Blessing&Lifeisbeautiful
08-13 04:21 PM
With the current situation, I think it may take 2 to 3 months...
Probable longer for an RFE. Receipt notices are taking 6 weeks+. When do you think EAD will come out. It used to be 60-90 days. With quite a few EADs out in less than 60 days.
Any ideas
Probable longer for an RFE. Receipt notices are taking 6 weeks+. When do you think EAD will come out. It used to be 60-90 days. With quite a few EADs out in less than 60 days.
Any ideas
wallpaper Paul Smith Patent Mini Car
nave_kum
07-22 02:40 PM
There's no logic whatsoever in these calculations. Somebody is spending unnecessary time in his room to come up with such analogies.
First of all, all of this is sheer assumptions. Secondly...oh forget it who cares...why waste OUR time on this blog at all?
Guyz...all I can say is...v have opened USCIS' eyes and they're determined to improve the process. Things will start happening ...Just wait N watch. Go watch a movie or something!!!
P.S: Patience Pays....Always!!!:)
First of all, all of this is sheer assumptions. Secondly...oh forget it who cares...why waste OUR time on this blog at all?
Guyz...all I can say is...v have opened USCIS' eyes and they're determined to improve the process. Things will start happening ...Just wait N watch. Go watch a movie or something!!!
P.S: Patience Pays....Always!!!:)
bala50
09-13 09:03 PM
Here is my shot. Thank you ALL
Order Details - Sep 13, 2007 9:23 PM EDT
100$ Google Order #247249006321709
No thank you Libra for encouraging people to contribute. My new contribution is in my signature.
Now please welcome bala, our special guest, who will take the last shot of this round.
Order Details - Sep 13, 2007 9:23 PM EDT
100$ Google Order #247249006321709
Order Details - Sep 13, 2007 9:23 PM EDT
100$ Google Order #247249006321709
No thank you Libra for encouraging people to contribute. My new contribution is in my signature.
Now please welcome bala, our special guest, who will take the last shot of this round.
Order Details - Sep 13, 2007 9:23 PM EDT
100$ Google Order #247249006321709
2011 PAUL SMITH MINI ,RARE OLD
andy007
07-18 12:12 AM
Labor PD: April 29, 2003 (EB3)
140 Approved Date:
140 approved from: NSC
Mailed to NSC: June 1st
Received at NSC: June 4th
Receipt Date : June 5, 2007 This is what everybody gets now ........
Approved I485: Notice date : June 18, 2007
FP Appointment: July 11, 2007
I-485 : PENDING
140 Approved Date:
140 approved from: NSC
Mailed to NSC: June 1st
Received at NSC: June 4th
Receipt Date : June 5, 2007 This is what everybody gets now ........
Approved I485: Notice date : June 18, 2007
FP Appointment: July 11, 2007
I-485 : PENDING
more...
alterego
02-20 04:15 AM
I am not entirely sure about the 1% number. I feel it may be somewhat higher than that.
If indeed the ratio is 1%, then things are very dire, since with the economy as it is, we probably will not see any expansion in EB immigration in the near term.
Additionally the L1-EB1 route as multinational manager is very much alive and well, and is arguably the preferred and probably only viable route for any Indian prospectively attempting to immigrate to the USA. The numbers of such applicants might be larger than we know. If anyone has any data on that and specifically about the change in those numbers ever since retrogression hit, please post it.
In all honesty, I know the guys applying anew need a little hope and encouragement, but with perhaps 300K people and rising ahead of you in the EB India queue and slim to none chance of EB expansion in the near term, what are the odds of getting through that line in the next decade?
If indeed the ratio is 1%, then things are very dire, since with the economy as it is, we probably will not see any expansion in EB immigration in the near term.
Additionally the L1-EB1 route as multinational manager is very much alive and well, and is arguably the preferred and probably only viable route for any Indian prospectively attempting to immigrate to the USA. The numbers of such applicants might be larger than we know. If anyone has any data on that and specifically about the change in those numbers ever since retrogression hit, please post it.
In all honesty, I know the guys applying anew need a little hope and encouragement, but with perhaps 300K people and rising ahead of you in the EB India queue and slim to none chance of EB expansion in the near term, what are the odds of getting through that line in the next decade?
reddymjm
03-12 02:35 PM
I do not support this donor ONLY idea.
