eb3_nepa
07-05 12:10 PM
FIRST make the Forums Viewable ONLY by members who are signed in. Currently you need to sign in only to POST.
wallpaper final fantasy 7 wallpaper.
ambals03
06-10 04:39 PM
Done and forwarded to 10 friends.
psam
06-11 12:15 AM
This amendment treats foreign workers like slaves.
When we need you, we take you in. But when there are layoffs, you are supposed to pack your bags and leave? Even if you are the best performer in your group?
Layoffs happen at respectable companies like Microsoft as well. And Microsoft indeed has hired some of the brightest brains from all over the world. Why should families of these people take all the heat of layoff?
I wish that next Microsoft, Apple, Google happens outside of U.S.
When we need you, we take you in. But when there are layoffs, you are supposed to pack your bags and leave? Even if you are the best performer in your group?
Layoffs happen at respectable companies like Microsoft as well. And Microsoft indeed has hired some of the brightest brains from all over the world. Why should families of these people take all the heat of layoff?
I wish that next Microsoft, Apple, Google happens outside of U.S.
2011 crisis core, final fantasy
chmur
09-11 12:41 AM
The problem with your analysis is not every one in the backlog has equal access to excess of 35-40K visas available each year. Most of the excess comes from EB4,5,1 and 2ROW and all goes to EB2 I/C. EB3 ROW gets ~30K every year (42K- 4*2.8K).
Even if we are to assume that post 2007 the demand for EB2 I/C and EB3 is low then also it is ~ 15K for EB2 I/C and ~ 10K for EB3 ROW. But the way INA law is framed EB3 I (most backlogged with ~ 60K) will only get 2800 visa till either of EB2 I/C or EB3 row becomes current. And by current I mean real current, not July 2007. Using these numbers it will still take 4-5 for both EB2 I/C and EB3 Row to become current.
This is assuming low demand in all EB categories continue.
It will be only after 2014-15 that EB3I will get ~ 50K SOFAD(35K SOFAD which EB2 I/C was getting plus about 15K from EB3 ROW category). So in 2015 EB3 I will see a jump of ~ 4 yrs (2003-2007). So EB3I folks with PD after 2007 will have a relative wait time of ~ 8 yrs but folks from 2003-4 are looking at a 12-13 year wait unless reform like Recapture/STEM Degree holders & Dependents excluded from cap is passed.
I understand how overflow gets distributed and Eb3-I is last in line. However , if net reduction is 35-40K each year starting 2010(i.e oct 2009 to oct 2010) and the backlog is 200 K at the beginning of 2010 (Inventory report) , we should work through all the backlog in 5 (40 *5) years.
That means in 2-3 years overflow should get to EB3 I because rest of the category will be current by then .
I agree people who applied in 2003 -2004 are looking at 10 year wait as against someone applying for EB3-I - today . Infact someone applying today will get GC in 5 years from now.
Even if we are to assume that post 2007 the demand for EB2 I/C and EB3 is low then also it is ~ 15K for EB2 I/C and ~ 10K for EB3 ROW. But the way INA law is framed EB3 I (most backlogged with ~ 60K) will only get 2800 visa till either of EB2 I/C or EB3 row becomes current. And by current I mean real current, not July 2007. Using these numbers it will still take 4-5 for both EB2 I/C and EB3 Row to become current.
This is assuming low demand in all EB categories continue.
It will be only after 2014-15 that EB3I will get ~ 50K SOFAD(35K SOFAD which EB2 I/C was getting plus about 15K from EB3 ROW category). So in 2015 EB3 I will see a jump of ~ 4 yrs (2003-2007). So EB3I folks with PD after 2007 will have a relative wait time of ~ 8 yrs but folks from 2003-4 are looking at a 12-13 year wait unless reform like Recapture/STEM Degree holders & Dependents excluded from cap is passed.
I understand how overflow gets distributed and Eb3-I is last in line. However , if net reduction is 35-40K each year starting 2010(i.e oct 2009 to oct 2010) and the backlog is 200 K at the beginning of 2010 (Inventory report) , we should work through all the backlog in 5 (40 *5) years.
That means in 2-3 years overflow should get to EB3 I because rest of the category will be current by then .
I agree people who applied in 2003 -2004 are looking at 10 year wait as against someone applying for EB3-I - today . Infact someone applying today will get GC in 5 years from now.
more...
transpass
04-10 12:07 PM
Here are the details for last year and years before:
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
Thanks Kondur. That was a very good presentation of the numbers. I very much appreciate it.
Now,
1. Why did EB1 last year needed spillover visas, although it was current all the time? If a category is current, isn't that it has less demand than allocated numbers?
