AILA.
That is true. USCIS behaviour no longer (or never has) assumes the meaning of EB1&EB2 wording in the law text.
Previously a lot of visas flowed into EB3 because USCIS misinterpreted ( rather did not take into account) the AC21 change, which suggests that the per-category spill over numbers must be used within the category before flowing out of the category.
Unfortunately, when they realized it, they seem to now ignore (or have always ignored) the wording of EB1&EB2 numbers flowing in EB3. A lot of people here don't agree with this interpretation, but I am very sure that USCIS is misreading the law and is shafting EB3 big time.
I dont know how to word a letter to USCIS that shows them their oversight, and yet word it in a positive (or a non-confrontational) manner. If you have any idea's, lets work on a letter campaign to make USCIS aware of this. However, let us do this through personal PMs while we work out the details, as this is a very contentious issue and you will spend a lot of time responding to distracting arguments.
That is true. USCIS behaviour no longer (or never has) assumes the meaning of EB1&EB2 wording in the law text.
Previously a lot of visas flowed into EB3 because USCIS misinterpreted ( rather did not take into account) the AC21 change, which suggests that the per-category spill over numbers must be used within the category before flowing out of the category.
Unfortunately, when they realized it, they seem to now ignore (or have always ignored) the wording of EB1&EB2 numbers flowing in EB3. A lot of people here don't agree with this interpretation, but I am very sure that USCIS is misreading the law and is shafting EB3 big time.
I dont know how to word a letter to USCIS that shows them their oversight, and yet word it in a positive (or a non-confrontational) manner. If you have any idea's, lets work on a letter campaign to make USCIS aware of this. However, let us do this through personal PMs while we work out the details, as this is a very contentious issue and you will spend a lot of time responding to distracting arguments.
more...
natrajs
10-01 04:23 PM
Finallly, my online status changed from "Initial review" -> "Document production" and also got email from Senator's office that my case is approved.
I think I got it....but not 100% sure yet...no approval emails yet... or no other proof.
Thanks,
-N
Finally , Congrats & Best Wishes
I think I got it....but not 100% sure yet...no approval emails yet... or no other proof.
Thanks,
-N
Finally , Congrats & Best Wishes
hair webby awards red carpet. lil
walking_dude
10-29 11:18 AM
Yes, we must all understand that AC21 is not a law.
The correct way of stating it is AC21 Act of 2000, signed by Pres. Clinton is law of the land. But, that law doesn't come into effect until and unless the concerned Government department (in this case USCIS) publishes the regulations in the Federal Register. This hasn't happened so far with AC21 law, though we are approaching a decade of it's passage.
An unfortunate example I can give to illustrate the point is the U & T visas created by US Congress some years back to help victims of sexual-trafficking and domestic violence to remain in the country and adjust status to LPRs. Unfortunately for these hapless victims, they couldn't get the benefit of these visas as USCIS did not make the regulations for years. ( I'm not sure of the status now).
There is a saying that 'what the legislature gave in the law, the department took away in regulations'. Department can deny the benefits in two ways. Delaying/not framing the regulations or framing them in such a way as to take away the benefits of the law.
The correct way of stating it is AC21 Act of 2000, signed by Pres. Clinton is law of the land. But, that law doesn't come into effect until and unless the concerned Government department (in this case USCIS) publishes the regulations in the Federal Register. This hasn't happened so far with AC21 law, though we are approaching a decade of it's passage.
An unfortunate example I can give to illustrate the point is the U & T visas created by US Congress some years back to help victims of sexual-trafficking and domestic violence to remain in the country and adjust status to LPRs. Unfortunately for these hapless victims, they couldn't get the benefit of these visas as USCIS did not make the regulations for years. ( I'm not sure of the status now).
There is a saying that 'what the legislature gave in the law, the department took away in regulations'. Department can deny the benefits in two ways. Delaying/not framing the regulations or framing them in such a way as to take away the benefits of the law.
more...
kevinkris
01-24 02:55 PM
How can you confirm this?
Police solved the Duke case partially that it's robbery case.
Don't come to conclusions yourselves..
On top of these issues, apparent hate crimes against Indians at LSU and then at Duke would certainly make a lot of parents a little nervous before sending their kids for higher education here.
GG_007
Police solved the Duke case partially that it's robbery case.
Don't come to conclusions yourselves..
On top of these issues, apparent hate crimes against Indians at LSU and then at Duke would certainly make a lot of parents a little nervous before sending their kids for higher education here.
