NKR
10-16 02:09 PM
Second: What happened (the flood of applications) were definitely caused by an ill thought Visa bulletin, but USCIS had no control over the massive amount of applications that they had to deal with. Even commercial operations (amazon etc) break down when overloaded. So to put extensive blame on USCIS for the "reaction" (I assume you are talking about the backlogs) is not right.
I beg to disagree. If it was the visa bulletin, then why did they process newer applications first?. That shows some disorder out there. Even when Amazon breaks up, they set their operations right. Here we are being fed the same story over and over again.
Coming to backlogs, they introduced perm before all the existing labor applications were processed and what happened after that?. All the existing applications were sent to the infamous backlog elimination centers. While those applications were waiting to be picked up, perm applications were being processed left, right and centre.
I beg to disagree. If it was the visa bulletin, then why did they process newer applications first?. That shows some disorder out there. Even when Amazon breaks up, they set their operations right. Here we are being fed the same story over and over again.
Coming to backlogs, they introduced perm before all the existing labor applications were processed and what happened after that?. All the existing applications were sent to the infamous backlog elimination centers. While those applications were waiting to be picked up, perm applications were being processed left, right and centre.
wallpaper wallpapers for samsung star
ramus
07-03 05:10 PM
Thank you.. Also please take part in media coverage thread...and also ask other members to contribute.
Contributed $100 for the lawsuit.
Confirmation Number: 40W931175C853351T.
Contributed $100 for the lawsuit.
Confirmation Number: 40W931175C853351T.
superdude
08-06 05:04 PM
Got email approvals on our I485 with PD of Mar10 2006 on EB-2.. Was at NSC.. Looks like they are processing beyond the Mar1st cutoff date..
How come your priority date in the profile says Jan 06. And now you say Mar10 got approved. Please share more information on your case.
Priority Date:
Service Center:
Received Date:
Notice Date:
Changeability Country
How come your priority date in the profile says Jan 06. And now you say Mar10 got approved. Please share more information on your case.
Priority Date:
Service Center:
Received Date:
Notice Date:
Changeability Country
2011 Samsung Star S5230 | New
greyhair
02-09 03:42 PM
And reply you will never get.
I'm not holding my breath any more.
I'm not holding my breath any more.
more...
johnwright03
07-01 09:38 AM
06/30/2007: Potential EB Visa Number Exhaution in July and Probable Actions of State Department or USCIS
* By now, people understand that the sources of potential action by the State Department or USCIS are predicated on the two important facts. One was the information from a government source that there were only about 40,000 numbers left for the entire EB visa numbers for the FY 2007 which ends on September 30, 2007. The second important fact was that reportedly the USCIS alone had far more than 40,000 I-485 applications in the backlog queue that were reportedly ready for approval. Considering the fact that the immigrant visa numbers are consumed by the approval of I-485 applications by the USCIS and the approval of immigant visa applications in the consular processing by visa posts througout the world, 40,000 visa numbers could be fairly quickly exhausted in early July 2007. This prediction was exacerbated by the information that the USCIS was apparently picking up the pace of I-485 adjudications lately.
* Obviously the State Department has been in communication with the USCIS and was well aware of the situation. Sources reported that the State Department might revise the July Visa Bulletin either Monday or Tuesday to reflect the situation. However, it is unclear at this point whether this will occur on Monday or Tuesday or, for that matter, some time soon, particulary considering the ongoing uproar in the nation. Assuming that the EB immigrant visa number will be exhausted before the end of July, from the government perspectives, they may have two options to handle this matter. One is the State Department revises the Visa Bulletin based on the newly developed facts and predictions. The other option is that the State Department does not take any action of revising the Visa Bulletin but just notify the USCIS when the visa numbers for certain categories are exhausted. The initial sources of rumor was the former possibility. However, as updated by the AILA afterwards, it might or might not happen.
