go_gc_way
12-26 10:56 PM
Dear New IV Members ...
You can GREATLY HELP THIS EFFORT by throwing your ideas and contributing to this effort.
Please update Web sites in your local areas. I have posted a classified in the following web site ..
www.desigate.com that can be read at ... http://www.desigate.com/classified.php
It took me less than 15 minutes to register and post the ad. But as you see it can not be done by one person, with every one's help , we can finish this effort in few days.
We have approximately 7000 members , if we can post at least in 1000 different web sites/forums/groups , I am sure It will definetly help increase the membership toward 10,000.
You can GREATLY HELP THIS EFFORT by throwing your ideas and contributing to this effort.
Please update Web sites in your local areas. I have posted a classified in the following web site ..
www.desigate.com that can be read at ... http://www.desigate.com/classified.php
It took me less than 15 minutes to register and post the ad. But as you see it can not be done by one person, with every one's help , we can finish this effort in few days.
We have approximately 7000 members , if we can post at least in 1000 different web sites/forums/groups , I am sure It will definetly help increase the membership toward 10,000.
wallpaper lara logan hot pics
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,
ghost
08-12 07:34 AM
I would be more than happy to help with whatever ideas you have on mind. Even if IV decides to create an exclusive EB3 fund, count me in for any monetary contribution.
Good to see someone from EB-2 advocating an exclusive EB-3 monetary fund...I think the spirit of this gesture speaks for the fact that we are in this together...let's translate into a "donor" status if possible...personally, I'm not bothered whether my donations go towards EB-2 or EB-3 and that should not be our long-term vision.
Let's believe in IV and believe in ourselves that we are better than this EB-2/EB-3 divisions. Good luck to all of us!
Good to see someone from EB-2 advocating an exclusive EB-3 monetary fund...I think the spirit of this gesture speaks for the fact that we are in this together...let's translate into a "donor" status if possible...personally, I'm not bothered whether my donations go towards EB-2 or EB-3 and that should not be our long-term vision.
Let's believe in IV and believe in ourselves that we are better than this EB-2/EB-3 divisions. Good luck to all of us!
2011 lara logan hot pics. lara
gcdreamer
03-02 12:01 AM
To solve the FBI name check problem, the following suggestions should be communicated to lawmaker if possible:
1. Increase the fundings for FBI name check. The major reason of name check delay is due to lack of resources for manual name check.
2. Introduce a conditional Green Card. Conditional green card is equivalent to green card, except with condition that it could be taken back IF AND ONLY IF the name check eventually fails to pass. Person with conditional green card enjoy all the benefits with normal green card, including transfering job freely, re-enter US freely, count years to citizenship, etc.
3. People wants to file 485 can ask FBI do name check before they actaully file 485 with a certain amount of filing fee. So that the delay for FBI name check will not impact 485 processing too much.
1. Increase the fundings for FBI name check. The major reason of name check delay is due to lack of resources for manual name check.
2. Introduce a conditional Green Card. Conditional green card is equivalent to green card, except with condition that it could be taken back IF AND ONLY IF the name check eventually fails to pass. Person with conditional green card enjoy all the benefits with normal green card, including transfering job freely, re-enter US freely, count years to citizenship, etc.
3. People wants to file 485 can ask FBI do name check before they actaully file 485 with a certain amount of filing fee. So that the delay for FBI name check will not impact 485 processing too much.
more...
rpatel
07-24 08:59 AM
We could pose this question to the USCIS Director today. He will be at Ask the White House at 4pm ET today. Pose your question at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/ask
I just posted this very question on the website above. I hope it gets selected for the chat
http://www.whitehouse.gov/ask
I just posted this very question on the website above. I hope it gets selected for the chat
paulinasmith
08-08 08:50 AM
If you are just another desk jockey, your company made a big mistake sponsoring your H1. H1 visa is only given to people in high demand with special skills where company cannot find a US citizen. Greencard is sponsored by a company when company proves that no USA citizen is available to do your job despite lot of advertising for many months. It is company wanting to keep you permanent instead of just 6 years and not you demanding to be permanent. This is Employment based Green card where employer sponsors you. You do not sponsor yourself unless you are extraordinary in EB1 and world's best. Why can't people get over this and stop demanding greencard as their right. Greencard is a benefit you get for having specialized skills that are in high demand in the job you do. If you think you are unique and no American can replace you after giving ads for several months, what is stopping you from finding another company and challenging them to try advertising for few months for your position. If they find someone, you will happily quit the job and vacate for the American citizen. And if they do not find someone, then they should sponsor you for Greencard. Do you have such courage to talk to HR or CEO of your company?
I agree that there is no direct route or path defined between H1B and green card. In my opinion one have to concentrate on making maximum money USD$.USD$ is the only thing thing country have left remaining with.There are other secure economies where you can invest maximum USD$ (from here) and get better return (better interest rates). Chasing American Dream should be now over after living in the dark harsh realities of US.Many indians are putting their savings in India...
I agree that there is no direct route or path defined between H1B and green card. In my opinion one have to concentrate on making maximum money USD$.USD$ is the only thing thing country have left remaining with.There are other secure economies where you can invest maximum USD$ (from here) and get better return (better interest rates). Chasing American Dream should be now over after living in the dark harsh realities of US.Many indians are putting their savings in India...
more...
santa123
02-24 03:45 PM
Can an approved I-140 from Company A (future employer) be used to obtain an extension for H1 with company B (Current employer)?
