ezee
10-16 04:37 PM
Don't you think we should be more clear in requesting information per specific country instead of lumping China and India together for EB-2 and others for EB-3? Also will it be too much to request pending applications by month/quarter instead of year?
We probably want the report in this format? This is just a suggestion.
|[indent]|EB2 - China |EB-2 India |EB-3 China |EB-3 India |EB-3 Mexico |EB-3 Phillipines |EB-3 Rest|
2001-Q1
2001-Q2
2001-Q3
2001-Q4
2002-Q1
2002-Q2
2002-Q3
2002-Q4
2003-Q1
2003-Q2
2003-Q3
2003-Q4
2004-Q1
2004-Q2
2004-Q3
2004-Q4
2005-Q1
2005-Q2
2005-Q3
2005-Q4
2006-Q1
2006-Q2
2006-Q3
2006-Q4
2007-Q1
2007-Q2
2007-Q3
2007-Q4
2008-Q1
2008-Q2
2008-Q3
2008-Q4
We probably want the report in this format? This is just a suggestion.
|[indent]|EB2 - China |EB-2 India |EB-3 China |EB-3 India |EB-3 Mexico |EB-3 Phillipines |EB-3 Rest|
2001-Q1
2001-Q2
2001-Q3
2001-Q4
2002-Q1
2002-Q2
2002-Q3
2002-Q4
2003-Q1
2003-Q2
2003-Q3
2003-Q4
2004-Q1
2004-Q2
2004-Q3
2004-Q4
2005-Q1
2005-Q2
2005-Q3
2005-Q4
2006-Q1
2006-Q2
2006-Q3
2006-Q4
2007-Q1
2007-Q2
2007-Q3
2007-Q4
2008-Q1
2008-Q2
2008-Q3
2008-Q4
wallpaper 22 Amores Perros
logiclife
01-16 04:18 PM
I just got the word from our treasurer that the IRS has approved Immigration Voice as a non-profit organization of 501 (C) (4) type.
This approval means that IV will not have to pay tax on the contributions recd from our contributors since IRS has approved that IV is not for profit organization.
This approval means that IV will not have to pay tax on the contributions recd from our contributors since IRS has approved that IV is not for profit organization.
vamseedhard
06-03 12:17 AM
I stayed in US for full 5 years on L1-B visa and left US on 6-Jan-07
This year I applied for H1-B and my application got selected in lottery
Need your help in clearing my below doubts..
1) I need to maintain 1 year gap between the day I left US ( 6-Jan-07 ) and the day I'm going to enter US so that I can stay in US for another 6 years on H1-B. Is my understanding correct?
2) Is it OK to go for VISA staming before 6-Jan-08?
3) Do I need to consider any other facts than 1 year gap so that I can stay in US for another 6 years?
This year I applied for H1-B and my application got selected in lottery
Need your help in clearing my below doubts..
1) I need to maintain 1 year gap between the day I left US ( 6-Jan-07 ) and the day I'm going to enter US so that I can stay in US for another 6 years on H1-B. Is my understanding correct?
2) Is it OK to go for VISA staming before 6-Jan-08?
3) Do I need to consider any other facts than 1 year gap so that I can stay in US for another 6 years?
2011 love is fans of Kim Casali
ashatara78
03-10 04:38 PM
The EB immigration system was fine before then; thus, the problem is supply/demand, not the immigration policies.
I have no comments about comparison of family vs EB but the EB immigration system was not find before then. I have friends who were in this system in the late 1980s, early 1990s and had huge problems - had to wait a long time, could not switch jobs, could not visit back home for sibling's weddings etc.
It was probably fine during the Clinton administration for a few years 1996-1999 but I only know of a few cases, not many.
I have no comments about comparison of family vs EB but the EB immigration system was not find before then. I have friends who were in this system in the late 1980s, early 1990s and had huge problems - had to wait a long time, could not switch jobs, could not visit back home for sibling's weddings etc.
It was probably fine during the Clinton administration for a few years 1996-1999 but I only know of a few cases, not many.
more...
nojoke
01-22 02:16 PM
Its been 8 yrs, 2 recessions, 3 layoffs, marriage, baby, home, an expensive car, and lots of ego.
with all this going on for an year for now, I dont have time for GC any more.