* Whether the State Department revises the July visa bulletin or not, the fact will remain that 40,000 numbers could indeed be run out in a fairly short period of time in July. It is too obvious that under the statute, when the visa numbers are exhausted, the USCIS will not be able to approve any I-485 applications, and for that reason, the USCIS may wrongly reject the incoming I-485 applications or return I-485 applications which were received after the date when the visa number is exhausted. This happened for the "other worker" category in June when the priority date was current in June for certain other workers. The issue of legality of such action of the USCIS is rooted in the required distinction of the USCIS statutory mandates between its job of adjudication of 485 applications "already in the pipeline" and its job of "accepting new 485 applications." Arguably, when the visa number runs out, there is no question about that the USCIS should not and cannot adjudicate and approve any 485 applications. But there is no legal basis that the USCIS should not and cannot "accept" new 485 applications when the cases fall within the cut-off date of the monthly visa bulletin. If the State Department attempts to revise the July Visa Bulletin, probably they are doing it to overcome the predicament of the USCIS that will face in rejecting the new 485 applications. The problem is the State Department's own legal problem or authority to revise the published Visa Bulletin. Accordingly, either USCIS or State Department will be liable for either abuse of power or arbitrary act depending on who acts. The AILF is planning to sue the USCIS for rejecting "other worker" new 485 applications in June probably on ultra vires or other statutory authority grounds. Should the same thing happen in July, the AILF intends to extend its lawsuit to cover the July 2007 485 applicants, probably in the form of class action. What happens if the State Department revises the Visa Bulletin and the USCIS rejects the new applications based on the new Visa Bulletin? Strictly speaking, there may be no cause of action against the USCIS in that it followed the State Department's Visa Bulletin for the month of July. In this case, probably the lawsuit will have to be directed to the State Department for violation of law in revising the visa bulletin. We will soon find out.
* Where does this leave to the July 485 applicants? Fact remains that all likelihood, the annual limit may reach fairly early in July and they should file their cases before the visa posts and the USCIS exhaust all the numbers. They have to do this probably for the two reasons. One is that should the government take the second option of rejecting new cases after reaching the limit just as we experienced in the other worker cases, those who filed the I-485 application before that date will not be affected. Those who files the application after the date of exhaution and receive rejection of the 485 applications may be entitled to sue the USCIS either in a class action or individually. Secondly, if the government takes the first option of the State Department revising the July Visa Bulletin, they will have to sue the State Department and for that purpose, they should have filed I-485 applications within July 2007. Otherwise, they may have a standing to sue the State Department.
* For the foregoing reasons, we urge the July 485 filers to file the applications as soon as possible. At the same time, we urge the State Department and the USCIS not to take any actions to avoid the lawsuits. They should keep accepting I-485 applications even after the enhaution of the FY 2007 numbers, even though they will not be able to adjudicate these applications until the visa numbers become current again. Again, the agencies should distinguish the requirement for adjudication of 485 applications and the requirement for acceptance of new applications. These are two separate things.
* By now, people understand that the sources of potential action by the State Department or USCIS are predicated on the two important facts. One was the information from a government source that there were only about 40,000 numbers left for the entire EB visa numbers for the FY 2007 which ends on September 30, 2007. The second important fact was that reportedly the USCIS alone had far more than 40,000 I-485 applications in the backlog queue that were reportedly ready for approval. Considering the fact that the immigrant visa numbers are consumed by the approval of I-485 applications by the USCIS and the approval of immigant visa applications in the consular processing by visa posts througout the world, 40,000 visa numbers could be fairly quickly exhausted in early July 2007. This prediction was exacerbated by the information that the USCIS was apparently picking up the pace of I-485 adjudications lately.
* Obviously the State Department has been in communication with the USCIS and was well aware of the situation. Sources reported that the State Department might revise the July Visa Bulletin either Monday or Tuesday to reflect the situation. However, it is unclear at this point whether this will occur on Monday or Tuesday or, for that matter, some time soon, particulary considering the ongoing uproar in the nation. Assuming that the EB immigrant visa number will be exhausted before the end of July, from the government perspectives, they may have two options to handle this matter. One is the State Department revises the Visa Bulletin based on the newly developed facts and predictions. The other option is that the State Department does not take any action of revising the Visa Bulletin but just notify the USCIS when the visa numbers for certain categories are exhausted. The initial sources of rumor was the former possibility. However, as updated by the AILA afterwards, it might or might not happen.