Pls provide your inputs
Pls provide your inputs
2010 lara logan hot. lara logan
sivakumar
02-22 12:14 PM
any comment friends ?
more...
sanju_dba
08-10 02:45 PM
Count me in!
hair lara logan pictures
gc_on_demand
03-10 04:46 PM
>> Once they (USCIS) reached last quarter then they(DOS) will make EB2-I/C current and distribute those spill-over visas across EB.
Thanks MDix.
You have no idea. Have a good day, sir!
______________________
US citizen of Indian origin
This is another anti immigrant. Please ignore him
Thanks MDix.
You have no idea. Have a good day, sir!
______________________
US citizen of Indian origin
This is another anti immigrant. Please ignore him
more...
jerez_z
03-12 08:41 PM
It was a hard choice between Thirdworldman and Eilsoe... I had to go with Third cause his lighting was cool, and the setup was nice.
hot lara logan hot.
shankar_thanu
11-10 02:45 PM
I got a tracking number as well..
more...
house lara logan hot pics. quot
NKR
10-15 03:23 PM
Most immigrants and potential immigrants are within Top 20% of US population.
Can you tell us from where you got that information?.
Can you tell us from where you got that information?.
tattoo lara logan hot pics.
GCanyMinute
08-02 02:21 PM
you have already filed ur I485 right ? so what do u mean "y am i still waiting ?"
yes I did, but that's the thing.... what is the relation between "visa number" and the "greencard" ??? i'm confused.... whether I am still waiting for a "visa number" or for the "greencard".... please help!! :)
yes I did, but that's the thing.... what is the relation between "visa number" and the "greencard" ??? i'm confused.... whether I am still waiting for a "visa number" or for the "greencard".... please help!! :)
more...
pictures lara logan hot. lara logan
desi3933
02-11 12:03 PM
The visa numbers reported as used for FY 2009 is 141,020 from http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09...ort_TableV.pdf
This was the response i got from Ron Gotcher.
"The employment based category is entitled to use the "unused" family based numbers from the previous year. Last year, the quota for EB was the base of 140,000, plus another 13,000 shifted over from FB. Unfortunately, the CIS failed once again to approve enough cases to use up the entire available quota."
If this is true, we have lost a lot of visas last year.
Now with aprox. 10,000 visas shifted from FB, we should hope they use about 150,000 (140,000 + 10,000) this year.
Is there a way to confirm this? We got to do something to resolve this problem
As per this link
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY08-AR-TableV.pdf
Page 6, the total number of family based visas (that are subject to numerical limitations) is 226,105. Section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets an annual minimum family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000. So, family based visa numbers were fully used.
So where is 13,000 unused family numbers for FY2008 that should have been available for employment based visa numbers for FY2009?
__________________
Not a legal advice.
This was the response i got from Ron Gotcher.
"The employment based category is entitled to use the "unused" family based numbers from the previous year. Last year, the quota for EB was the base of 140,000, plus another 13,000 shifted over from FB. Unfortunately, the CIS failed once again to approve enough cases to use up the entire available quota."
If this is true, we have lost a lot of visas last year.
Now with aprox. 10,000 visas shifted from FB, we should hope they use about 150,000 (140,000 + 10,000) this year.
Is there a way to confirm this? We got to do something to resolve this problem
As per this link
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY08-AR-TableV.pdf
Page 6, the total number of family based visas (that are subject to numerical limitations) is 226,105. Section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets an annual minimum family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000. So, family based visa numbers were fully used.
So where is 13,000 unused family numbers for FY2008 that should have been available for employment based visa numbers for FY2009?
__________________
Not a legal advice.
dresses lara logan hot. lara logan
solaris27
07-27 07:48 AM
Never join SRG America (Bartronics America)
more...
makeup lara logan hot.
chanduv23
01-30 01:57 PM
It is just not desi compaanies, but small companies in general want to save every peenny and would like to extract more work and would not mind about ur status or legality but will just get their work done.
When you join desi company you have to deal with crap. Must be very careful while inbetween projects and make sure u don't accrue any bench time.
When you join desi company you have to deal with crap. Must be very careful while inbetween projects and make sure u don't accrue any bench time.
girlfriend lara logan hot pics. lara logan hot.
sukhwinderd
02-09 08:43 AM
I would like to join, I live in Orlando area... do you happen to hear from other interested members?
most likely one of my friends will join. so 3 of us till now. i am trying to check with my other friends.
most likely one of my friends will join. so 3 of us till now. i am trying to check with my other friends.
hairstyles lara logan hot. lara logan hot
rennieallen
03-05 07:41 PM
My $0.02:
Add this option to the poll as well to get a realistic picture:
I will not buy a house tomorrow (even if I was promised a GC this evening) because we are in a recession and/or the real estate market is spiralling downwards.
Now is *exactly* the right time to buy a house (at least in California). The prices are not spiraling down (they've already hit bottom). The interest rates are low and prices are low.
Add this option to the poll as well to get a realistic picture:
I will not buy a house tomorrow (even if I was promised a GC this evening) because we are in a recession and/or the real estate market is spiralling downwards.
Now is *exactly* the right time to buy a house (at least in California). The prices are not spiraling down (they've already hit bottom). The interest rates are low and prices are low.
amitps
09-26 11:27 AM
Eilene Zimmerman
freelance journalist
v and f: 619.582.2192
ezimmerman@sbcglobal.net
IV Leaders and Core are working on it...but feel free to call her / email her.
freelance journalist
v and f: 619.582.2192
ezimmerman@sbcglobal.net
IV Leaders and Core are working on it...but feel free to call her / email her.
signifer123
02-15 08:44 AM
Glad i already have an idea of how i'm gonna do it maybe later i'll start on it and give you guys a quick pic if grinch doesn't
Post a Comment