Also, Day 1, the FOIA initiative had a goal of $5K.
And without reason, the goal was increased to $10K.
So, pappu should not complain of not reaching the goal when he keeps increasing the goal.
stay consistent.
Its just not pappu.
We all felt like increasing the goal becasue out the 100 or so FOIA responses we got atleat we should be able to respond to couple of them. FOIA is not the only one needing money.
Also, Day 1, the FOIA initiative had a goal of $5K.
And without reason, the goal was increased to $10K.
So, pappu should not complain of not reaching the goal when he keeps increasing the goal.
stay consistent.
Its just not pappu.
We all felt like increasing the goal becasue out the 100 or so FOIA responses we got atleat we should be able to respond to couple of them. FOIA is not the only one needing money.
more...
kaisersose
06-10 11:42 AM
Visa numbers have been recaptured in the past (year 2000, I think).
Do we know more details on how this happened? Who worked for this and what did they do to make their efforts successful?
Same with the AC21 provision that allows changing jobs after 180 days. That is a huge accomplishment for whoever worked to make it happen.
Perhaps we can borrow some of their wisdom.
Do we know more details on how this happened? Who worked for this and what did they do to make their efforts successful?
Same with the AC21 provision that allows changing jobs after 180 days. That is a huge accomplishment for whoever worked to make it happen.
Perhaps we can borrow some of their wisdom.
2010 Paul Smith mini cooper car
ragz4u
03-08 10:28 AM
This is the right link. It is very clear today. Interesting discussion.
Again, the link is http://www.capitolhearings.org/ then click on Dirksen 226 in the right frame
Again, the link is http://www.capitolhearings.org/ then click on Dirksen 226 in the right frame
more...
dvrao4
09-15 06:44 PM
hi! i just contributed $100.00 via paypal transaction id is : 1GE522823P5726434
hair 1999-Classic-Mini-Paul-Smith-
john2255
07-20 04:35 PM
Kindly understand that
Yea- YES
Nay- NO
Not- Absent from voting.
Obama was absent from voting- A clever diplomacy.
Hilary Clinton- Nay(double talk)
Senators from California- both no ( Big Surprise)
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00266
Text of the amemdment.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r110:1:./temp/~r110xIKs1t:e32253:
Here is the Senators and their voting pattern.
Alabama: Sessions (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Nay Pryor (D-AR), Nay
California: Boxer (D-CA), Nay Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Colorado: Allard (R-CO), Yea Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Nay Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Florida: Martinez (R-FL), Yea Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Nay Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Yea Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Kansas: Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Nay Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Massachusetts: Kennedy (D-MA), Nay Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Nay Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Yea Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Missouri: Bond (R-MO), Yea McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Tester (D-MT), Nay
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Yea Reid (D-NV), Nay
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Yea Sununu (R-NH), Yea
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Nay Domenici (R-NM), Yea
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Dole (R-NC), Yea
North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Nay Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Nay Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Nay Specter (R-PA), Yea
Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Nay Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Nay Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Virginia: Warner (R-VA), Yea Webb (D-VA), Nay
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia: Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Wisconsin: Feingold (D-WI), Nay Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea
That means we have lost around 2,40,000 unused visas. I heard that there is a total amount of 3,00,000 unused employment visas of the previous years due to the great efficiency of USCIS. Out of this 61,000 is kept apart for Schedule A nurses and PT's and the remaining 2,40,000 thousand would have been divided amoung employment catagories if the amendment had passed,clearing lot of our backloggs.
REMEMBER, THE RECAPTURE OF UNUSED VISAS IS ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT PRIORITIES OF CORE AND THE DOOR IS SLAMMED ON OUR FACES AGAIN BY HYPOCRITES LIKE HILARY AND CALIFORNIA SENATORS.
Its the high time we convince the senators who said NAYS. Lets start SOME KIND OF CAMPAIN aiming these guys. I am sure that core's hands are there behind this amendment. Well done IV. Don't get dissappointed, keep trying for Skill bill or for similar amendments. Its really unfortunate that we lost a very very big chance. Lets do something immediately.
Following is the text of amendment.
`(ii) DISTRIBUTION OF VISAS.--The total number of visas made available under paragraph (1) from unused visas from fiscal years 1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006 shall be distributed as follows:
``(I) The total number of visas made available for immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor shall be 61,000.
