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...
wallpaper 1 paket laksa mee (celur
cal_dood
07-05 01:43 PM
I'll just go back to forums of the leading lady immigration lawyer....
jonty_11
06-06 04:50 PM
A friend of mine (from India) got his GC approval notice on 6/3. Here are the details:
LC PD - April 12 2003.
I-485 RD - June, 07, ND - July 16th 2007.
Filing Center - NSC
Received RFE 5/14/08.
Submitted reply 5/30. USCIS ack 5/31. Soft update again on 6/02.
6/03 received email about card production ordered.
Congrats to all those lucky souls.
any idea on waht the RFE was?
LC PD - April 12 2003.
I-485 RD - June, 07, ND - July 16th 2007.
Filing Center - NSC
Received RFE 5/14/08.
Submitted reply 5/30. USCIS ack 5/31. Soft update again on 6/02.
6/03 received email about card production ordered.
Congrats to all those lucky souls.
any idea on waht the RFE was?
2011 laksa mee. the Singaporean mee
desi3933
02-11 12:30 PM
Looks like Ron is correct. ....
Read this
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY08-AR-TableV.pdf
and tell us, where do you see 13,000 unused numbers?
Read this
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY08-AR-TableV.pdf
and tell us, where do you see 13,000 unused numbers?
more...
nc14
11-03 04:19 PM
I too got a receipt letter from USCIS about my FOIA request.
Today received letter from USCIS regarding the FOIA.
Today received letter from USCIS regarding the FOIA.
rsayed
11-20 11:13 PM
Guys.
Please do not mind, my writing this - I honestly think we should stop writing insensible comments like "sick people getting frustrated" and the like...
IV is a professional not for profit outfit, with a set agenda. We should work together towards achieving our goal, through legal, available channels.
If things work out - great! If they don't, it's disappointing but not the end of the world.
People who chose to stay and wait longer for their Permanent Residency will do so; those who cannot (for whatever reasons) will find other alternatives...
Let's not make this a platform for venting out our frustrations.
Please do not mind, my writing this - I honestly think we should stop writing insensible comments like "sick people getting frustrated" and the like...
IV is a professional not for profit outfit, with a set agenda. We should work together towards achieving our goal, through legal, available channels.
If things work out - great! If they don't, it's disappointing but not the end of the world.
People who chose to stay and wait longer for their Permanent Residency will do so; those who cannot (for whatever reasons) will find other alternatives...
Let's not make this a platform for venting out our frustrations.
more...
abhishek101
06-15 11:36 AM
as a 501(3)(C) organization immigration voice has is limited in its efforts to contribute for any cause, while it can spend a max of 30 % (lawyers please comment) on Advocacy but it cannot do political campaigns openly, if people want to contribute and defeat Sen Grassley they need a 501(4) type of non profit.
2010 penang prawn mee and laksa
supers789
03-12 01:15 AM
is it really out
Visa Bulletin (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_1360.html)
this doesnt tell that yet
As far as dates for India goes, its out. Bulletin on USCIS website will have details for all other countries as well which doesn't matter much to us...
Visa Bulletin (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_1360.html)
this doesnt tell that yet
As far as dates for India goes, its out. Bulletin on USCIS website will have details for all other countries as well which doesn't matter much to us...
more...
arsh007
01-30 02:45 PM
Hi,
I know a good desi firm. The firm takes just $2/hr for the operational expense. If you need more info please send a private message.
Thanks
I have looking out for companies to sponsor my wife's H1 (she is currently on H4) here in St Louis, MO. One local company (less than 25 employees) is ready to sponsor my wife's H1 provided the following conditions are met:
1. Pay H1 costs (including petition and attorney fees)
2. Pay payroll taxes for my wife from Oct 1, 2007 if she manages to get an H1 but is not able to begin working on a project.
3. Refund of H1 costs after completing 6 months on project.
I was ready for all conditions except 'paying payroll taxes when not on project'. That would mean paying around $700-$800 each month or more...Its surprising how desi companies can impose such conditions....
I am still contemplating whether to go ahead with this company or tell him "GO to HELL".......
I know a good desi firm. The firm takes just $2/hr for the operational expense. If you need more info please send a private message.
Thanks
I have looking out for companies to sponsor my wife's H1 (she is currently on H4) here in St Louis, MO. One local company (less than 25 employees) is ready to sponsor my wife's H1 provided the following conditions are met:
1. Pay H1 costs (including petition and attorney fees)
2. Pay payroll taxes for my wife from Oct 1, 2007 if she manages to get an H1 but is not able to begin working on a project.
3. Refund of H1 costs after completing 6 months on project.
I was ready for all conditions except 'paying payroll taxes when not on project'. That would mean paying around $700-$800 each month or more...Its surprising how desi companies can impose such conditions....