* Whether the State Department revises the July visa bulletin or not, the fact will remain that 40,000 numbers could indeed be run out in a fairly short period of time in July. It is too obvious that under the statute, when the visa numbers are exhausted, the USCIS will not be able to approve any I-485 applications, and for that reason, the USCIS may wrongly reject the incoming I-485 applications or return I-485 applications which were received after the date when the visa number is exhausted. This happened for the "other worker" category in June when the priority date was current in June for certain other workers. The issue of legality of such action of the USCIS is rooted in the required distinction of the USCIS statutory mandates between its job of adjudication of 485 applications "already in the pipeline" and its job of "accepting new 485 applications." Arguably, when the visa number runs out, there is no question about that the USCIS should not and cannot adjudicate and approve any 485 applications. But there is no legal basis that the USCIS should not and cannot "accept" new 485 applications when the cases fall within the cut-off date of the monthly visa bulletin. If the State Department attempts to revise the July Visa Bulletin, probably they are doing it to overcome the predicament of the USCIS that will face in rejecting the new 485 applications. The problem is the State Department's own legal problem or authority to revise the published Visa Bulletin. Accordingly, either USCIS or State Department will be liable for either abuse of power or arbitrary act depending on who acts. The AILF is planning to sue the USCIS for rejecting "other worker" new 485 applications in June probably on ultra vires or other statutory authority grounds. Should the same thing happen in July, the AILF intends to extend its lawsuit to cover the July 2007 485 applicants, probably in the form of class action. What happens if the State Department revises the Visa Bulletin and the USCIS rejects the new applications based on the new Visa Bulletin? Strictly speaking, there may be no cause of action against the USCIS in that it followed the State Department's Visa Bulletin for the month of July. In this case, probably the lawsuit will have to be directed to the State Department for violation of law in revising the visa bulletin. We will soon find out.
* Where does this leave to the July 485 applicants? Fact remains that all likelihood, the annual limit may reach fairly early in July and they should file their cases before the visa posts and the USCIS exhaust all the numbers. They have to do this probably for the two reasons. One is that should the government take the second option of rejecting new cases after reaching the limit just as we experienced in the other worker cases, those who filed the I-485 application before that date will not be affected. Those who files the application after the date of exhaution and receive rejection of the 485 applications may be entitled to sue the USCIS either in a class action or individually. Secondly, if the government takes the first option of the State Department revising the July Visa Bulletin, they will have to sue the State Department and for that purpose, they should have filed I-485 applications within July 2007. Otherwise, they may have a standing to sue the State Department.
* For the foregoing reasons, we urge the July 485 filers to file the applications as soon as possible. At the same time, we urge the State Department and the USCIS not to take any actions to avoid the lawsuits. They should keep accepting I-485 applications even after the enhaution of the FY 2007 numbers, even though they will not be able to adjudicate these applications until the visa numbers become current again. Again, the agencies should distinguish the requirement for adjudication of 485 applications and the requirement for acceptance of new applications. These are two separate things.
kondur_007
04-10 03:44 PM
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,
Here is what I think; possible answers/comments. I am not an expert but am thinking following:
1. Any category being "current" is based on "DOS's guesstimate" based on demand numbers they receive and so it is never "perfect". So yes, you are true that technically EB1 should be retrogressed "slightly", but considering the small number of spillover (now called fall down numbers) it used, it may not have been able to be predicted prior to the end of fiscal year.
2. That is the biggest hope and assumption that there will be more fall down from EB5 and EB1 due to "economy". Caveat is, more and more people are trying to switch to "current" categories and so actual usage may not be commensurate with "economy". We have never been given any "usage data". So everything is a pure guess on this front. Looking at data, I honestly do not see any difference in number of EB1 cases from 2008-2009-2010.
3. Yes, it is due to "spillover" from Family based category. (This is where DOS is using the word "spillover" and any visa number that go from one EB to another EB category, they all it "fall across" and "fall down"). These numbers used to be higher before and now lower as they are more efficient in using as many numbers as possible for a particular category.
4. Pending 485 data is extremely deceptive for "current" categories. Look at the approval timeframe of EB2 ROW or EB1 cases; majority of them are approved before ever counted as "pending". Remember. "pending cases" DO NOT reflect "usage".
The main thing missing in all these is the "USAGE", this should be a very easy information that can be made available by DOS, but they have not. If I had one "wish" to get one piece of info; would be this: "number of visa used in each category every month and YTD". Without that info, no prediction of spillover/fall down-across is ever possible.
