nixstor
07-05 02:17 PM
Oh, you are just mean now!:p
I think there should be a big a** button on the top of this screen that says "donations for immigration causes" or whatever and those who feel they can afford to do it will do it, otherwise making paid membership a requirement will severely cut down on the number of people coming on here. Makes no difference to me, there is tons of forums like this online. This is my favorite so far though.
What difference does the membership of people make if they do not understand the agenda/motive of the organization? May be you are being mean in not understanding the agenda and needs of your favorite organization.
I think there should be a big a** button on the top of this screen that says "donations for immigration causes" or whatever and those who feel they can afford to do it will do it, otherwise making paid membership a requirement will severely cut down on the number of people coming on here. Makes no difference to me, there is tons of forums like this online. This is my favorite so far though.
What difference does the membership of people make if they do not understand the agenda/motive of the organization? May be you are being mean in not understanding the agenda and needs of your favorite organization.
wallpaper quot;To thine own self be truequot;
saro28
07-12 06:48 PM
Same boat as you! Legally in this country for more than 11 years! Hope they approve on time. Debating whether to extend the EAD or wait for the card
understandably so.. but I am now current after a looooong time. EB3 Dec 2001 PD. I can finally file the AOS for my wife who has been on H4 for the last 2 yrs... excellent!
understandably so.. but I am now current after a looooong time. EB3 Dec 2001 PD. I can finally file the AOS for my wife who has been on H4 for the last 2 yrs... excellent!
rock
06-22 10:54 PM
When you get 485 approval you will not need EAD or AP :D
It's OK to file for EAD and AP yourself, I did it 4 times but you need I-485 receipt notice and I-140 receipt and then approval notice to do that. So if you are wiling to wait till your lawyer get notices (it could be months for those who are filing in July) and your employer and lawyer will provide you a copy of all notices - it's fine to file yourself.
Hi voldemar,
I am also in the similar but not exact situation. Recently I changed the employer. My new employer is going to file I-140 and I-485 using the Labor substitution.I also want to file EAD and AP but the company attorney is saying it is safer to file the EAD and AP once the I-140 is approved. Can any one please answer this is true or not? Should I wait for I-140 to be approved or should I try convince the attorney to file EAD and AP also along with I-140 and I-485. I have one more question which is if We do not file the EAD and AP along with the I-485 and once the priority dates are retrogessed. Can we file EAD and AP even though the priority dates are not current and our I-485 is pending?
I would appreciate the answers and any official links if available.
Thanks
It's OK to file for EAD and AP yourself, I did it 4 times but you need I-485 receipt notice and I-140 receipt and then approval notice to do that. So if you are wiling to wait till your lawyer get notices (it could be months for those who are filing in July) and your employer and lawyer will provide you a copy of all notices - it's fine to file yourself.
Hi voldemar,
I am also in the similar but not exact situation. Recently I changed the employer. My new employer is going to file I-140 and I-485 using the Labor substitution.I also want to file EAD and AP but the company attorney is saying it is safer to file the EAD and AP once the I-140 is approved. Can any one please answer this is true or not? Should I wait for I-140 to be approved or should I try convince the attorney to file EAD and AP also along with I-140 and I-485. I have one more question which is if We do not file the EAD and AP along with the I-485 and once the priority dates are retrogessed. Can we file EAD and AP even though the priority dates are not current and our I-485 is pending?
I would appreciate the answers and any official links if available.
Thanks
2011 2010 to thine own self be true to thine own self be true tattoo. to thine
virtual55
07-05 01:16 PM
Yes I aggree. I think we have reached a stage where there are at least around 1000 members who flock to IV, when they need help on any GC related issue.
Why not make IV paid membership? IV core team's work and persistance has made this site an integral part of all GC apsirants' lives.
Peole value this site/it's opinions etc. There is nothing wrong in make them pay for it ONLY because we are on so shoestring budget. Our efforts can be more fruitful if core is having enough funds at disposal.
Those who care about IV efforts ,who care about themselves and GC will definitely join and those who wanted this site to be non paid will realize and will also join as paid members later on.
Why not make IV paid membership? IV core team's work and persistance has made this site an integral part of all GC apsirants' lives.