Do you?
I still love my life whether depressed or surpressed - hahahahha!
Take it easy. Best of luck.
with all this going on for an year for now, I dont have time for GC any more.
Do you?
I still love my life whether depressed or surpressed - hahahahha!
Take it easy. Best of luck.
sweet_jungle
10-25 06:22 PM
no comments on the above ?? I do support the FOIA .but when you think about it ..what is the point in knowing that our GC's are 3-4 years away ...we should also focus on something getting passed during lame duck session ..at the very least we should be prepared for something incase it is suddenly announced that there will be lame duck session after elections ...any thoughts ??
Can somebody re-post the link for downloading the form I need to fax?
Can somebody re-post the link for downloading the form I need to fax?
more...
Ahimsa
11-22 08:11 AM
... You cannot guarantee 2 years from now for those who applied in 2003 and 2004 till getting GC...
... My PD is in 2003 and I am EB-3 ROW but I don't think it will happen in two years in this pace...
Until now (from June 2005) Schedule A EB3 applicants were prioritized in GC number allocations, making the H-1B EB3 applicants' priority dates stayed put.
From Jan 2007 onwards there will be no priority for Schedule A. So I expect the EB3 dates for all countries to move from Jan 2007 onwards. 2003 and 2004 applicants may be able to file 485 with an available GC number in 2 years but may get stuck in the FBI name check.
... My PD is in 2003 and I am EB-3 ROW but I don't think it will happen in two years in this pace...
Until now (from June 2005) Schedule A EB3 applicants were prioritized in GC number allocations, making the H-1B EB3 applicants' priority dates stayed put.
From Jan 2007 onwards there will be no priority for Schedule A. So I expect the EB3 dates for all countries to move from Jan 2007 onwards. 2003 and 2004 applicants may be able to file 485 with an available GC number in 2 years but may get stuck in the FBI name check.
2010 amor moffat
we_can
12-27 12:43 PM
Posted classified on portland.ekNazar.com
http://portland.eknazar.com/ekClassifieds/product_desc.php?id=127180
http://portland.eknazar.com/ekClassifieds/product_desc.php?id=127180
more...
Slave_2k
10-12 02:55 PM
The information that we are trying to capture is already with IV. It will be nice if they can actually come up with a neat report on that. What say guys?
hair hot Amor Es por Kim amor es
sparky_jones
03-17 11:53 AM
See signature...EB3 - India
more...
Appu
10-20 05:30 PM
The democrats will take the house by a very large majority and the senate by a less-than-60 vote majority. So if CIR makes a come back republicans will not be in a very strong position to strike a deal on high-skilled immigration. But there are a number of democrats who also support high-skilled immigration. People opposed to H1B and employment-based green card reforms are on both sides of the aisle (Dems Dick Durbin and Byron Dorgan, Republicans Jeff Sessions and Chuck Grassley for example) but hopefully they will remain a minority. It also looks like vocal supporters like Jon Cornyn will win re-election. But Pete Domenici is retiring. So, on the balance, there will be some change but not a drastic change on the legislative side.
Sen Obama is a very pragmatic and thoughtful person. You should know that he was co-sponsor of the PACE Act which, among other things, tried to create a F4 visa and make it very easy for STEM graduates to get green cards. There is absolutely no need to be panicked about a Obama win. Sen McCain, on the other hand, seems to have gone back on many of his immigration promises these last few months. It will be a concern if there is a democratic congress and McCain is in the White House.
Sen Obama is a very pragmatic and thoughtful person. You should know that he was co-sponsor of the PACE Act which, among other things, tried to create a F4 visa and make it very easy for STEM graduates to get green cards. There is absolutely no need to be panicked about a Obama win. Sen McCain, on the other hand, seems to have gone back on many of his immigration promises these last few months. It will be a concern if there is a democratic congress and McCain is in the White House.
hot amor es kim casali. kim
rajuram
11-10 10:34 PM
We have no more excuses now.