``(II) The visas remaining from the total made available under subclause (I) shall be allocated equally among employment-based immigrants with approved petitions under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (and their family members accompanying or following to join).''.
(b) H-1B Visa Availability.--Section 214(g)(1)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(g)(1)(A)) is amended--
(1) in clause (vi), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) by redesignating clause (vii) as clause (ix); and
(3) by inserting after clause (vi) the following:
``(vii) 65,000 in each of fiscal years 2004 through 2007;
``(viii) 115,000 in fiscal year 2008; and''.
Yea- YES
Nay- NO
Not- Absent from voting.
Obama was absent from voting- A clever diplomacy.
Hilary Clinton- Nay(double talk)
Senators from California- both no ( Big Surprise)
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00266
Text of the amemdment.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r110:1:./temp/~r110xIKs1t:e32253:
Here is the Senators and their voting pattern.
Alabama: Sessions (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Nay Pryor (D-AR), Nay
California: Boxer (D-CA), Nay Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Colorado: Allard (R-CO), Yea Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Nay Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Florida: Martinez (R-FL), Yea Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Nay Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Yea Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Kansas: Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Nay Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Massachusetts: Kennedy (D-MA), Nay Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Nay Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Yea Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Missouri: Bond (R-MO), Yea McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Tester (D-MT), Nay
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Yea Reid (D-NV), Nay
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Yea Sununu (R-NH), Yea
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Nay Domenici (R-NM), Yea
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Dole (R-NC), Yea
North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Nay Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Nay Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Nay Specter (R-PA), Yea
Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Nay Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Nay Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Virginia: Warner (R-VA), Yea Webb (D-VA), Nay
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia: Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Wisconsin: Feingold (D-WI), Nay Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea
That means we have lost around 2,40,000 unused visas. I heard that there is a total amount of 3,00,000 unused employment visas of the previous years due to the great efficiency of USCIS. Out of this 61,000 is kept apart for Schedule A nurses and PT's and the remaining 2,40,000 thousand would have been divided amoung employment catagories if the amendment had passed,clearing lot of our backloggs.
REMEMBER, THE RECAPTURE OF UNUSED VISAS IS ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT PRIORITIES OF CORE AND THE DOOR IS SLAMMED ON OUR FACES AGAIN BY HYPOCRITES LIKE HILARY AND CALIFORNIA SENATORS.
Its the high time we convince the senators who said NAYS. Lets start SOME KIND OF CAMPAIN aiming these guys. I am sure that core's hands are there behind this amendment. Well done IV. Don't get dissappointed, keep trying for Skill bill or for similar amendments. Its really unfortunate that we lost a very very big chance. Lets do something immediately.
Following is the text of amendment.
`(ii) DISTRIBUTION OF VISAS.--The total number of visas made available under paragraph (1) from unused visas from fiscal years 1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006 shall be distributed as follows:
``(I) The total number of visas made available for immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor shall be 61,000.
``(II) The visas remaining from the total made available under subclause (I) shall be allocated equally among employment-based immigrants with approved petitions under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (and their family members accompanying or following to join).''.
(b) H-1B Visa Availability.--Section 214(g)(1)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(g)(1)(A)) is amended--
(1) in clause (vi), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) by redesignating clause (vii) as clause (ix); and
(3) by inserting after clause (vi) the following:
``(vii) 65,000 in each of fiscal years 2004 through 2007;
``(viii) 115,000 in fiscal year 2008; and''.
more...
add78
06-23 08:39 AM
Good morning...
Lets target to reach 25k by the end of this week.
800 more to get to 20K = 8 contributions @100 each, and then
5000 more to get to 25k = 50 contributions @100 each
And we have "thousands" of registered members
And there are "hundreds of thousands" of people who benefited from last year's July visa bulletin due to IV's efforts.
Folks, now more than ever, we need you to be just a little less self centered and open up your hearts, not for some other people, but your own cause.
Your own cause guys, We need funds to lobby for the 3 Lofgren bills!!!!
If the July bulleting could get us EADs and APs, imagine what those 3 bills can do - MAGIC, WONDER, THE HOLY GRAIL A.K.A. THE G.C.
So please, please, please, do what you can.
Lets target to reach 25k by the end of this week.
800 more to get to 20K = 8 contributions @100 each, and then
5000 more to get to 25k = 50 contributions @100 each
And we have "thousands" of registered members
And there are "hundreds of thousands" of people who benefited from last year's July visa bulletin due to IV's efforts.