GG_007
hot red carpet at the Webby
pappu
01-07 09:08 PM
The campaign has begun. Lets all unite and make it successful. There is very slim chance of any legislative relief until after the Presidential elections. This is our best shot at this time.
Letter Template #7
<<Date>>
The Honorable George W. Bush
President of the United States
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President:
I write today to urge you to fix America's broken legal employment-based immigration system. Highly skilled professionals in various high-technology fields currently facing a long wait of 6 to 12 years, find themselves trapped in a legal maze, and are unable to advance in their careers. Changing jobs, even with the same employer, means the process must be started over again.
Mr. President, you can make changes that would impart fairness and dignity to this arduously long process and improve the quality of life of these half a million hard-working professionals. Mr. President, I appeal to you to implement administrative reforms to:
Recapture administratively the unused visas for permanent residency to fulfill the congressional mandate of 140,000 green cards per year.
Revise the administrative definition of "same or similar" to allow slight additional job flexibility for legal immigrants awaiting adjudication of adjustment of status (I-485) petitions.
Allow filing of Adjustment of Status (Form I-485) when a visa number is not available.
Implement the existing interim rule to allow issuance of multi-year Employment Authorization Documents (EAD) and Advance Parole.
Allow visa revalidation in the United States.
Reinstate premium processing of Immigrant Petitions.The above fixes are urgently needed to fulfill your stated goal of attracting and retaining highly-skilled legal immigrants from around the world, eliminating bureaucratic inefficiency, and improving the lives of future Americans already living and working legally in the United States.
I thank you for your attention to this matter.
Respectfully,
Name:
Address:
Letter Template #7
<<Date>>
The Honorable George W. Bush
President of the United States
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President:
I write today to urge you to fix America's broken legal employment-based immigration system. Highly skilled professionals in various high-technology fields currently facing a long wait of 6 to 12 years, find themselves trapped in a legal maze, and are unable to advance in their careers. Changing jobs, even with the same employer, means the process must be started over again.
Mr. President, you can make changes that would impart fairness and dignity to this arduously long process and improve the quality of life of these half a million hard-working professionals. Mr. President, I appeal to you to implement administrative reforms to:
Recapture administratively the unused visas for permanent residency to fulfill the congressional mandate of 140,000 green cards per year.
Revise the administrative definition of "same or similar" to allow slight additional job flexibility for legal immigrants awaiting adjudication of adjustment of status (I-485) petitions.
Allow filing of Adjustment of Status (Form I-485) when a visa number is not available.
Implement the existing interim rule to allow issuance of multi-year Employment Authorization Documents (EAD) and Advance Parole.
Allow visa revalidation in the United States.
Reinstate premium processing of Immigrant Petitions.The above fixes are urgently needed to fulfill your stated goal of attracting and retaining highly-skilled legal immigrants from around the world, eliminating bureaucratic inefficiency, and improving the lives of future Americans already living and working legally in the United States.
I thank you for your attention to this matter.
Respectfully,
Name:
Address:
more...
house Emmy Awards Red Carpet Roundup
abhijitp
07-31 03:21 PM
question: can I file without employer letter
For an employment-based petition, in order to proceed and be valid,
they
need to still INTEND to be employed by the sponsoring employer if and
when
they get their green card. The employer however, does not need to sign
any
forms per se with relation to the adjustment petition. If the alien is
currently working for the sponsoring employer (on H-1B or other) he or
she
can port or transfer employers without penalty or without losing the
green
card process 180 days after they file the I-485 petition. At that
point,
they can change employers and work for whomever they wish (provided
they
have a valid work permit)
The forms which need to be filed with the I-485 include;
Form I-485 for EACH applicant with $325 filing fee ($225 if under age
14)
Proof of approved I-140
Form G-325A for each applicant
G-28, if attorney involved
Form I765 Work Permit (optional) (filing fee of $180)
Form I-131 Travel Permit (optional) (filing fee of $170)
Fingerprint fee of $70 for each
Medical examination by INS approved doctor
Passport, visa, approval notices and I-94 card showing all years in the
US
in valid status and maintenance of status
Marriage certificate, birth certificates of children.
Form I-134 Affidavit of Support (notarized) or I-864, with tax returns
(1
year must be attached, but income for three years must be listed); job
letter from the alien's current employer; and pay-stubs.
If the alien is NOT yet working for the sponsoring employer, I like to
include a letter from the employer stating that if and when the alien
gets
his residency, they still intend to hire him or her.
Hope this answers the questions.
