BlueSunD
02-23 09:32 PM
Sounds good to me, I havn�t had too much spare time to work on my entrie... but let�s really hope people havn�t really forgot abou this battle! :puzzled:
wallpaper disease: visceral larva
vbkris77
04-10 12:28 PM
What you said is absolutely true. EB1 Last year and the year before saw lot more approvals than usual. My reasoning is that even though EB1 was current for all along, they never really approved I140s to give them GC. So In the overall clearing of I140s, CIS cleared lot more EB1 cases and became approved during last 2 years. If you look at the I140 completion in the dash board, it will be very much clear that the completions came down to 4 digits for each month from 5 digits. Receipts continued to be less than 5K per month.
This year, we may see a big dip in EB1 cases and larger EB2 spillover. EB4 spillover is ruled out after this bulletin.
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.
This year, we may see a big dip in EB1 cases and larger EB2 spillover. EB4 spillover is ruled out after this bulletin.
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.
gunabcd
07-13 10:57 PM
http://www.murthy.com/chertoff_murthy.html
July 12, 2007
VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS
Michael Chertoff, Esq.
Secretary
Department of Homeland Security
RE: USCIS Decision to Reject I-485 Filings
Dear Mr. Chertoff:
continue
Looks like "Jbpvisa" wanted to win the race of posting this article first, and he/she mis-spelled "Murthy" as Murphy. recently somebody came up with a "Secret News.." which was actually his own far fetched fantasy. I don't understand why some people are so thrilled about throwing around sensational sounding posts ? Isn't that similar to creating a chain email hoax?
July 12, 2007
VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS
Michael Chertoff, Esq.
Secretary
Department of Homeland Security
RE: USCIS Decision to Reject I-485 Filings
Dear Mr. Chertoff:
continue
Looks like "Jbpvisa" wanted to win the race of posting this article first, and he/she mis-spelled "Murthy" as Murphy. recently somebody came up with a "Secret News.." which was actually his own far fetched fantasy. I don't understand why some people are so thrilled about throwing around sensational sounding posts ? Isn't that similar to creating a chain email hoax?
2011 from Larval instarthe life
widad2020
01-16 04:37 PM
Good one man. I can see myself while reading your story.
more...
isantem
02-23 09:44 PM
I will attend the Advocacy Day April 2,3,4 and maybe 5 but I can't promise the 5.
I am coming from Richmond, VA and I can pick-up 3 more people from the area. I can also do carpool in DC during the events (Hotel - Captol Hill or Airport Capitol Hill)
I am coming from Richmond, VA and I can pick-up 3 more people from the area. I can also do carpool in DC during the events (Hotel - Captol Hill or Airport Capitol Hill)
delhikadesi
06-10 09:36 PM
done
more...
pappu
02-08 02:41 PM
In December, the CIS Ombudsman's Office began a pilot teleconference program on issues of concern to individuals and employers as they interface with USCIS. We have had three such pilot teleconferences so far and in February will continue with a few more. Please join us on Friday, February 16, from 11:00 a.m.-12:00 noon EST for the "Newark District Office: How Is It Working For You?" We look forward to hearing your comments, thoughts, and suggestions for improvement as well as any best practices you have noticed in your interaction with that office. We also would appreciate your thoughts regarding the Cherry Hill , NJ field office.
To participate in Friday's call, please RSVP to cisombudsman.publicaffairs@dhs.gov. The first 50 people to sign up will be able to participate and will receive a return email with the call-in information. If you are unable to participate on Friday, stay tuned for similar upcoming programs which will be posted on our website, www.dhs.gov/cisombudsman. Also, if you have a topic of interest for a future call, please send it to cisombudsman.publicaffairs@dhs.gov.
We appreciate your assistance with this pilot program.
Thank you,
Citizenship & Immigration Services Ombudsman
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop: 1225
Washington , DC 20528-1225
Office: 202-357-8100
www.dhs.gov/cisombudsman
To participate in Friday's call, please RSVP to cisombudsman.publicaffairs@dhs.gov. The first 50 people to sign up will be able to participate and will receive a return email with the call-in information. If you are unable to participate on Friday, stay tuned for similar upcoming programs which will be posted on our website, www.dhs.gov/cisombudsman. Also, if you have a topic of interest for a future call, please send it to cisombudsman.publicaffairs@dhs.gov.
We appreciate your assistance with this pilot program.
Thank you,
Citizenship & Immigration Services Ombudsman
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop: 1225
Washington , DC 20528-1225
Office: 202-357-8100
www.dhs.gov/cisombudsman
2010 saline reast implants.
my2239
06-11 08:38 AM
sent message
Thank you for creating the easy to use interface
Thank you for creating the easy to use interface
more...
immig4me
02-11 08:57 AM
/\/\/\/\/\/\
hair hair Saline Breast Implants
prioritydate
12-20 08:42 PM
Correct me if I am wrong, but you've had unexpired H1B while you were out of work. This is not considered unlawful presence. On top of that, violation of status determination can be done only by the USCIS (IO). If they did not inform you that you violated status, you are good to go.
Well, I moved a lot since 2001 and I don't know if the IO sent any documents to my previous address. Yes, I have unexpired H1B visa till Oct 2002(I-94 valid until Oct, 2002). In Apr, 2005, I went to Canada for stamping of my new H1B. I again made an appointment in Jan, 2008.