Folks, now more than ever, we need you to be just a little less self centered and open up your hearts, not for some other people, but your own cause.
Your own cause guys, We need funds to lobby for the 3 Lofgren bills!!!!
If the July bulleting could get us EADs and APs, imagine what those 3 bills can do - MAGIC, WONDER, THE HOLY GRAIL A.K.A. THE G.C.
So please, please, please, do what you can.
hot Smith#39;s limited-edition Mini;
desi3933
08-04 12:49 PM
Desi3933
I don't understand why you are picking up on facts and faults on other post.What mirage is saying is true.I know 3 families stuck up in this GC process...all true cases.
There are some lucky people who have bought old labor substitution ;)who came to US in 2004 and got their GC's cleared and are very :D.
Some really who have come here to study...living in US for past 10 years genuine appliers are really stuck in this.They have all applied their labor and got them cleared only dec 2006.
people who are interested can send those letters if not ignore the thread.
If you are EB2 good for you...Its not that easy to change jobs having families..and when you are satisfied with the employer ,why would they change.
Everyone here want GC to stay in this country.And we all are here to find solutions thru IV - active participation is better.
Pani's letter is not that bad...if you dont like alter what you want to express and send it.People can write what they are facing only.
this is not an argument...just felt bad when you were point blankly picking on them.
I dont undestand :confused:
But one thing I understand there are many , in general like to irritate and hurt other's sentiments and thoughts and pinpoint only faults.
Becoz of this lack of unity only ,most of us face problems.
First of all, I do support issues faced by EB-3 India applicants. However, a letter with many factual errors and words like bonded is not going to help. I am just trying to present my views.
If I were OP, I will at least show my letter for some kind of legal review before sending. After all who would like to make condition bad to worse?
Please refer to post by internet couple of posts back. He has raised many good points.
Good Luck to everyone!
I don't understand why you are picking up on facts and faults on other post.What mirage is saying is true.I know 3 families stuck up in this GC process...all true cases.
There are some lucky people who have bought old labor substitution ;)who came to US in 2004 and got their GC's cleared and are very :D.
Some really who have come here to study...living in US for past 10 years genuine appliers are really stuck in this.They have all applied their labor and got them cleared only dec 2006.
people who are interested can send those letters if not ignore the thread.
If you are EB2 good for you...Its not that easy to change jobs having families..and when you are satisfied with the employer ,why would they change.
Everyone here want GC to stay in this country.And we all are here to find solutions thru IV - active participation is better.
Pani's letter is not that bad...if you dont like alter what you want to express and send it.People can write what they are facing only.
this is not an argument...just felt bad when you were point blankly picking on them.
I dont undestand :confused:
But one thing I understand there are many , in general like to irritate and hurt other's sentiments and thoughts and pinpoint only faults.
Becoz of this lack of unity only ,most of us face problems.
First of all, I do support issues faced by EB-3 India applicants. However, a letter with many factual errors and words like bonded is not going to help. I am just trying to present my views.
If I were OP, I will at least show my letter for some kind of legal review before sending. After all who would like to make condition bad to worse?
Please refer to post by internet couple of posts back. He has raised many good points.
Good Luck to everyone!
more...
house Paul Smith Mini Multi Hoops
andy007
07-17 11:59 PM
Once they accept I-485 in the system then they give us a Receipt#, with that Receipt we can file for EAD / AP (as long as your PD becomes available) then they will process your I-485, Just thinking.. what do you say guys ... Please lete me know.. Receipt Date Vs Visa Number ...
Thanks
Thanks
tattoo Paul Smith Mini One
Hassan11
07-20 04:03 PM
I agree but we have to send faxes now while the bill is still HOT (even it didn't pass)
Why can't we have a fax campaign like NumbersUSA and fax the respective senators.
I think when it is re-introduced again we need to flood the nay/abstained senators with faxes asking them for changing the vote.
Thanks,
Sanjay.
Why can't we have a fax campaign like NumbersUSA and fax the respective senators.
I think when it is re-introduced again we need to flood the nay/abstained senators with faxes asking them for changing the vote.
Thanks,
Sanjay.
more...
pictures Paul Smith Mini
desi3933
09-11 03:43 PM
Its shocking!!! They've foolishly approved many 2006 cases and dont tell me it was unpredictable and now ppl with 2003 r still waiting....how logical is this? A bunch of A** H**** working there or what?