1. Elections are over. So all arguments like "wait till the elections are over" do not apply.
2. We have a pro immigration president now.
3. Democrats are incharge of the house and the senate.
This is a good time to act. What is IV waiting for...
Ofcourse economy will grab the headlines, but it does not mean nothing else can be done. Do something before democrats start worrying about 2010 elections. Time to highlight that immigrants can help by buying houses (NPR had devoted some time to it recently, so they are aware, we just need to give it more publicity)
1. Elections are over. So all arguments like "wait till the elections are over" do not apply.
2. We have a pro immigration president now.
3. Democrats are incharge of the house and the senate.
This is a good time to act. What is IV waiting for...
Ofcourse economy will grab the headlines, but it does not mean nothing else can be done. Do something before democrats start worrying about 2010 elections. Time to highlight that immigrants can help by buying houses (NPR had devoted some time to it recently, so they are aware, we just need to give it more publicity)
more...
house amor es kim casali. kim
bayarea07
09-10 02:22 PM
I do see some action now on http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/calendar.html
HR6020 is being presented right now
I dont think its the Right Link the link that you sent has lot of action going on but
http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/calendar.html
has people moving all over the place and no action
HR6020 is being presented right now
I dont think its the Right Link the link that you sent has lot of action going on but
http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/calendar.html
has people moving all over the place and no action
tattoo amor es kim casali. Kim casali estate || kim casali album
willwin
03-17 03:12 PM
Right. But here USCIS plays its villain role. What happens is USCIS moves clock ahead depending upon last month's "demand." We always think stramline logic.. USCIS does not work that way. It will kick PD to x date for an example Dec 2002. Now at the same time it will keep RD at say for example july 2001..Now it will keep some files eating dust in Name check so end effect is "Some" will get their gC. So next month, seeing this "demand" USCIS will kick PD further.. same game.. I believe at some level it decides seeing it reaching to "3500" limit put a break. So in reality what happen is even though USCIS kicks PD ahead not "all applicants with valid PD" get their GC. If they are unlucky enough to stuck in name check or RD is not being current, they will again wait for years for next kicking cycle start from April 2001.
But when that happens, I guess, guys in CP wil get their interview scheduled (as long as their PD is current; no RD date concept there) as the queue in CP is not as long. Correct?
But when that happens, I guess, guys in CP wil get their interview scheduled (as long as their PD is current; no RD date concept there) as the queue in CP is not as long. Correct?
more...
pictures amor es kim casali
srkamath
07-13 05:12 PM
They adjudicated lot more 485s than 25 K last year. This massive adjudication was the reason behind threatened withdrawal of July 07 bulletin.
Yes, they can do a lot more than 25 k in 2 months.
EB2 folks, please get prepared for RFEs - a few possibilities.
1. Medicals, outdated physicals, PPD positive etc.
2. Passport expired since applying for I-485 last summer.
3. Father's or Mother's name misspelled.
4. DOB discrepancies.
5. Translations of documents
6. Find those old pay-stubs, bank records, W2s, I-20s
7. Google yourself and your spouse.
Yes, they can do a lot more than 25 k in 2 months.
EB2 folks, please get prepared for RFEs - a few possibilities.
1. Medicals, outdated physicals, PPD positive etc.
2. Passport expired since applying for I-485 last summer.
3. Father's or Mother's name misspelled.
4. DOB discrepancies.
5. Translations of documents
6. Find those old pay-stubs, bank records, W2s, I-20s
7. Google yourself and your spouse.
dresses Amores Perros
smuggymba
09-10 12:53 PM
My PD is March 2010 EB2 so i'm not even in this race yet but help me in understanding one thing.
Was EB3 current in July 2007? If yes, I'm assuming atleast 95% EB3 folks have EAD and their spouse can work. The really big problem in post 2007 EB3.
Since dates were current in July 2007, Eb2 and Eb3 can atleast enjoy EAD/spouse working benefits. Why do ppl complain when they have EAD etc whose PD is before 2007.
Was EB3 current in July 2007? If yes, I'm assuming atleast 95% EB3 folks have EAD and their spouse can work. The really big problem in post 2007 EB3.