Well, I moved a lot since 2001 and I don't know if the IO sent any documents to my previous address. Yes, I have unexpired H1B visa till Oct 2002(I-94 valid until Oct, 2002). In Apr, 2005, I went to Canada for stamping of my new H1B. I again made an appointment in Jan, 2008.
more...
gsc999
09-11 04:25 PM
It is amazing to see so much positive energy.
I am from California and more than forty people are flying. Some people are making plans at the last moment to go. So there will more.
Guys this is not the time to think it is time to act.
Put DC rally on top of your agenda rest of the things can probably wait and you know it. Don't loose this historic moment to make a difference. IV probably won't be organizing such an event any time soon.
Come to DC, yes and make a difference. You are important and let no one take you for granted anymore.
I am from California and more than forty people are flying. Some people are making plans at the last moment to go. So there will more.
Guys this is not the time to think it is time to act.
Put DC rally on top of your agenda rest of the things can probably wait and you know it. Don't loose this historic moment to make a difference. IV probably won't be organizing such an event any time soon.
Come to DC, yes and make a difference. You are important and let no one take you for granted anymore.
hot saline reast implants.
reddymjm
10-16 01:36 PM
Please work on the IV approved action items before working on these.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=22037
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=18955
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=22037
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=18955
more...
house Chrysomya bezziana Larvae,
nitlsu
11-20 05:37 PM
Here's the correct link,
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/afm_ch22_091206R.pdf
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/afm_ch22_091206R.pdf
tattoo Parasitic wasp larvae in a
va_dude
03-19 08:44 AM
Guys... can we drop the whole discussion about this guy's name.
It is no advisable to discuss such topics in public forums on the internet. These keywords attract unwarranted attention.
It is no advisable to discuss such topics in public forums on the internet. These keywords attract unwarranted attention.
more...
pictures used to treat larval forms of
pappu
01-18 01:06 PM
we now have 110 members signed up for monthly contributions. Thanks to all those that signed up.
dresses piercing infection. hot
yabadaba
09-10 04:07 PM
thx for catching that.. i m sending it now to my school
more...
makeup Larvae Unite Ratto
reddymjm
09-10 12:38 PM
EB2 I/C won't be current in the next 4-5 Years, the EB2 I/C demand till date (Today’s Date) is in the 100K - 120K Range. The EB2I/C demand till Jul/Aug 2007 is easily in the 40-45K Range so it will require a very over optimistic scenario to clear by Sep 2011. EB3 ROW will reach end of 2006 by FY 2011. So there is a very long way to go. All the movement is under many assumptions most important being the economy and unemployment, anytime this changes all spillover will collapse and there will really be no difference between EB2 I/C and EB3 I/C.
where is this 120k EB2I and C coming up from, those who haven't filed 485 yet? So you are expecting another july 2007 making all EB2 Current.
where is this 120k EB2I and C coming up from, those who haven't filed 485 yet? So you are expecting another july 2007 making all EB2 Current.
girlfriend Actual reast jul doneask Skin
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,
hairstyles larvae,
anilsal
12-26 04:10 PM
You have pretty much written my hit list. I could not have put it in better words.
Just to add I work for a bank and to open an account within bank I had to go through a long paper process, whereas any outsider (Citizen/GC) can get it in 5 min online.
But as a bank employee I do understand that while we at bank would love to open all accounts online (less cost and all) the US government has restrictions under Know your customer requirement, that prevents us from doing so. So while most of the business understand that they are losing business they are pretty much restricted by the laws of the land.
there are two ways out of it:
1. Support legislative action for getting GC faster, for that support IV.
2. Make the immigrant group a huge economic success that the business has incentive to provide it better services.
But the whole mortgage industry is providing home loans to illegals. Now how did they work around it? Of course the competition defined it.
Just to add I work for a bank and to open an account within bank I had to go through a long paper process, whereas any outsider (Citizen/GC) can get it in 5 min online.
But as a bank employee I do understand that while we at bank would love to open all accounts online (less cost and all) the US government has restrictions under Know your customer requirement, that prevents us from doing so. So while most of the business understand that they are losing business they are pretty much restricted by the laws of the land.
there are two ways out of it:
1. Support legislative action for getting GC faster, for that support IV.
2. Make the immigrant group a huge economic success that the business has incentive to provide it better services.
But the whole mortgage industry is providing home loans to illegals. Now how did they work around it? Of course the competition defined it.
CADude
07-23 05:27 PM
Will wait couple of weeks? worse come worse, will refile in Oct (by than USCIS will take some decision :))
My attorney has specifically advised us that we don't have to file again. My application reached NSC on July 2nd.
My attorney has specifically advised us that we don't have to file again. My application reached NSC on July 2nd.
bfadlia
02-03 02:46 PM
Do you only do what IV support ? Did I say anywhere I want IV o endorse it ?
I did not mean to run you down, but was questioning whether such thread can get us anywhere.. u obviously can't do this by yourself and if u seek the support of some IV members to do something that will harm other IV members this will only divide and make us weaker in seeking a siolution that helps us all
I did not mean to run you down, but was questioning whether such thread can get us anywhere.. u obviously can't do this by yourself and if u seek the support of some IV members to do something that will harm other IV members this will only divide and make us weaker in seeking a siolution that helps us all
Post a Comment