I understand your frustration. Since there is no spillover in the first quarter of new fiscal year, it was expected that PD would move back. How can you you expect 2006 PD for Oct when there is no spillover visa numbers.
Next year Jul-Sep 2009, PD should move to mid 2006 again.
My 2 cents.
I understand your frustration. Since there is no spillover in the first quarter of new fiscal year, it was expected that PD would move back. How can you you expect 2006 PD for Oct when there is no spillover visa numbers.
Next year Jul-Sep 2009, PD should move to mid 2006 again.
My 2 cents.
dresses Paul Smith Limited Edition
ragz4u
03-09 09:36 AM
Title 1 amendments are done and have moved to Title 2 for discussion. The ones important to us is in Title 4,5.
Any links to the amendment titles?
Any links to the amendment titles?
more...
makeup 2009 - Paul Smith Mini
gc_on_demand
12-10 04:38 PM
HOW IS THE PER-COUNTRY LIMIT CALCULATED?
Section 201 of the INA sets an annual minimum Family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000, while the worldwide annual level for Employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 202 sets the per-country limit for preference immigrants at 7% of the total annual Family-sponsored and Employment-based preference limits, i.e. a minimum of 25,620.
- The annual per-country limitation of 7% is a cap, meaning visa issuances to any single country may not exceed this figure. This limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled, however. The per-country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the visa numbers by applicants from only a few countries.
- INA Section 202(a)(5), added by the American Competitiveness Act in the 21st Century (AC21), removed the per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of such numbers available. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5)has occasionally allowed countries such as China-mainland born and India to utilize large amounts of Employment First and Second preference numbers which would have otherwise gone unused.
WHAT ARE THE PROJECTIONS FOR CUT-OFF DATE MOVEMENT IN THE FAMILY PREFERENCES?
Cut-off date movement in most categories continues to be greater than might ordinarily be expected, and this is anticipated to continue for at least the next few months. This is because fewer applicants are proceeding with final action on their cases at consular posts abroad, and the volume of CIS adjustment cases remains low. Once large numbers of applicants begin to have their cases brought to final action, cut-off date movements will necessarily slow or stop. Moreover, in some categories cut-off date retrogression is a possibility. Therefore, readers should be aware that the recent rate of cut-off date advances will not continue indefinitely, but it is not possible to say at present how soon they will end.
WHY DID MOST EMPLOYMENT CUT-OFFS REMAIN UNCHANGED IN RECENT MONTHS?
Many of the categories were "unavailable" at the end of FY which resulted in excessive demand being received during October and November. Coupled with the fact that CIS Offices have been doing an excellent job of processing cases, this has had an impact on cut-off date movements. Some forward movement has begun for January as we enter the second quarter of the fiscal year.
In my view CIS is not processing the applications fast enough to be using the benefits of INA Section 202(a)(5). We need to understand reasons behind this. Per the official bulletin, it is clear that if CIS can process them fast enough, we could see a movement of EB2 till end of the 2005. How many times should CIS pre-adjudicate before actually approving the EB AOS applications?
State made a good start to give an explanation for these dates. But they still didn't consider DOL application volume and CIS processing bottlenecks in processing AOS cases. IV needs to ask CIS on processing capacities of AOS applications. If they can't process them fast enough, They need to open up the AC-140 process for India (it is available only for Bombay) centers to get the cases approved by state department in a much faster way.
In Jan 2010 DOL will publish their data and that will make thing very clear. I think DOS is assuming around 10 -15 k Spill over visas that can be available to Eb2 India ( based on previous years ) and that is what it take them into Oct - Dec 2005 range. They don't factor in CIS processing time. But I think from pool of 40-50k pre adjudicated apps CIS can easily consume 10k visas. But if there are less labors and more spill over visas ( like 30 -40 k) then be ready for mini version of july fiasco.
Section 201 of the INA sets an annual minimum Family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000, while the worldwide annual level for Employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 202 sets the per-country limit for preference immigrants at 7% of the total annual Family-sponsored and Employment-based preference limits, i.e. a minimum of 25,620.
- The annual per-country limitation of 7% is a cap, meaning visa issuances to any single country may not exceed this figure. This limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled, however. The per-country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the visa numbers by applicants from only a few countries.
