samcam
05-19 11:34 AM
welcome to our newest member darlynb... 3873 and counting...
acecupid
08-05 09:39 PM
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Office%20of%20Communications/Homepage/uscisdotgov_mockup_28july09.ai.pdf
roseball
05-04 11:11 PM
Hi All,
Recently I received an RFE on my Wife's 485 application asking to prove that we both are still married. My lawyer is asking for around $400 to respond to this RFE, We have already paid the lawyer about $7500 until now for our GC process and she is no longer the preferred lawyer for the company that I am working for, but I had to keep my case with her as she has processed all of my applications until now. My questions are:
1. Can we ourselves respond to the RFE and save the $400.00,
2. If so, What's the process and what documents that we need to send to prove that we are still married.
Appreciate all of your help in this regard.
Thanks
Yes, you can reply to RFE directly. One of my friends recently got a similar RFE and the RFE included the type of documents to submit. The following is the text from the RFE:
"Submit evidence to demonstrate that your present marriage to XXXX is bonafide. This may be in the form of birth certificates for common children, documentary evidence of joint residence and/or ownership of property, joint income tax returns, joint financial accounts, spousal insurance coverage and other such documentation. If you fail to submit any evience or of you submit insufficient evidence, you application may be considered for denial"
His lawyer is charging him similar fee so mailed all the above mentioned documents directly with a cover letter and copy of the RFE. Hope this helps.
Recently I received an RFE on my Wife's 485 application asking to prove that we both are still married. My lawyer is asking for around $400 to respond to this RFE, We have already paid the lawyer about $7500 until now for our GC process and she is no longer the preferred lawyer for the company that I am working for, but I had to keep my case with her as she has processed all of my applications until now. My questions are:
1. Can we ourselves respond to the RFE and save the $400.00,
2. If so, What's the process and what documents that we need to send to prove that we are still married.
Appreciate all of your help in this regard.
Thanks
Yes, you can reply to RFE directly. One of my friends recently got a similar RFE and the RFE included the type of documents to submit. The following is the text from the RFE:
"Submit evidence to demonstrate that your present marriage to XXXX is bonafide. This may be in the form of birth certificates for common children, documentary evidence of joint residence and/or ownership of property, joint income tax returns, joint financial accounts, spousal insurance coverage and other such documentation. If you fail to submit any evience or of you submit insufficient evidence, you application may be considered for denial"
His lawyer is charging him similar fee so mailed all the above mentioned documents directly with a cover letter and copy of the RFE. Hope this helps.
bfadlia
03-15 09:26 AM
My wife and I did our medicals last July and applied for our I485. However, my wife was pregnant so the doctor decided to not do x-rays and some vaccinations and inform USCIS it should be done after the pregnancy.
Now after we had the baby, do we have to wait for an RFE to come asking us for the missing part of the medical? Or can we be proactive and go complete the medicals and send it to USCIS?
Our PD and RD are close to becoming current, so we may benefit if the second scenario is possible.
Now after we had the baby, do we have to wait for an RFE to come asking us for the missing part of the medical? Or can we be proactive and go complete the medicals and send it to USCIS?
Our PD and RD are close to becoming current, so we may benefit if the second scenario is possible.
more...
FredG
March 3rd, 2004, 08:18 PM
It's photoshop magic. Just create a 22.5 degree slice, dup it to 2 and position, dup that to 4 and position, dup that to 8 and position, crop to a circle and voila, kaleidoscope. It really was derived from Fretnomore's posted shot.
Fred
Fred
va_labor2002
08-23 10:31 AM
SKIL Bill will resolve lot of our issues. There are lot of people supporting this BILL. And, many Big companies are behind this BILL. Still, this Bill is stuck in the congress for many months. Why ? What is happening with this Bill ? We don't know the future of this Bill ? It is in a Black box now !
But,we have to do something to pass this BILL. What options we have ?
What IV is doing now to push this Bill ? IV has done an excellent job in CIR
bill in the senate.
I suggest everybody to post their ideas and comments to this thread. I appreciate your valuable comments and brilliant ideas.