2. As per May bulletin, EB4 might need a cut off. So we cannot expect any spillover from EB4. So that is clear. Now the spillover chances are from EB5, EB2 ROW and EB1(?). I am including EB1 because, given the current economy over the past year, should there be a better possibility of more spillover from EB2 ROW and EB1 compared to last year?
3. Also why are the total EB numbers different in different fiscal years (e.g., 141020 in FY2009, 162949 in FY 2008 and 154497 in FY2007)? In FYs 2007 and 2008 did the extra visas come from Family based while it did not for FY 2009? If so, why is it so?
4. Based on Pending 485 data of March 2010, I barely see few hundred EB4s. And hardly considerable number of EB1s. What's going on? If we go by this data, we should be getting good chunk of spillover numbers...
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Green%20Card/Green%20Card%20Through%20a%20Job/Employment%20Based%20I-485%20Pending%20Inventory-Total%203-8-2010.pdf
Thanks,
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
Thanks Kondur. That was a very good presentation of the numbers. I very much appreciate it.
Now,
1. Why did EB1 last year needed spillover visas, although it was current all the time? If a category is current, isn't that it has less demand than allocated numbers?
2. As per May bulletin, EB4 might need a cut off. So we cannot expect any spillover from EB4. So that is clear. Now the spillover chances are from EB5, EB2 ROW and EB1(?). I am including EB1 because, given the current economy over the past year, should there be a better possibility of more spillover from EB2 ROW and EB1 compared to last year?
3. Also why are the total EB numbers different in different fiscal years (e.g., 141020 in FY2009, 162949 in FY 2008 and 154497 in FY2007)? In FYs 2007 and 2008 did the extra visas come from Family based while it did not for FY 2009? If so, why is it so?
4. Based on Pending 485 data of March 2010, I barely see few hundred EB4s. And hardly considerable number of EB1s. What's going on? If we go by this data, we should be getting good chunk of spillover numbers...
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Green%20Card/Green%20Card%20Through%20a%20Job/Employment%20Based%20I-485%20Pending%20Inventory-Total%203-8-2010.pdf
Thanks,
pd052009
03-17 08:14 AM
^^^^^
more...
ajju
01-18 08:01 PM
Based on your state law, you may be required to carry your original DL and not copies.
I was talking about copy of EAD instead of original card.. But you made a valid point that EAD is not proof of immigration status... But then what is proof of Legal Status?? If you are on EAD.. you may not've H1...
Also carrying original EAD all the time is not a good idea... If you lose it.. it will take months to replace it... Not sure if during this.. you can work or not... Personally I was asked to show passport only once.. when driving through Texas by US Army... Within your state it may be okay if your DL is close to real ID... But still this is a confusing topic...
I was talking about copy of EAD instead of original card.. But you made a valid point that EAD is not proof of immigration status... But then what is proof of Legal Status?? If you are on EAD.. you may not've H1...
Also carrying original EAD all the time is not a good idea... If you lose it.. it will take months to replace it... Not sure if during this.. you can work or not... Personally I was asked to show passport only once.. when driving through Texas by US Army... Within your state it may be okay if your DL is close to real ID... But still this is a confusing topic...
2010 Final Fantasy VII: Crisis Core
vagish
04-02 03:22 PM
this is not the new trend, back in year 2000 to 2003 , when massive layoffs were going on , it has been prevelant since then. Also if this illegal , how about people who got laid off in those years and never went bak home sitting on bench for a year, if you start to fish around, you will find lots and lots of people
had trouble in maintaining their status in the past.
Fake resume is the fact which has been there for so many years, be it for masters or for just B.E graduates.
thanks
had trouble in maintaining their status in the past.
Fake resume is the fact which has been there for so many years, be it for masters or for just B.E graduates.
thanks
more...
boreal
12-28 02:36 PM
Yes this is correct. If you have an approved I-140 and your I-485 is pending for 180 days, the employer cannot revoke your I-140 unless there is fraud in getting the I-140. If you have done joint filing of the two, if you get your I-140 within 6 months of the joint filing, you can change employers immediately after that. Of course, you can't just go to any employer; it has a to be a similar job.
welcome back qplearn :-)
welcome back qplearn :-)
hair final fantasy: crisis core
ksvreg
06-10 01:45 PM
best bet is eb3 to eb2 conversion in addition to advocacy efforts?
more...
perm2gc
12-27 05:38 PM
/\/\/\/\
hot Crisis Core : Final Fantasy
nomi
12-13 11:03 AM
I know , More than 50% of IV members who can not file I 485 due to retrogression will be happy to pay this nominal amount of $10 to fax letter to USCIS for rule change
but What is the stand of Core group on this?