I am still contemplating whether to go ahead with this company or tell him "GO to HELL".......
hair Laksa Mee Hoon
NKR
10-19 08:02 PM
Question 18 should be helpful to your situation with RD.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/cbo_30sept08.pdf
Thanks, then i do not know what to make out of what is in my status "we received the case in Oct at NSC" though it was applied in Aug at TSC.
I do hope that what is in this document is true.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/cbo_30sept08.pdf
Thanks, then i do not know what to make out of what is in my status "we received the case in Oct at NSC" though it was applied in Aug at TSC.
I do hope that what is in this document is true.
more...
hiyer31
01-26 12:00 PM
What happened to all the thesis and discussions? i felt disgusted listening to the state of the union address. i completely am of the opinion that everybody deserves a chance even those who are here illegally. But there is something wrong with a country which wishes to cater to them to favor them who broke the laws then the who indian community which barely breaks laws and is probably the most god fearing and law fearing group of people in this country. We have 0 representation in this nation. Taxation without representation. All the social security and medicare taxes I will never probably get to use it. I wish we could all muster the courage to quit the jobs and leave this country and let every client and employer deal with the fallout. Unfortunately we cant. Since there are 10 others in line behind me who will willing become slaves for the little comfort they get. Life has become very frustrating.
hot laksa mee
sanjaymm
10-29 01:43 PM
I have mailed a notorized letter. I have also forwarded the link to other friends who may have missed this action item.
Sanjay
Sanjay
more...
house The laksa was nourishing and
gimmeacard
07-12 09:00 PM
So looking at the demand data used for determining Aug bulletin,
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf
how far do you think it'll progress next month?
AUG BULLETIN is already out, it moved to March06 for EB2,
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf
how far do you think it'll progress next month?
AUG BULLETIN is already out, it moved to March06 for EB2,
tattoo maggie mee assam laksa
espoir
01-18 10:20 PM
OK. What the inital poster stated is true. Per US Law one MUST carry all the immigration documents. My home is literally 4.5 miles away from US-Mexico border crossing and 30 miles west of Harlingen airport. I lived here since 2001 and as per my experience cops usually do not ask for immigration documents when stopped for routine traffic stops. Both the times when I was stopped, I was asked for DL and Insurance as usual per TX law. I normally do not carry my passport and other docs when I go to work (5.5 miles north to where I live), when shopping or when going out within 15 miles (north) of my home. Suresh was asked for PP by a police officer because he was in the airport.
I ALWAYS carry my passport and status verifying docs when I know I'm in the vicinity of exit points such as Greyhound terminal, Airport (even if I'm just dropping/picking up a friend at the Airport) or going out of town. Because I know there are NO excuses whatsoever for not carrying the docs if you are travelling north or south from US-Mexico border town.
But when in town I never had any trouble, and carrying the imigration docs as needed was never a problem for me. Trust me I sat on tables right next to Border Patrol Officers when I go out to lunch many times.
In fact at border towns (especially Mexican border), there is lot of vigilence at exit points whether you are citizen or not, you can be held for questioning. Its logical, since escaping into Mexico is literally matter of minutes for law-breakers.
Also, I do carry a copy of PP in my car, just in case. Nothing wrong in carrying copy of our PP (note: not US docs). Although whether to accept your explanation or not is completely upto the officer.
Few of my friends from north of Texas visited me did forget their immigration docs and passports(inspite of me cautioning them 100 times), they were held at checkpoints (50 miles north of the border) but were eventually let go after couple hours of verification process. Bottom line you may mostly get away for not carrying the documents at all times. But if they want to hold it against you, you have no case in your favor. Always be nice to them and 99% times you are treated respectfully.
I ALWAYS carry my passport and status verifying docs when I know I'm in the vicinity of exit points such as Greyhound terminal, Airport (even if I'm just dropping/picking up a friend at the Airport) or going out of town. Because I know there are NO excuses whatsoever for not carrying the docs if you are travelling north or south from US-Mexico border town.
But when in town I never had any trouble, and carrying the imigration docs as needed was never a problem for me. Trust me I sat on tables right next to Border Patrol Officers when I go out to lunch many times.
In fact at border towns (especially Mexican border), there is lot of vigilence at exit points whether you are citizen or not, you can be held for questioning. Its logical, since escaping into Mexico is literally matter of minutes for law-breakers.
Also, I do carry a copy of PP in my car, just in case. Nothing wrong in carrying copy of our PP (note: not US docs). Although whether to accept your explanation or not is completely upto the officer.
Few of my friends from north of Texas visited me did forget their immigration docs and passports(inspite of me cautioning them 100 times), they were held at checkpoints (50 miles north of the border) but were eventually let go after couple hours of verification process. Bottom line you may mostly get away for not carrying the documents at all times. But if they want to hold it against you, you have no case in your favor. Always be nice to them and 99% times you are treated respectfully.
more...
pictures Mee Jawa#39;s Curry Laksa
aps
08-09 12:20 AM
:rolleyes:I mailed my I-485 application on July30 and it is delivered on next day.