Since dates were current in July 2007, Eb2 and Eb3 can atleast enjoy EAD/spouse working benefits. Why do ppl complain when they have EAD etc whose PD is before 2007.
more...
makeup Kim falleció en Junio de 1997; amor es kim casali. amor es: enero 2011
desi3933
01-30 02:27 PM
Ok now I am confused. I was laid off while in India. Since I could not then use my H1 to reenter, I used the AP. So my I-94 is stamped as AOS. Are you saying this was not a lawful admission? Are you implying that from the time I entered the US on AP (Dec till date) is unlawful?
It is my fault. I should have explained it better.
The immigration laws are very confusion. Entry on AP is legal entry and it is ok, but it is not considered as lawful entry for I-485 approval process ONLY. For last lawful entry, USCIS looks for last entry on non-immigrant visa.
Hope that helps.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
It is my fault. I should have explained it better.
The immigration laws are very confusion. Entry on AP is legal entry and it is ok, but it is not considered as lawful entry for I-485 approval process ONLY. For last lawful entry, USCIS looks for last entry on non-immigrant visa.
Hope that helps.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
girlfriend 2011 el amor que perdimos
vijayassr
08-05 08:53 PM
Hi, Looks like you have a propabilities now.
1) If your H1 gets approved first before OCT'01st and your L1 does not approve, you should change to company B (who applied H1), if B applied your H1 with CHANGE OF STATUS (you will see new I-94 issued along with approval).
Good thing u can stay in country and work for B.
2) IF your H1 & L1 gets approved one after other in sequence, means first H1 then L1 then I think you are safe to work with company A without leaving country, Murthy.com says its the sequence that matters.
Check with Murthy.com attornies as well, but other Attorneys does not agree with them.It will be only problem when you apply GC, and not in mean while.
3)IF its L1 then H1,and if you want to work with company A, then you need to go out of country and get L1 stamped. Your H1 will remain avilable unless company B cancells it.
4) If your L1 gets approved and H1 gets problem(rejected I dont want this but if happens) then any how u can work for company A.
Hope the above things help.
Thanks
Vijay
1) If your H1 gets approved first before OCT'01st and your L1 does not approve, you should change to company B (who applied H1), if B applied your H1 with CHANGE OF STATUS (you will see new I-94 issued along with approval).
Good thing u can stay in country and work for B.
2) IF your H1 & L1 gets approved one after other in sequence, means first H1 then L1 then I think you are safe to work with company A without leaving country, Murthy.com says its the sequence that matters.
Check with Murthy.com attornies as well, but other Attorneys does not agree with them.It will be only problem when you apply GC, and not in mean while.
3)IF its L1 then H1,and if you want to work with company A, then you need to go out of country and get L1 stamped. Your H1 will remain avilable unless company B cancells it.
4) If your L1 gets approved and H1 gets problem(rejected I dont want this but if happens) then any how u can work for company A.
Hope the above things help.
Thanks
Vijay
hairstyles amor es kim casali. dios es
leoindiano
03-17 10:58 AM
Yes, mine was in Philly BEC too...which was approved in 2007 January.
But, there was quite a few go lucky people whose labor was getting approved in 30 days state, 30 days federal until that time. thats why i took 50-50 probability.
But, there was quite a few go lucky people whose labor was getting approved in 30 days state, 30 days federal until that time. thats why i took 50-50 probability.
jonty_11
07-09 06:36 PM
I came across this law about the departmental control of numerical limitations, and I'd appreciate it if you all could post your interpretations of the same.
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
text in bold has a GREY area....'plus remaining balance from previous months.'
They can always say the additional approvals were left over from previous months...
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
text in bold has a GREY area....'plus remaining balance from previous months.'
They can always say the additional approvals were left over from previous months...
rongch60
07-13 03:56 PM
All the data shows that we have 20K EB2 I/C with PD before 6/1/2006, and it is comparable with the unused 20K quota from EB1 and EB2-ROW. As stated by Openhemer, the 2 year jump is due to the spillover of 20K to EB2 instead of EB3-ROW and there will NOT be any significant retrogression in Oct. However, a petition is being organized in this forum to stopping this spillover. Only if the petition succeed, we will see EB2 date goes back to 2004.
Post a Comment