Thank you.
But,we have to do something to pass this BILL. What options we have ?
What IV is doing now to push this Bill ? IV has done an excellent job in CIR
bill in the senate.
I suggest everybody to post their ideas and comments to this thread. I appreciate your valuable comments and brilliant ideas.
Thank you.
more...
perm2gc
06-11 12:12 PM
Asked Core Iv A Question And They Deleted The Thread
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I asked IV core on what version of immigration bill they support because I and other people wanted to know since there are so many amendments to the current immigration bill and Now I log in to see , the thread is missing, why, my question was straight forward, again I am asking them on what form of immigration bill they support. I highly doubt In what they are doing looks like they are working for the benefit of them self. Guys please don�t be ignorant and its your right to ask the question don�t be a dumb crowd but ask questions.
I am too in the same GC queue with I140 and I485 filed and pending, so don�t count me as anti � immigrant but also want to see the betterment of others too who are in GC process and will be effected due to the introduction of the new bill.
get out of box...IV core always asked people to PM if they need some information and IV core goals will not be discussed in public..
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I asked IV core on what version of immigration bill they support because I and other people wanted to know since there are so many amendments to the current immigration bill and Now I log in to see , the thread is missing, why, my question was straight forward, again I am asking them on what form of immigration bill they support. I highly doubt In what they are doing looks like they are working for the benefit of them self. Guys please don�t be ignorant and its your right to ask the question don�t be a dumb crowd but ask questions.
I am too in the same GC queue with I140 and I485 filed and pending, so don�t count me as anti � immigrant but also want to see the betterment of others too who are in GC process and will be effected due to the introduction of the new bill.
get out of box...IV core always asked people to PM if they need some information and IV core goals will not be discussed in public..
whitecollarslave
02-10 01:05 PM
All the tactics used by groups opposing EB immigration and in particular H-1B visas center around one central theme - foreign (H-1B) workers are cheap labor. While they may have identified specific cases, it is not representative of the entire EB (and H-1B) community. Most of us are paid much more than higher end of prevailing wage, plus 10-20K in immigration costs. Many of us are physicians with NIW and working in medically under served areas.
How about we stand in silent, peaceful protest against the H-1B ban to show that the common perception of H-1B workers is not all correct. I suggest we do this either in front of the Capitol on the day when the House-Senate joint committee is considering the bill or on the day when President Obama signs the bill in front of the White House. Our goal will be simple - we will try to pass on one message - We are not cheap labor. The way we do this -
Each of us will create a poster with our 2008 W-2 blown up that shows the income (100k+), show that we are paying all taxes (Medicare, SS, etc.). We can scratch off employer name, address, etc.
We can wear white strips around our lips to symbolize our protest to be silent, peaceful.
We can have some flyers ready with relevant information.
These are just some preliminary ideas. I am sure others here will have much better ideas to get our point across - We are not cheap labor.
I know skeptics and nay sayers tell me that this is useless, etc. etc. I have two things to day about that - First, if we don't do anything we don't gain anything anyways. Second, I do not expect the Congress to change anything just based on any protest like this. What this will do is that it will plant a seed of a forgotten concept that foreign workers like you and me are not cheap. I feel confident that we can find somebody to report this.
Anybody up for it? Even if 10 of us are ready I think we should do it. Timing this right is important. We have to move swiftly.
How about we stand in silent, peaceful protest against the H-1B ban to show that the common perception of H-1B workers is not all correct. I suggest we do this either in front of the Capitol on the day when the House-Senate joint committee is considering the bill or on the day when President Obama signs the bill in front of the White House. Our goal will be simple - we will try to pass on one message - We are not cheap labor. The way we do this -
Each of us will create a poster with our 2008 W-2 blown up that shows the income (100k+), show that we are paying all taxes (Medicare, SS, etc.). We can scratch off employer name, address, etc.
We can wear white strips around our lips to symbolize our protest to be silent, peaceful.
We can have some flyers ready with relevant information.