Is it possible for us to ask, what are the chances of rejection solely based on the lack of the Employment Verification Letter? If too high, it is a better idea to re-submit. If not a high risk, might as well wait for the A# and then send out this document.
I was present on the conf call on Sunday and wanted to ask this question in the end, but we ran out of time, I have sent her a follow up email with this question (no response yet).
For an employment-based petition, in order to proceed and be valid,
they
need to still INTEND to be employed by the sponsoring employer if and
when
they get their green card. The employer however, does not need to sign
any
forms per se with relation to the adjustment petition. If the alien is
currently working for the sponsoring employer (on H-1B or other) he or
she
can port or transfer employers without penalty or without losing the
green
card process 180 days after they file the I-485 petition. At that
point,
they can change employers and work for whomever they wish (provided
they
have a valid work permit)
The forms which need to be filed with the I-485 include;
Form I-485 for EACH applicant with $325 filing fee ($225 if under age
14)
Proof of approved I-140
Form G-325A for each applicant
G-28, if attorney involved
Form I765 Work Permit (optional) (filing fee of $180)
Form I-131 Travel Permit (optional) (filing fee of $170)
Fingerprint fee of $70 for each
Medical examination by INS approved doctor
Passport, visa, approval notices and I-94 card showing all years in the
US
in valid status and maintenance of status
Marriage certificate, birth certificates of children.
Form I-134 Affidavit of Support (notarized) or I-864, with tax returns
(1
year must be attached, but income for three years must be listed); job
letter from the alien's current employer; and pay-stubs.
If the alien is NOT yet working for the sponsoring employer, I like to
include a letter from the employer stating that if and when the alien
gets
his residency, they still intend to hire him or her.
Hope this answers the questions.
Is it possible for us to ask, what are the chances of rejection solely based on the lack of the Employment Verification Letter? If too high, it is a better idea to re-submit. If not a high risk, might as well wait for the A# and then send out this document.
I was present on the conf call on Sunday and wanted to ask this question in the end, but we ran out of time, I have sent her a follow up email with this question (no response yet).
tattoo webby awards red carpet.
jonty_11
06-29 05:23 PM
keep refreshing the July VISA bulletin page all thru th ewkend...
here u go:
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3258.html
here u go:
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3258.html
more...
pictures aka-aki on the red carpet in
sc3
08-20 07:54 PM
Not excatly. eb3_2004 has posted the link of INA. You will find more interesting things if you read through it.
Non-descrimination rule is clearly spelled out in Section 202 (a). I assume this rule should be generally applied to all applicants, no matter which categories they are falling, unless other rules specifically provided in paragraph (2) and in sections 101(a)(27) , 201(b)(2)(A)(i) , and 203.
INA does not say to spillover unused visas first to EB2 then EB3. I assume USCIS and Department of State should treat each EB applicants equally (based on their priority dates, not based on EB categories) in according to INA act.
It is likely the misinterpretation violates the law. We need some one which more professional knowledge to read through it. Can some core member help?
This is awesome lead. It suggests that barring 203 (which does not talk much about per-country limits) and paragraph 2 (which goes moot when there is spill-over), there should be no discrimination. But does the anti-discrimination apply to "qualification requirements" ?? That will be the counter argument against applying this section.
Non-descrimination rule is clearly spelled out in Section 202 (a). I assume this rule should be generally applied to all applicants, no matter which categories they are falling, unless other rules specifically provided in paragraph (2) and in sections 101(a)(27) , 201(b)(2)(A)(i) , and 203.
INA does not say to spillover unused visas first to EB2 then EB3. I assume USCIS and Department of State should treat each EB applicants equally (based on their priority dates, not based on EB categories) in according to INA act.
It is likely the misinterpretation violates the law. We need some one which more professional knowledge to read through it. Can some core member help?
This is awesome lead. It suggests that barring 203 (which does not talk much about per-country limits) and paragraph 2 (which goes moot when there is spill-over), there should be no discrimination. But does the anti-discrimination apply to "qualification requirements" ?? That will be the counter argument against applying this section.
dresses (RED) Webby Award: Ushahidi
onemaveric
09-13 11:26 PM
Travelling in the same boat.
more...
makeup webby awards red carpet.
whitecollarslave
03-26 01:04 PM
Yes, I am aware about this but in my case I do not have any written or tape recorded evidence. In other guy's case at least he have written proof (Capital One) and that can be the base. Now many companies are doing this so it is ofcourse my assumption that they can do this under "Hire and fire" authority.. And main problem is that, when you are out for a job, you do not stop thinking to takle particular one "no", you want to just move haead and fix your job first.. That is practical reality:)
I appreciate your point of view and bringing forth the practical reality in this situation. However, your attitude and tone, which seems to suggest that this is a lost cause and a helpless situation, is somewhat discouraging.