No update from any one!!
Please Core Team ,
Help us in this option and show us right way. We will generate $60,000 for IV and if nothing happen but we will make Headline in Media which will help us in future efforts in US Senate.
Please throw some light in this regard.
thx.
nomi
but What is the stand of Core group on this?
No update from any one!!
Please Core Team ,
Help us in this option and show us right way. We will generate $60,000 for IV and if nothing happen but we will make Headline in Media which will help us in future efforts in US Senate.
Please throw some light in this regard.
thx.
nomi
more...
house wallpaper: final fantasy 13
delax
07-14 07:39 PM
Yes. I VOLUNTARILY exclude myself from any such potential benefit.
BTW did you get a discount from Murthy for defending the firm on this website? Most of your posts are all about defending.
Great - You have your conscience to answer about excluding yourself - hopefully you will walk the talk - if not, so much for your commitment to "Gandhigiri".
And Oh! BTW I did not get a discount - but I atleast dont hurl allegations before I know the facts. Its a pity that you are missing the forest for the trees - I dont think I am defending anybody here. But just because Murthy Law Firm is more visible than a John Doe Law Office, does not make her more guilty or for that matter more innocent. She may be as guilty or as innocent as any other lawyer - her letter will only help not harm. If she takes undue credit for it "Gandhigiri" would require us to send her flowers - not hurl allegations.
Let us practice what we preach - or is the preaching only to show USCIS - since you have a vested interest there. Ask yourself this question. I dont need to tell you the answer. Cheers
BTW did you get a discount from Murthy for defending the firm on this website? Most of your posts are all about defending.
Great - You have your conscience to answer about excluding yourself - hopefully you will walk the talk - if not, so much for your commitment to "Gandhigiri".
And Oh! BTW I did not get a discount - but I atleast dont hurl allegations before I know the facts. Its a pity that you are missing the forest for the trees - I dont think I am defending anybody here. But just because Murthy Law Firm is more visible than a John Doe Law Office, does not make her more guilty or for that matter more innocent. She may be as guilty or as innocent as any other lawyer - her letter will only help not harm. If she takes undue credit for it "Gandhigiri" would require us to send her flowers - not hurl allegations.
Let us practice what we preach - or is the preaching only to show USCIS - since you have a vested interest there. Ask yourself this question. I dont need to tell you the answer. Cheers
tattoo Crisis Core: Final Fantasy
Macaca
01-31 04:52 PM
I am actually looking for a very simple answer : My husband whose EB-2 I-140 had been approved some time back, wants to quit his job & pursue MBA on F-1. Would the I-539 be approved in this case ? Or should he plan for H4.
BTW , he has no plans to travel out of country so stamping is not an issue.
Zima's post is not about stamping only. Applying for F1 from US means that the International Student office will mail I-20 and application to USCIS and you do not get a stamp on your passport. Applying for F1 in Embassy means that you take the same I-20 and apply at the embassy and get your passport satmped. Same rules should be applicable.
I think Zima's case is saying that you can not go to F1 (in Zima's case extend F1) with approved I-140. It probably also depends on when Zima's I-140 and F1 were filed/approved.
It certainly does not look good. I think USCIS has your I-140 file and your F1 application will be conected to it.
There was a related post sometime back. From what I remember, there was a person who got I-140 approved on F1 and then transferred to H1B.
BTW , he has no plans to travel out of country so stamping is not an issue.
Zima's post is not about stamping only. Applying for F1 from US means that the International Student office will mail I-20 and application to USCIS and you do not get a stamp on your passport. Applying for F1 in Embassy means that you take the same I-20 and apply at the embassy and get your passport satmped. Same rules should be applicable.
I think Zima's case is saying that you can not go to F1 (in Zima's case extend F1) with approved I-140. It probably also depends on when Zima's I-140 and F1 were filed/approved.
It certainly does not look good. I think USCIS has your I-140 file and your F1 application will be conected to it.