These are just some preliminary ideas. I am sure others here will have much better ideas to get our point across - We are not cheap labor.
I know skeptics and nay sayers tell me that this is useless, etc. etc. I have two things to day about that - First, if we don't do anything we don't gain anything anyways. Second, I do not expect the Congress to change anything just based on any protest like this. What this will do is that it will plant a seed of a forgotten concept that foreign workers like you and me are not cheap. I feel confident that we can find somebody to report this.
Anybody up for it? Even if 10 of us are ready I think we should do it. Timing this right is important. We have to move swiftly.
more...
eastindia
05-21 01:05 PM
If this immigration backlog continues, more people will go to Canada and Australia. Is there any way to find such numbers. It will be America's loss
GCFISH
07-17 05:47 PM
All,
I just made a payment for IV. I stongly believe now it's our turn to help IV. I don't want to talk more about this but if you think you got any benifit because of IV please make your contribution. That's the truthful way of saying 'THANKS'
I just made a payment for IV. I stongly believe now it's our turn to help IV. I don't want to talk more about this but if you think you got any benifit because of IV please make your contribution. That's the truthful way of saying 'THANKS'
more...
.jpg "X love poems and quotes Gtcute")
sanjay
08-29 12:29 PM
I saw many 2nd July Polls but doesn't have full proof information.
So thaught creating New Poll.
Hope everyone will participate in the Poll.
where is the poll? Any way there more than 5 - 6 polls as of now and there is no way to find a full proof information. We all do more speculations and analysis. So, no need to create new threads with these polls. We got many.
So thaught creating New Poll.
Hope everyone will participate in the Poll.
where is the poll? Any way there more than 5 - 6 polls as of now and there is no way to find a full proof information. We all do more speculations and analysis. So, no need to create new threads with these polls. We got many.
crazyghoda
09-09 10:09 AM
You don't need SSN to apply for a passport for a baby.
Where did you hear that from? The passport application form has a field for the SSN and I dont think its optional.
We had our baby last month but SSN in IL takes 12 weeks and they refused to give it over the phone. I dont think I have much of a choice but to wait it out till I get the SSN to be able to plan any trip to India to see the grandparents.
If you have any link that states that SSN is optional for passport, please let me know.
Where did you hear that from? The passport application form has a field for the SSN and I dont think its optional.
We had our baby last month but SSN in IL takes 12 weeks and they refused to give it over the phone. I dont think I have much of a choice but to wait it out till I get the SSN to be able to plan any trip to India to see the grandparents.
If you have any link that states that SSN is optional for passport, please let me know.
more...
ebizash
08-03 01:39 PM
Panky,
Copy the text from Pappu's post. Go to Edit Signature option under User CP. Paste your copied text in the box. Now highlight "contributing to immigrationvoice" and then click on "globe-like" button right below "smily" button. This will pop-up the hyperlink box. Type of copy this in to the box "http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=26&Itemid=44"]contributing to immigrationvoice"
Copy the text from Pappu's post. Go to Edit Signature option under User CP. Paste your copied text in the box. Now highlight "contributing to immigrationvoice" and then click on "globe-like" button right below "smily" button. This will pop-up the hyperlink box. Type of copy this in to the box "http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=26&Itemid=44"]contributing to immigrationvoice"
GCOP
11-08 03:23 PM
The main reason for EB-3 Problem is LIFE ACT (245i act of year 2000) which allowed approximately 345,000 people to file for Adjustment of Status (Green cards). There was no separate quota approved by congress for these applicants, which resulted in using the regular quota ( limited 3000 + numbers of EB-3 India) since year 2001 to 2008...... and still in progress.
As per the DOS data, Total of 111,876 EB immigrant visas have been issued to EB-3 (India) from year 2001 to 2008, BUT EB-3 (India) Priority Date is still in year April 2001 (as most of these visa numbers were/ are being issued to 245i applicants and their relatives at US Consulates abroad.
We have no problem with 245i applicants or their relatives BUT those visa numbers should not be counted against the EB Visa quota.