Nobody is suggesting that you drop your job search, drop everything, and file a law suit. What do you do? You go and find a job elsewhere, of course. You are right, the reality is that employers may ask you questions about your visa/immigration status. But there is a better way to handle such situations. Mark had posted some great tips on that. Even after all that, you may end up in a situation such as yours - where you mentioned that 5 employers told you that they will not hire somebody on EAD. You can remain quiet about it and go about your life, or you can do something about it. Its up to you.
Think about the visa delays, retrogression, etc. You could have stayed quiet and let the lawmakers, employers and the government deal with it or you could have done something about it. There is nothing "illegal" that the government is doing by making you wait years for a green card. But you did not sit quiet about it, did you? You joined the cause of IV, you wrote letters to the President, right?
Employers have the right to make a policy or a hiring decision that they want a person with certain skill set or experience, etc. They can find a tons of reasons not to interview or hire somebody. But race, gender, immigration status, etc. CANNOT be one of the reasons or criteria. This is my understanding of the law. I believe it is written in simple English that an employer CANNOT discriminate or make hiring decisions based on immigration status unless mandated by the job requirement (such as security clearance).
You are blindly assuming that whatever the employers are doing is within legal bounds, without questioning, even when the documents (see I-9 form, or DOL's web site for example) clearly state that such practices are illegal. (I am not a lawyer, this is my understanding of the law.) All I am saying is that if I were in this situation (denied on EAD), I would write to the heads of HR, ask a lawyer if this constitutes discrimination, call the OSC hot line, ask in the forums for employment law, contact ACLU or other civil rights groups. Heck, I am not affected by this (yet), and I still did some of the above because I have the urge to find out if this is indeed discrimination as viewed by the law and if so, do something about it. You don't need written evidence for any of these.
I appreciate your point of view and bringing forth the practical reality in this situation. However, your attitude and tone, which seems to suggest that this is a lost cause and a helpless situation, is somewhat discouraging.
Nobody is suggesting that you drop your job search, drop everything, and file a law suit. What do you do? You go and find a job elsewhere, of course. You are right, the reality is that employers may ask you questions about your visa/immigration status. But there is a better way to handle such situations. Mark had posted some great tips on that. Even after all that, you may end up in a situation such as yours - where you mentioned that 5 employers told you that they will not hire somebody on EAD. You can remain quiet about it and go about your life, or you can do something about it. Its up to you.
Think about the visa delays, retrogression, etc. You could have stayed quiet and let the lawmakers, employers and the government deal with it or you could have done something about it. There is nothing "illegal" that the government is doing by making you wait years for a green card. But you did not sit quiet about it, did you? You joined the cause of IV, you wrote letters to the President, right?
Employers have the right to make a policy or a hiring decision that they want a person with certain skill set or experience, etc. They can find a tons of reasons not to interview or hire somebody. But race, gender, immigration status, etc. CANNOT be one of the reasons or criteria. This is my understanding of the law. I believe it is written in simple English that an employer CANNOT discriminate or make hiring decisions based on immigration status unless mandated by the job requirement (such as security clearance).
You are blindly assuming that whatever the employers are doing is within legal bounds, without questioning, even when the documents (see I-9 form, or DOL's web site for example) clearly state that such practices are illegal. (I am not a lawyer, this is my understanding of the law.) All I am saying is that if I were in this situation (denied on EAD), I would write to the heads of HR, ask a lawyer if this constitutes discrimination, call the OSC hot line, ask in the forums for employment law, contact ACLU or other civil rights groups. Heck, I am not affected by this (yet), and I still did some of the above because I have the urge to find out if this is indeed discrimination as viewed by the law and if so, do something about it. You don't need written evidence for any of these.
girlfriend webby awards red carpet.
saturnring11
01-17 09:16 PM
While I agree in principle to what is being suggested here (I voted for this on Change.gov), I think it may be easier to win this battle with a smaller change:
The five year clock for obtaining US Citizenship (post Permanent Residency) must start at the time Adjustment of Status (I-485) has been filed.
For example: If you are approved for Permanent Residency after a long 5 year wait of filing your I-485, you should be eligible to apply for citizenship immediately without a further wait.