There was a related post sometime back. From what I remember, there was a person who got I-140 approved on F1 and then transferred to H1B.
more...
pictures FFVII Crisis Core Wallpaper
gautamagg
04-23 04:46 PM
I came with 4 other people and NONE are IV members and nor did we approach any - infact the white shirt dude was surprised to know we were not part of IV and offended. As I said passive movements dont make a difference.
technically you are an IV member because you have an ID, that you created on your own. You probably went to the meeting with the IV crowd then branched out..good for you. Wonder why the Stanfords and Harvards are dying to admit you:D
Obviously you seem to be in a very unique situation, and you are taking steps to solve your issues in your own way, nothing wrong with that. good luck, to each his own.
technically you are an IV member because you have an ID, that you created on your own. You probably went to the meeting with the IV crowd then branched out..good for you. Wonder why the Stanfords and Harvards are dying to admit you:D
Obviously you seem to be in a very unique situation, and you are taking steps to solve your issues in your own way, nothing wrong with that. good luck, to each his own.
dresses Tags: final fantasy,crisis
willgetgc2005
03-20 07:26 PM
We're definitely pursuing this problem also through our lobbyist, but for now given the drastic changes in the Comprehensive Immigration Bills, all the effort is going into that. Once that cools down a bit, we will concentrate on the procedural issues like FBI name check as we do realize that a large number of us are likely to get stuck there.
Admin,
Thanks for taking this into account. Including me many are affected by name check.How will this affect all eventually? As an example, consider this.
Let us say your PD becomes current in 2006 and u are waiting for name check.Name check is not cleared in 2006. So the yearly quota which was available to you could not be used because of name check. So the visa in 2006 is not used up, even though it was available.That is one precious Visa number was not used up and got lost in the yearly quota system. Then
in 2007, you get in line ahead of candidates whose PD becomes current in 2007.
So in effect all of us loose.
Admin,
Thanks for taking this into account. Including me many are affected by name check.How will this affect all eventually? As an example, consider this.
Let us say your PD becomes current in 2006 and u are waiting for name check.Name check is not cleared in 2006. So the yearly quota which was available to you could not be used because of name check. So the visa in 2006 is not used up, even though it was available.That is one precious Visa number was not used up and got lost in the yearly quota system. Then
in 2007, you get in line ahead of candidates whose PD becomes current in 2007.
So in effect all of us loose.
more...
makeup wallpaper PSP final fantasy
feedfront
09-21 04:55 PM
My attorney's office received RFE mail today (Sept 21, 2010). RFE notice was sent on Sept 10, 2010.
RFE was about deficiency in medical exam report. My doctor is in not USCIS list (he was in list July 2007). Well, I called him and he was busy. I will talk to him again.
RFE is about:
1) Provide med exam report from USCIS authorized Civil Surgeon, and
2) Chest x-ray because TB was +ve
I had provided both. I guess I'll have to redo. I've to reply by Oct 13, 2010.
RFE was about deficiency in medical exam report. My doctor is in not USCIS list (he was in list July 2007). Well, I called him and he was busy. I will talk to him again.
RFE is about:
1) Provide med exam report from USCIS authorized Civil Surgeon, and
2) Chest x-ray because TB was +ve
I had provided both. I guess I'll have to redo. I've to reply by Oct 13, 2010.
girlfriend Final Fantasy Crisis Core
tabletpc
12-20 04:10 PM
"...I dont think you need to worry.. for you knwo what I am saying ..."
this is turning out be very hilarious form:):). Good way to get rid of GC frustation.:o
this is turning out be very hilarious form:):). Good way to get rid of GC frustation.:o
hairstyles ff7 wallpaper. FFvII Crisis
like_watching_paint_dry
05-27 05:22 PM
I-485 application instructions (http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/i-485instr.pdf) ask you to make photocopies of your passport.
senthil1
06-12 10:03 PM
Yes that is true. Impact for US companies are minimal and in fact good for US companies and more disadvantage for Indian companies. Mainly those who are running just by H1b persons will have tough time. Actually many small US consulting companies went out of business because they were not able to compete with Indian companies because of H1B.
dont count on the restrictions being removed, the restrictions are the trade off to the major increase that is goin to take place for the h1b's , the biggie US companys are not gonna get affected by them, its only the indian IT and the desi bodyshoppers, so they wil support it as long as they get the h1b's.
dont count on the restrictions being removed, the restrictions are the trade off to the major increase that is goin to take place for the h1b's , the biggie US companys are not gonna get affected by them, its only the indian IT and the desi bodyshoppers, so they wil support it as long as they get the h1b's.
senthil1
12-26 07:21 PM
If old employer revokes I140 then the result will be unpredictable. But it is upto INS to decide. Only those who had similar experience can tell clearly about this. Or a Lawyer can give better idea
Thanks for the reply, if old employer revokes I-140 while the other employer is still working on LC+I-140, Will this creates any problem for me?
-Thanks,
Thanks for the reply, if old employer revokes I-140 while the other employer is still working on LC+I-140, Will this creates any problem for me?
-Thanks,
Post a Comment