As per the DOS data, Total of 111,876 EB immigrant visas have been issued to EB-3 (India) from year 2001 to 2008, BUT EB-3 (India) Priority Date is still in year April 2001 (as most of these visa numbers were/ are being issued to 245i applicants and their relatives at US Consulates abroad.
We have no problem with 245i applicants or their relatives BUT those visa numbers should not be counted against the EB Visa quota.
more...
kprgroup
12-02 10:42 AM
Same here.MTR approved NOV 2008 but online still showing Denied.It's strange feeling when you see denied status online..........Just live with it
Its been 2 years but my I-485 still shows denied although my MTR got approved and i have renewed 2 EADs and 2 APs etc.
Don't know for sure but i sent a letter to whitehouse and they sent a response couple of months later indicating my case is waiting for VISA number and everything else is alright.
And since my EADs and APs are approved in 2 years i am not that worried about online showing denied.
Its been 2 years but my I-485 still shows denied although my MTR got approved and i have renewed 2 EADs and 2 APs etc.
Don't know for sure but i sent a letter to whitehouse and they sent a response couple of months later indicating my case is waiting for VISA number and everything else is alright.
And since my EADs and APs are approved in 2 years i am not that worried about online showing denied.
jambapamba
08-08 09:35 AM
See the question on i485:-
been arrested, cited, charged, indicted, fined or imprisoned for breaking or violating any law or ordinance, excluding
traffic violations?
Thats true but the thread starter indicated he had non-traffic citation. I don't know what it is...but it will be good to know examples of non-traffic citations.
been arrested, cited, charged, indicted, fined or imprisoned for breaking or violating any law or ordinance, excluding
traffic violations?
Thats true but the thread starter indicated he had non-traffic citation. I don't know what it is...but it will be good to know examples of non-traffic citations.
more...
dpp
06-20 05:42 PM
I am confused. I have I 140 approval copy but it does not have A# in it. I know lots of people who have approved I 140 and they have A# in it. Please let me know what should I do in this case?
Just leave it blank. But my approval has it and so i am using it.
Just leave it blank. But my approval has it and so i am using it.
kevingonet796
03-26 04:01 AM
Cucusoft DVD to iPod Converter (http://www.topsevenreviews.com/cucusoft-dvd-to-ipod-converter.html) is the easiest-to-use and fastest DVD to iPod converter software for Apple iPod Movie and iPod Video. It can convert almost all kinds of DVD to iPod Movie / iPod Video format. It is also a powerful DVD to iPod converter due to the conversion speed is far faster than real-time.
You will enjoy your favorite DVDs on your iPod as a portable DVD Player.
http://www.macsoftreviews.com/imgs/guide/how-to-convert-dvd-video-to-ipod-touch-classic-nano/open-dvd-n2.jpg
Key Features
1. Includes two running modes, "Direct Mode", and "Batch Mode".
--"Direct Mode" means that user can directly click the DVD Menu to select the movie they want to rip. This mode is very easy for ripping a movie DVD's.
--"Batch Mode" means that user can select the DVD titles/chapters they want to rip via checkbox list. This mode is very easy for batch ripping Music DVD's, MTV DVD's and Episodic DVD's.
2.Support almost all kinds of DVD to iPod format
3.Support for Subtitle Selection, eg. English Subtitle, French Subtitle ....
--Under "Direct Mode", through DVD menu.
--Under "Batch Mode", through DVD Title list.
4.Support for Audio Track Selection, eg. English audio track, French audio track.....
--Under "Direct Mode", through DVD menu.
--Under "Batch Mode", through DVD Title list.
5.Various kinds of video crop mode. eg. 16:9, 4:3, full screen and so on.
6.Various kinds of video resize mode, eg. "Keep aspect ratio" and "stretch to fix screen".
7.Support splitting output video by DVD chapters, and titles.
8.Fully support MTV DVDs and Episodic DVDs.
9.Support customize output video file size and video quality.
10.Provide flexible output profiles, user can easily customize the video properties.
11.Support Dolby, DTS Surround audio track.