- INA Section 202(a)(5), added by the American Competitiveness Act in the 21st Century (AC21), removed the per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of such numbers available. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5)has occasionally allowed countries such as China-mainland born and India to utilize large amounts of Employment First and Second preference numbers which would have otherwise gone unused.
WHAT ARE THE PROJECTIONS FOR CUT-OFF DATE MOVEMENT IN THE FAMILY PREFERENCES?
Cut-off date movement in most categories continues to be greater than might ordinarily be expected, and this is anticipated to continue for at least the next few months. This is because fewer applicants are proceeding with final action on their cases at consular posts abroad, and the volume of CIS adjustment cases remains low. Once large numbers of applicants begin to have their cases brought to final action, cut-off date movements will necessarily slow or stop. Moreover, in some categories cut-off date retrogression is a possibility. Therefore, readers should be aware that the recent rate of cut-off date advances will not continue indefinitely, but it is not possible to say at present how soon they will end.
WHY DID MOST EMPLOYMENT CUT-OFFS REMAIN UNCHANGED IN RECENT MONTHS?
Many of the categories were "unavailable" at the end of FY which resulted in excessive demand being received during October and November. Coupled with the fact that CIS Offices have been doing an excellent job of processing cases, this has had an impact on cut-off date movements. Some forward movement has begun for January as we enter the second quarter of the fiscal year.
In my view CIS is not processing the applications fast enough to be using the benefits of INA Section 202(a)(5). We need to understand reasons behind this. Per the official bulletin, it is clear that if CIS can process them fast enough, we could see a movement of EB2 till end of the 2005. How many times should CIS pre-adjudicate before actually approving the EB AOS applications?
State made a good start to give an explanation for these dates. But they still didn't consider DOL application volume and CIS processing bottlenecks in processing AOS cases. IV needs to ask CIS on processing capacities of AOS applications. If they can't process them fast enough, They need to open up the AC-140 process for India (it is available only for Bombay) centers to get the cases approved by state department in a much faster way.
In Jan 2010 DOL will publish their data and that will make thing very clear. I think DOS is assuming around 10 -15 k Spill over visas that can be available to Eb2 India ( based on previous years ) and that is what it take them into Oct - Dec 2005 range. They don't factor in CIS processing time. But I think from pool of 40-50k pre adjudicated apps CIS can easily consume 10k visas. But if there are less labors and more spill over visas ( like 30 -40 k) then be ready for mini version of july fiasco.
girlfriend Paul Smith. Product Type
amitga
07-06 12:37 PM
We just need 20,000 active members to make a change, which is approx 10% of the total number of GC apps pending. At the most 2000 people are active.
If somebody can being in 20,000 active members to this forum, the change will happen.
If somebody can being in 20,000 active members to this forum, the change will happen.
hairstyles Paul Smith MINI COPPER Leather
sertasheep
07-29 08:07 PM
Dear schedule A professionals,
Please support member 'paskal' (physician) in his efforts.
Several exciting initiatives are underway on the healthcare front, and we also invite professionals from other fields(apart from healthcare). However, y'all must take up leadership and lead these efforts via IV as the platform!
The agenda should align with general objectives of IV, and we welcome professionals from fields. Please spread the word among the nursing/PT and other communities.
IV is not restricted to any one nationality alone!!(But, please restrict your conversations to English)
Please support member 'paskal' (physician) in his efforts.
Several exciting initiatives are underway on the healthcare front, and we also invite professionals from other fields(apart from healthcare). However, y'all must take up leadership and lead these efforts via IV as the platform!
The agenda should align with general objectives of IV, and we welcome professionals from fields. Please spread the word among the nursing/PT and other communities.
IV is not restricted to any one nationality alone!!(But, please restrict your conversations to English)
Milind123
09-13 02:24 PM
One more contribution needed for this round. Please make me go from this :( to :D
himu73
07-19 11:16 AM
Only lawyer or the employeer contact can call for labor status queries. DOL does not know you exist. Be careful there is no relation between labor and green card AOS. If you call it shows that you intend to immigrate while on H1. It might work against you.
Can anyone please post a 'sample letter' and the contact information?
I want to post a hard copy of the letter personally to the Atlanta center.
Stuck since April 15th.
Can anyone please post a 'sample letter' and the contact information?
I want to post a hard copy of the letter personally to the Atlanta center.
Stuck since April 15th.
No comments:
Post a Comment