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,
Here is what I think; possible answers/comments. I am not an expert but am thinking following:
1. Any category being "current" is based on "DOS's guesstimate" based on demand numbers they receive and so it is never "perfect". So yes, you are true that technically EB1 should be retrogressed "slightly", but considering the small number of spillover (now called fall down numbers) it used, it may not have been able to be predicted prior to the end of fiscal year.
2. That is the biggest hope and assumption that there will be more fall down from EB5 and EB1 due to "economy". Caveat is, more and more people are trying to switch to "current" categories and so actual usage may not be commensurate with "economy". We have never been given any "usage data". So everything is a pure guess on this front. Looking at data, I honestly do not see any difference in number of EB1 cases from 2008-2009-2010.
3. Yes, it is due to "spillover" from Family based category. (This is where DOS is using the word "spillover" and any visa number that go from one EB to another EB category, they all it "fall across" and "fall down"). These numbers used to be higher before and now lower as they are more efficient in using as many numbers as possible for a particular category.
4. Pending 485 data is extremely deceptive for "current" categories. Look at the approval timeframe of EB2 ROW or EB1 cases; majority of them are approved before ever counted as "pending". Remember. "pending cases" DO NOT reflect "usage".
The main thing missing in all these is the "USAGE", this should be a very easy information that can be made available by DOS, but they have not. If I had one "wish" to get one piece of info; would be this: "number of visa used in each category every month and YTD". Without that info, no prediction of spillover/fall down-across is ever possible.
more...
sbeyyala
12-27 05:43 PM
Great Idea. I spoke to Southern CA Telugu association executive members requesting them to forward this to all there members, I will update this forum once this message is sent out to all the members.
2010 Wallpapers Samsung Star S5230
485Mbe4001
07-28 03:55 PM
true to each his/her own, we can decide if we want to read the thread or not
simple enough..in the same token..this could be a form of self expression too..
http://outlookindia.com/full.asp?fodname=20080728&fname=email&sid=1
http://outlookindia.com/full.asp?fodname=20080728&fname=ajai&sid=1
I am reading about 16th century stuff here in this thread.
Let us go back to 10,000 B.C or further back (ice age or if possible even before).
Was there any gods (known to us) then (any religion for that matter)?
Gods came in to existence with human civilization. Initially as an answer to all things that were 'unknown' to human beings and then later as a 'tool' to insist discipline (in their own understanding as to what discipline is) among human beings.
We talk about Iran, Iraq, afghanistan wars, bomb blasts in India, poverty in places like somalia and in all of these INCIDENTS millions of innocents died/die. What are/were the 'Gods' doing? Can They not stop this from happening?
They won't. Because these are started by human beings and unless we stop it won't stop. Now don't direct me to a book or a PDF. Answer me straight.
Human beings are the most cruel/selfish creatures on earth. We are animals - well worse than them - social animals. This thread does not make any sense.
We are talking about our 'beliefs' here and that is decided by so many factors. Million people will have million different beliefs.
simple enough..in the same token..this could be a form of self expression too..
http://outlookindia.com/full.asp?fodname=20080728&fname=email&sid=1
http://outlookindia.com/full.asp?fodname=20080728&fname=ajai&sid=1
I am reading about 16th century stuff here in this thread.
Let us go back to 10,000 B.C or further back (ice age or if possible even before).
Was there any gods (known to us) then (any religion for that matter)?
Gods came in to existence with human civilization. Initially as an answer to all things that were 'unknown' to human beings and then later as a 'tool' to insist discipline (in their own understanding as to what discipline is) among human beings.
We talk about Iran, Iraq, afghanistan wars, bomb blasts in India, poverty in places like somalia and in all of these INCIDENTS millions of innocents died/die. What are/were the 'Gods' doing? Can They not stop this from happening?
They won't. Because these are started by human beings and unless we stop it won't stop. Now don't direct me to a book or a PDF. Answer me straight.
Human beings are the most cruel/selfish creatures on earth. We are animals - well worse than them - social animals. This thread does not make any sense.
We are talking about our 'beliefs' here and that is decided by so many factors. Million people will have million different beliefs.
more...
optimist578
01-31 03:16 PM
My brother had horror stories when he was working in CA. His close friend cousin owns a company and he blindely trusted him. They forced my brother to sign a contract in the amount of $10000 if he leaves the company. He spent there for 6 months and found it horrible. He finally decided to leave the company and lost 1.5 month pay. Now he has the following issues.