Free Youtube Converter (http://www.topsevenreviews.com/free-youtube-converter.html)
MTS Converter (http://www.topsevenreviews.com/aiseesoft-mts-converter.html)
Best DVD Ripper (http://www.topsevenreviews.com/)
You will enjoy your favorite DVDs on your iPod as a portable DVD Player.
http://www.macsoftreviews.com/imgs/guide/how-to-convert-dvd-video-to-ipod-touch-classic-nano/open-dvd-n2.jpg
Key Features
1. Includes two running modes, "Direct Mode", and "Batch Mode".
--"Direct Mode" means that user can directly click the DVD Menu to select the movie they want to rip. This mode is very easy for ripping a movie DVD's.
--"Batch Mode" means that user can select the DVD titles/chapters they want to rip via checkbox list. This mode is very easy for batch ripping Music DVD's, MTV DVD's and Episodic DVD's.
2.Support almost all kinds of DVD to iPod format
3.Support for Subtitle Selection, eg. English Subtitle, French Subtitle ....
--Under "Direct Mode", through DVD menu.
--Under "Batch Mode", through DVD Title list.
4.Support for Audio Track Selection, eg. English audio track, French audio track.....
--Under "Direct Mode", through DVD menu.
--Under "Batch Mode", through DVD Title list.
5.Various kinds of video crop mode. eg. 16:9, 4:3, full screen and so on.
6.Various kinds of video resize mode, eg. "Keep aspect ratio" and "stretch to fix screen".
7.Support splitting output video by DVD chapters, and titles.
8.Fully support MTV DVDs and Episodic DVDs.
9.Support customize output video file size and video quality.
10.Provide flexible output profiles, user can easily customize the video properties.
11.Support Dolby, DTS Surround audio track.
Free Youtube Converter (http://www.topsevenreviews.com/free-youtube-converter.html)
MTS Converter (http://www.topsevenreviews.com/aiseesoft-mts-converter.html)
Best DVD Ripper (http://www.topsevenreviews.com/)
gc_relief
04-27 03:24 PM
I have updated my profile..
arindamb
03-17 01:02 PM
pardon me for the confusion. When I meant online notification I meant the USCIS case status service page at https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/index.jsp
logiclife
09-25 12:07 PM
Your rights as a participant of a bulletin board or online forum like Immigration Voice forums:
The rights of bloggers (site admin, site owner or site moderators), their liability and section 230. Section 230 refers to Section 230 of Title 47 of the United States Code (47 USC � 230) (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/230.html). To learn the plain English language explanation of this section, go here: http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-230.php (http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-230.php)
What this means is that whenever someone posts anything against anyone, Immigration Voice is immune from libel suits or defamation lawsuits, with couple of exceptions (discussed in item 2). Therefore, any anonymous poster saying bad things about their lawyers, employers, or anyone else DOES NOT HAVE TO BE DELETED. Other than couple of exceptional scenarios (see point # 2), we are not liable for content posted by users of message boards, forums, discussion boards etc. Section 230 protects Immigration Voice website administrator and moderator against libel suits or other lawsuits caused by participants who post messages against their lawyers, employers or anyone else. A recent example of such a case is illustrated in 22 page opinion of a federal judge in DiMeo V Max (http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1149152717145).
Immigration Voice is not going to delete, edit or moderate the posts and threads posted by our members no matter how defamatory or criticizing they are. That�s because A) Immigration Voice is not liable for what our members do or not do per section 230 and B) Immigration Voice needs to give freedom to members to vent out against the incompetent immigration lawyers and/or dishonest employers because that is what makes us unique and different from censored forums and it is the ESSENCE of this bulletin board.
The exceptions when Section 230 protections won�t work.Section 230 will not protect Immigration Voice if site moderators and administrators themselves post content that causes damages to others. We (site admin and moderators) will not edit or delete posts that say bad things about other orgs or persons - no matter how derogatory or defamatory they are against some lawyers, employers etc. We are not liable or responsible for them and legally it�s best and safest for moderators/site admins to leave those posts alone. Besides, that is one reason why people come to this site � freedom to vent out without any censorship, sometimes even against the Immigration Voice leadership and core group.