My lawyer send me the I-485 froms before the july 30, 07 y revision and i used those forms for filing. But, FAQ3 released by uscis today states that we have to use the form version dated �7/30/07 Y�. . WHAT IS THIS? Do i have to resend the application again? More over i do not see difference between these two forms.
I have copied the question from faq3. It is the first question.
Q33: When filing an EB I-485 using the old fee, what version of the I-485 form do we use?
A33: The current I-485 form version dated �7/30/07 Y� should be used.
Please explain if you have any idea about this.
My lawyer send me the I-485 froms before the july 30, 07 y revision and i used those forms for filing. But, FAQ3 released by uscis today states that we have to use the form version dated �7/30/07 Y�. . WHAT IS THIS? Do i have to resend the application again? More over i do not see difference between these two forms.
I have copied the question from faq3. It is the first question.
Q33: When filing an EB I-485 using the old fee, what version of the I-485 form do we use?
A33: The current I-485 form version dated �7/30/07 Y� should be used.
Please explain if you have any idea about this.
dresses 七层楼 Kolo Mee 金门楼 Laksa
leoindiano
03-17 10:18 AM
Porting cases needs more research and with USCIS performance, you can say that it may have little impact on 2004 cases. The substitution cases filed in July are of 2005 and after cases. 2003 and 2004 cases all substituted before and i believe that is what created this mess for you and me.
more...
makeup laksa mee. pasal isu laksa mee
sbabunle
12-28 10:07 PM
Anybody tried timesof India?
girlfriend Penang curry mee.
GCNirvana007
10-10 09:55 PM
It is unreasonable to carry a passport at all times when you are living here. What happens if you leave it behind in the grocery store by mistake or leave it in the cab or something? I think the issue reported by the OP is more relevant close to the border. Nobody asks for your passport in Vegas or Denver.
Which part you didnt understand?
Once you enter USA, doesnt matter Vegas or Denver, you need to carry documents with you. Thats LAW. They dont stop everybody but if they do, we are answerable to them.
Its similar to speeding. For a 55 miles speed limit, usually cops dont stop if you drive 70. However they are legally entitled to fine you if you drive 56. Its LAW.
Now if you leave it by mistake, thats not their problem, you got to deal with it.
Which part you didnt understand?
Once you enter USA, doesnt matter Vegas or Denver, you need to carry documents with you. Thats LAW. They dont stop everybody but if they do, we are answerable to them.
Its similar to speeding. For a 55 miles speed limit, usually cops dont stop if you drive 70. However they are legally entitled to fine you if you drive 56. Its LAW.
Now if you leave it by mistake, thats not their problem, you got to deal with it.
hairstyles 2011 My Laksa Mee @ RM3.30
Pineapple
06-13 04:15 PM
I apologize for being rude earlier to Senthil. That was perhaps out of line.
What annoys me is the misconception many have regarding hiring a non-American, and what annoys me further is the fact that many H1Bs fall for the same facile arguments made by you-know-who.
Fact is, if we define displacement as "not hiring", then ANY hiring is, by definition, a displacement of one who is not hired.
For example: Say Jane is hired for X dollars per year, because John, who is equally qualified is not interested in working at that salary. Can John claim he was displaced by someone willing to work at a lower salary? Of course he can. But here is the deal: No matter how high you peg $ X (Say 120K), or how unique Jane is (Say Jane is the only person the company could find). Now keep increasing X, and at some point a John will walk in through the door since the money is good.
Bottom line? You may think you are not displacing anyone, but you ARE unless you are the only person on the planet who can do that job. For every Jane, one can find a disgruntled John. It makes not one jot of difference if you are American or Ethiopian. The Jane/John example I gave stands regardless.
What annoys me is the misconception many have regarding hiring a non-American, and what annoys me further is the fact that many H1Bs fall for the same facile arguments made by you-know-who.
Fact is, if we define displacement as "not hiring", then ANY hiring is, by definition, a displacement of one who is not hired.
For example: Say Jane is hired for X dollars per year, because John, who is equally qualified is not interested in working at that salary. Can John claim he was displaced by someone willing to work at a lower salary? Of course he can. But here is the deal: No matter how high you peg $ X (Say 120K), or how unique Jane is (Say Jane is the only person the company could find). Now keep increasing X, and at some point a John will walk in through the door since the money is good.
Bottom line? You may think you are not displacing anyone, but you ARE unless you are the only person on the planet who can do that job. For every Jane, one can find a disgruntled John. It makes not one jot of difference if you are American or Ethiopian. The Jane/John example I gave stands regardless.
jungalee43
06-11 09:45 AM
Done.
moonlight
06-20 12:39 PM
I doubt about illegal of taking color copy of driver license.
If it is why would lawyers ask for it. My lawyer asked for color copy.
If it is why would lawyers ask for it. My lawyer asked for color copy.
Post a Comment