1. He did not get his W2. And the company is not responding to his queries for his W2
2. He had to pay the tax on the amount which he did not received any money for 1.5 months
I hate desi companies as they take advantage of people and threaten them. Please share your ideas how can he proceed on his situation.
Thanks.
IRS requires every employer to furnish W-2. Take a look at this:
http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=106470,00.html
1. He did not get his W2. And the company is not responding to his queries for his W2
2. He had to pay the tax on the amount which he did not received any money for 1.5 months
I hate desi companies as they take advantage of people and threaten them. Please share your ideas how can he proceed on his situation.
Thanks.
IRS requires every employer to furnish W-2. Take a look at this:
http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=106470,00.html
hair for samsung star s5230.
H1BLegal95
02-14 02:31 PM
now what the hell is ROW and ICMP ?
more...
hebron
08-10 06:13 PM
I feel frustrated at some peoples' unwillingness to admit that EB3 needs IV's help now more than ever. They are saying that nothing much can be done for EB3, as INS merely corrected its wrong interpretation in visa allocation
But, if we are all willing to put our hearts and minds to it we can surely come up with new ideas that will help our cause. Surely, laws are written so that justice can happen. So if justice is not happening, the law would have some answer, somewhere.
Let me put forward my idea.
The INA language says that until EB2 is not current, there will be no spillover to EB3. Agreed. But I would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis. That is, if in the year 2002 (for example) all EB2 has been satisfied, then the spillovers should go to year 2002 EB3.
Is this something IV can point out and fight for? Can EB3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
Hi gk_2000, May be I am the only one who doesn't understand the idea. If you don't mind could you please explain what you proposed with examples?
But, if we are all willing to put our hearts and minds to it we can surely come up with new ideas that will help our cause. Surely, laws are written so that justice can happen. So if justice is not happening, the law would have some answer, somewhere.
Let me put forward my idea.
The INA language says that until EB2 is not current, there will be no spillover to EB3. Agreed. But I would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis. That is, if in the year 2002 (for example) all EB2 has been satisfied, then the spillovers should go to year 2002 EB3.
Is this something IV can point out and fight for? Can EB3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
Hi gk_2000, May be I am the only one who doesn't understand the idea. If you don't mind could you please explain what you proposed with examples?
hot solo Wallpapers Samsung S5230
Keeme
10-20 06:07 PM
["We're continuing to have conversations with members of Congress, and we're open to ideas that they would put forward ... that would stimulate the economy and help us pull out of this downturn faster," White House press secretary Dana Perino said around noon Monday, shortly after Bernanke endorsed the need for a fresh and "significant" round of government action.]
If you want to sell your 'ideas', get her e-mail address and start sending e-mails to her.
Also we can start sending e-mails to Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke.
They have resources to put ideas to congress members and Congress members would listen them. Sending some 20-25 e-mails to them won't stop us doing what you guys are planning to do.
If you want to sell your 'ideas', get her e-mail address and start sending e-mails to her.
Also we can start sending e-mails to Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke.
They have resources to put ideas to congress members and Congress members would listen them. Sending some 20-25 e-mails to them won't stop us doing what you guys are planning to do.
more...
house Wanna share wallpapers for
geniousatwork
06-11 08:50 AM
done....me and my wife did it
tattoo samsung star s5230 white
sanju
09-11 12:05 PM
wow..they resume discussions on sept 18th?
There is a slight correction, they will resume 4 hours break time on sept 18th.
There is a slight correction, they will resume 4 hours break time on sept 18th.
more...
pictures for samsung star s5230.
indyanguy
02-20 03:47 PM
looks like there no hope for EB3 India to move further :(
Ya, no hope for EB3-India :(
Ya, no hope for EB3-India :(
dresses s5230 samsung star wallpapers
Tito_ortiz
11-19 12:09 PM
Please do not take any precipitated steps that harm yours status ! Calm down. This is still the strongest economy in the world. You don't want to miss this unique opportunity !
more...
makeup Wallpapers Samsung Star GT
reddymjm
09-10 06:12 AM
IF DOS does not make EB2 I C and EB3 ROW current before Jul 2011.