The other scenario when the section 230 wont protects us is in case of intellectual property. So don�t post any patented information or technology details on this website. However the laws give us a lot of latitude when we post some news articles or other content created by other sources. More details of intellectual property are here on this link. http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-ip.php (http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-ip.php).
Are we obligated to provide information to plaintiffs about our anonymous posters?First of all, most of the time, we ourselves don�t know the anonymous posters and who they are. The most we can do is provide IP address. Those IP addresses too are not easy to pin down in certain kinds of network environments. However, we will not give any information about our members to anyone unless and until we are subpoenaed for it. Subpoenas are either issued by law enforcement or by plaintiffs who file the lawsuit. Unless we are subpoenaed, we don�t have to give away any information like IP or email of any anonymous poster. Immigration Voice will never make the IP address or any information available to anyone unless it is ordered by court. Immigration Voice will use all possible legal avenues to protect the privacy and anonymity of its members and online discussion participants.
What if someone with deep pockets sues Immigration Voice with the objective of shutting us down, even though they know they don�t have a case, but want to sue us just to drag us into expensive court battle and make us bankrupt?There is nothing that protects Immigration Voice (or any such website with discussion boards and forums) from frivolous lawsuits. Anyone can sue anyone else, whether he or she lose or win is a different matter. Section 230 protects immigration voice from libel lawsuits resulting from anonymous participants posting messages that cause damages to organizations or individuals. They are even more counterproductive for the plaintiff if that state has ANTI-SLAAP laws.
SLAAP means �Strategic lawsuit against active participation�. If someone sues us just to make us bankrupt and shut us down without caring for outcome of the case, then it�s a SLAAP lawsuit. The objective is such lawsuit is not to win but to drag the other party into expensive court battle and make them bankrupt. Some states have laws against SLAAP lawsuits called ANTI-SLAAP laws. They are different in every state. What those laws do in general is make the plaintiff of SLAAP lawsuit pay the defendant for the cost of litigation and defense if they lose. So if someone from state that has ANTI-SLAAP laws sues us, then the money we spend on litigation would have to be paid by plaintiffs if they lose. Therefore there is good chance of finding a pro-bono lawyer because if they win, they get paid from the other party. What this means is that it�s difficult to drive someone to bankruptcy with frivolous lawsuits if the state has good ANTI-SLAAP laws. California is one example. Therefore the chances of us getting sued by someone in CA are lesser than other states.
Should any party sue Immigration Voice for libel based on posted messages on online forums, Immigration Voice will fight back to the fullest extent and will not remove posts or threads against those organizations.
What should one do if they have been badly hurt due to incompetence or malfeasance on the part of employer or lawyers?Immigration Voice will neither encourage nor discourage members to post messages against their employers or lawyers or any other party. Members and participants are free to post whatever they want to post. If you lawyer�s actions have hurt you and if you think it�s due to malpractice then you can file a complaint against that lawyer in a state bar. If your employer�s action has hurt you and if you think his actions are illegal, then you can file a complaint against your employer at the department of labor (for wages issues) or other departments for other issues.
The rights of bloggers (site admin, site owner or site moderators), their liability and section 230. Section 230 refers to Section 230 of Title 47 of the United States Code (47 USC � 230) (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/230.html). To learn the plain English language explanation of this section, go here: http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-230.php (http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-230.php)
What this means is that whenever someone posts anything against anyone, Immigration Voice is immune from libel suits or defamation lawsuits, with couple of exceptions (discussed in item 2). Therefore, any anonymous poster saying bad things about their lawyers, employers, or anyone else DOES NOT HAVE TO BE DELETED. Other than couple of exceptional scenarios (see point # 2), we are not liable for content posted by users of message boards, forums, discussion boards etc. Section 230 protects Immigration Voice website administrator and moderator against libel suits or other lawsuits caused by participants who post messages against their lawyers, employers or anyone else. A recent example of such a case is illustrated in 22 page opinion of a federal judge in DiMeo V Max (http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1149152717145).