This takes away at least part of the suffering caused for the legal immigrant community. The effect of USCIS processing delays and visa retrogression can be mitigated at least when it comes to obtaining citizenship.
The five year clock for obtaining US Citizenship (post Permanent Residency) must start at the time Adjustment of Status (I-485) has been filed.
For example: If you are approved for Permanent Residency after a long 5 year wait of filing your I-485, you should be eligible to apply for citizenship immediately without a further wait.
This takes away at least part of the suffering caused for the legal immigrant community. The effect of USCIS processing delays and visa retrogression can be mitigated at least when it comes to obtaining citizenship.
hairstyles Search. The 15th Annual Webby
kewlchap
10-12 04:54 PM
@ fatjoe:
"With an IO" and "Assigned to IO" is the same, according to me. You need to ask them whether the IO has actually picked up the app. They use a bar scanner to update the status in their systems. So, ask, can you tell me if my IO has physically scanned my file and picked it up from the holding area? If yes, good.
I just tried the POJ method and it does appear to be blocked. Bummer.
"With an IO" and "Assigned to IO" is the same, according to me. You need to ask them whether the IO has actually picked up the app. They use a bar scanner to update the status in their systems. So, ask, can you tell me if my IO has physically scanned my file and picked it up from the holding area? If yes, good.
I just tried the POJ method and it does appear to be blocked. Bummer.
paskal
07-09 11:41 PM
senthil:
stop stop stop. it was not a mistake, it was not an accident.
they knew what they were doing. they worked weekends to achieve it damnit.
they are civil servants- u ever heard of civil servants working sundays to do 6 months of work in 15 days? that too by MISTAKE?????
smitha:
life is not all it seems. i came here in 1996. but my pd is 2007.
i have worked 4 years in an underserved area doing "national service"
i'm nowhere near a green card, forget that...you even grudge me an EAD.
i do not expect a gc tomorrow. i did not ask that july become current. but it did. and i lost a lot of money, time and effort to catch the window for an EAD. my family and employer scrambled with me. and got throughly screwed. not by senthil's "mistake", but coldly calculatedly so. in your wonderfully fair world, where does that rank?
stop stop stop. it was not a mistake, it was not an accident.
they knew what they were doing. they worked weekends to achieve it damnit.
they are civil servants- u ever heard of civil servants working sundays to do 6 months of work in 15 days? that too by MISTAKE?????
smitha:
life is not all it seems. i came here in 1996. but my pd is 2007.
i have worked 4 years in an underserved area doing "national service"
i'm nowhere near a green card, forget that...you even grudge me an EAD.
i do not expect a gc tomorrow. i did not ask that july become current. but it did. and i lost a lot of money, time and effort to catch the window for an EAD. my family and employer scrambled with me. and got throughly screwed. not by senthil's "mistake", but coldly calculatedly so. in your wonderfully fair world, where does that rank?
snathan
04-24 06:28 PM
This is a good bill. The 50% rule will impact Indian bodyshoppers and Top Indian outsourcing companies. But genuine companies like Microsoft,Google, Oracle and other US companies will not be impacted that much as they sincerely search whether US talent is available. But will it pass? In 2007 it did not move as they planned to consider for CIR. This time also same argument may come. But some genuine Indian consulting companies also will be impacted. But system will adjust quickly even if this bill passes.
May I ask your immigration status. I believe you already got your GC and roaming around here just beat shit out of others. Each and every of your post is convincing me in that direction only. You would be happy to see the H1 guys thrown out from here. So it will increase your demand and you can make more money. What kind of person you are. is there any difference between you and anti-immigrant. Or are you that coming with Indian name to make fool out of us.
If you dont believe me, you read all your posts again. You are always talking about banning desi consultant. You are more than welcome for that. But you did you even thought about a second for guys who are genuine and unfortunate to work for them.
People are already stressed out. If you got your GC please go-away and enjoy your freedom.
May I ask your immigration status. I believe you already got your GC and roaming around here just beat shit out of others. Each and every of your post is convincing me in that direction only. You would be happy to see the H1 guys thrown out from here. So it will increase your demand and you can make more money. What kind of person you are. is there any difference between you and anti-immigrant. Or are you that coming with Indian name to make fool out of us.
If you dont believe me, you read all your posts again. You are always talking about banning desi consultant. You are more than welcome for that. But you did you even thought about a second for guys who are genuine and unfortunate to work for them.
People are already stressed out. If you got your GC please go-away and enjoy your freedom.
No comments:
Post a Comment