ROW world has a quota of 149,200 and pending applications of 100 + 44,800 = 44,900.
Lets say EB1, EB3 ROW uses 30K which I doubt will be far less than that, so there will be 70K visas just from ROW to spill to EB3 ROW. If DOS/USICS decides not to waste the Visas definetly EB3 Mexico and India should get a good share of that 70k. This 70k should even be more as there might be some unsed EB1.
THIS IS ALL VOID IF EB2 I C and EB3 ROW becoming Current before Jul 2011 and also if they start quarterly spill over.
Good luck guys.
ROW world has a quota of 149,200 and pending applications of 100 + 44,800 = 44,900.
Lets say EB1, EB3 ROW uses 30K which I doubt will be far less than that, so there will be 70K visas just from ROW to spill to EB3 ROW. If DOS/USICS decides not to waste the Visas definetly EB3 Mexico and India should get a good share of that 70k. This 70k should even be more as there might be some unsed EB1.
THIS IS ALL VOID IF EB2 I C and EB3 ROW becoming Current before Jul 2011 and also if they start quarterly spill over.
Good luck guys.
girlfriend wallpapers samsung.
ItIsNotFunny
10-15 02:28 PM
I have a doubt about what can be accomplished by the flower campaign. I am totally for it if it would help but just think - it is not in USCIS hands to assign more visas to EB3 or EB2. The number of visas is limited and the number of people waiting for the visas is huge. That is the whole cause of retrogression . If there were as many visas as the people everything would be current.
This is a simple matter of demand and supply . The thing that can help is visa recapture but that again USCIS can't do and only the Congress . What we need to do is point our efforts in the right direction .
Think how the supply is controlled?
Just as a hypothetical example, if USCIS makes a spill over policy that ROW can not lead any other country by more than 3 years.
If we try we can achieve something, atleast we can see some avenues. If we sit silent - Nope, then we are loosers not fighters.
This is a simple matter of demand and supply . The thing that can help is visa recapture but that again USCIS can't do and only the Congress . What we need to do is point our efforts in the right direction .
Think how the supply is controlled?
Just as a hypothetical example, if USCIS makes a spill over policy that ROW can not lead any other country by more than 3 years.
If we try we can achieve something, atleast we can see some avenues. If we sit silent - Nope, then we are loosers not fighters.
hairstyles Samsung S5230 Star Wallpapers
alex99
04-08 02:24 PM
(EB1)
2007 2006 2005
26,697 36,960 64,731
(EB2)
44,162 21,911 42,597
(EB3)
85,030 89,922 129,070
How come EB3 is getting major share from the annual limit for last three years(2007,2006, and 2005)
Gurus : please through some light on this?
2007 2006 2005
26,697 36,960 64,731
(EB2)
44,162 21,911 42,597
(EB3)
85,030 89,922 129,070
How come EB3 is getting major share from the annual limit for last three years(2007,2006, and 2005)
Gurus : please through some light on this?
virtual55
07-05 01:02 PM
Lets do some quick math here. Assuming that we have 500 guys who are paying. you make IV paid. You will have alteast another 200 guys who will realize the importance of IV and join. People have come to IV time and over when ever shyt has hit the roof and they will come.
700 is better or 500 with a boat load of people who are just hovering around is better?
and also core will have an idea of how much funds are available to them every month.
700 is better or 500 with a boat load of people who are just hovering around is better?
and also core will have an idea of how much funds are available to them every month.
dealsnet
05-27 08:18 PM
These from CBP website:
If the individual being searched has undergone the total transformation, the current gender of that person will dictate whether or not a male or female U.S. Customs and Border Protection officer performs the search.
If the individual is a natural male becoming a female and has breasts, but still retains male genitalia, a female officer will complete an above the waist search and a male officer will complete a below the waist search.
If the individual is a natural female becoming a male, and still retains female genitalia, a female officer will perform the search.
If the individual being searched has undergone the total transformation, the current gender of that person will dictate whether or not a male or female U.S. Customs and Border Protection officer performs the search.
If the individual is a natural male becoming a female and has breasts, but still retains male genitalia, a female officer will complete an above the waist search and a male officer will complete a below the waist search.
If the individual is a natural female becoming a male, and still retains female genitalia, a female officer will perform the search.
Post a Comment