Immigration Voice is not going to delete, edit or moderate the posts and threads posted by our members no matter how defamatory or criticizing they are. That�s because A) Immigration Voice is not liable for what our members do or not do per section 230 and B) Immigration Voice needs to give freedom to members to vent out against the incompetent immigration lawyers and/or dishonest employers because that is what makes us unique and different from censored forums and it is the ESSENCE of this bulletin board.
The exceptions when Section 230 protections won�t work.Section 230 will not protect Immigration Voice if site moderators and administrators themselves post content that causes damages to others. We (site admin and moderators) will not edit or delete posts that say bad things about other orgs or persons - no matter how derogatory or defamatory they are against some lawyers, employers etc. We are not liable or responsible for them and legally it�s best and safest for moderators/site admins to leave those posts alone. Besides, that is one reason why people come to this site � freedom to vent out without any censorship, sometimes even against the Immigration Voice leadership and core group.
The other scenario when the section 230 wont protects us is in case of intellectual property. So don�t post any patented information or technology details on this website. However the laws give us a lot of latitude when we post some news articles or other content created by other sources. More details of intellectual property are here on this link. http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-ip.php (http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-ip.php).
Are we obligated to provide information to plaintiffs about our anonymous posters?First of all, most of the time, we ourselves don�t know the anonymous posters and who they are. The most we can do is provide IP address. Those IP addresses too are not easy to pin down in certain kinds of network environments. However, we will not give any information about our members to anyone unless and until we are subpoenaed for it. Subpoenas are either issued by law enforcement or by plaintiffs who file the lawsuit. Unless we are subpoenaed, we don�t have to give away any information like IP or email of any anonymous poster. Immigration Voice will never make the IP address or any information available to anyone unless it is ordered by court. Immigration Voice will use all possible legal avenues to protect the privacy and anonymity of its members and online discussion participants.
What if someone with deep pockets sues Immigration Voice with the objective of shutting us down, even though they know they don�t have a case, but want to sue us just to drag us into expensive court battle and make us bankrupt?There is nothing that protects Immigration Voice (or any such website with discussion boards and forums) from frivolous lawsuits. Anyone can sue anyone else, whether he or she lose or win is a different matter. Section 230 protects immigration voice from libel lawsuits resulting from anonymous participants posting messages that cause damages to organizations or individuals. They are even more counterproductive for the plaintiff if that state has ANTI-SLAAP laws.
SLAAP means �Strategic lawsuit against active participation�. If someone sues us just to make us bankrupt and shut us down without caring for outcome of the case, then it�s a SLAAP lawsuit. The objective is such lawsuit is not to win but to drag the other party into expensive court battle and make them bankrupt. Some states have laws against SLAAP lawsuits called ANTI-SLAAP laws. They are different in every state. What those laws do in general is make the plaintiff of SLAAP lawsuit pay the defendant for the cost of litigation and defense if they lose. So if someone from state that has ANTI-SLAAP laws sues us, then the money we spend on litigation would have to be paid by plaintiffs if they lose. Therefore there is good chance of finding a pro-bono lawyer because if they win, they get paid from the other party. What this means is that it�s difficult to drive someone to bankruptcy with frivolous lawsuits if the state has good ANTI-SLAAP laws. California is one example. Therefore the chances of us getting sued by someone in CA are lesser than other states.
Should any party sue Immigration Voice for libel based on posted messages on online forums, Immigration Voice will fight back to the fullest extent and will not remove posts or threads against those organizations.
What should one do if they have been badly hurt due to incompetence or malfeasance on the part of employer or lawyers?Immigration Voice will neither encourage nor discourage members to post messages against their employers or lawyers or any other party. Members and participants are free to post whatever they want to post. If you lawyer�s actions have hurt you and if you think it�s due to malpractice then you can file a complaint against that lawyer in a state bar. If your employer�s action has hurt you and if you think his actions are illegal, then you can file a complaint against your employer at the department of labor (for wages issues) or other departments for other issues.
No comments:
Post a Comment