Peole value this site/it's opinions etc. There is nothing wrong in make them pay for it ONLY because we are on so shoestring budget. Our efforts can be more fruitful if core is having enough funds at disposal.
Those who care about IV efforts ,who care about themselves and GC will definitely join and those who wanted this site to be non paid will realize and will also join as paid members later on.
more...
jsb
08-20 10:05 AM
To understand the Visa bulletin, one must first understand that it is not the USCIS that computes or post VB, it is the DOS. DOS also considers those undergoing consular processing. In this case, the dates are in favor of those doing CP as we all know that most of those who are qualified to apply for AOS have already applied.
Retrogression is a CP-friendly event.
Can one initiate CP if so chosen in I-140, but already applied for AOS?
Retrogression is a CP-friendly event.
Can one initiate CP if so chosen in I-140, but already applied for AOS?
alex99
11-14 05:09 PM
bump
more...
rajkr
06-11 11:48 AM
Everyone is again talking about ifs and buts. Guys why do not you put your hard work on what is more important than what is never ever going to happen. People with a GC, if this Bill passes, they are not going to renew your GC also. How's about that? People with a US citizenship, with previous GC status, they will not renew the USA passport, if this Bill passes. How's about that?
So forget all these bogus bills, and support our main agenda, which is to remove the Backlogs. If you do not have any new news, then sit idle, but please do not spread these bogus out-of-world stories.
So forget all these bogus bills, and support our main agenda, which is to remove the Backlogs. If you do not have any new news, then sit idle, but please do not spread these bogus out-of-world stories.
2010 To Thine own self be true and
DarkChild
02-16 03:25 AM
@ thirdworldman: WOW!
more...
gauravster
05-26 05:40 PM
This border patrol authority applies 100 miles from International border. Guess what, most of US population is in that region, all of NJ, MA, most of CA, etc etc as all are within 100 miles from the border (including the sea border, which marks international maritime border). Though not normally done, Border Patrol can set up checkpoints anywhere in this region. I remember reading in depth of this ridiculous rule sometime back.
Found this when I googled. Borderpatrol seems to have the authority to do whatever they did within 100 miles off any international border. It falls under 8 CFR 287.1. Entire state of NH is within 100 miles of Canada.
http://www.usborderpatrol.com/Border_Patrol608_2.htm
Found this when I googled. Borderpatrol seems to have the authority to do whatever they did within 100 miles off any international border. It falls under 8 CFR 287.1. Entire state of NH is within 100 miles of Canada.
http://www.usborderpatrol.com/Border_Patrol608_2.htm
hair to thine own self be true tattoo. “To Thine Own Self Be True” to thine own
kondur_007
04-10 10:28 AM
Does anyone have numbers for spillover last year category wise? I mean, last year how many EB4, EB5 and EB1 left out visas got spilled over to EB2? Thanks...
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.
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.
more...
nmdial
03-16 11:46 AM
Dear All,
I'll be driving from Harrisburg, PA on Saturday, Sunday, and attending the advocacy event on Monday only. It would be really helpful if someone could host me for one night.
Regards,
nmdial
I'll be driving from Harrisburg, PA on Saturday, Sunday, and attending the advocacy event on Monday only. It would be really helpful if someone could host me for one night.
Regards,
nmdial
hot to thine own self be true
sk2006
03-01 03:23 PM
"No way. House prices will never go down in California. Certainly not in bay area. Government will do all the magic to stop the crash... Not affordable, doesn't matter. Google stocks will make a lot of rich guys. BTW renting is throwing money away.":D:D:D:rolleyes:
I love the guys making those arguments.
Now it is India's turn.
"No way, India's real estate will crash. It has a huge population and a huge demand for 70 lakh apartments( even though there are only few people who can afford it)".:rolleyes:
One more argument I hear.
Prices in good school districts will never go down.
They are still selling more than asking prices..
Now This sounds what I heard in 2001 dot com crash. When dot coms started crashing, people used to say stock of big ships like Cisco, Sun, Lucent etc can not and WILL NOT be affected.. It is just the small companies linked only to dot com will suffer.
Sounds similar?
I love the guys making those arguments.
Now it is India's turn.
"No way, India's real estate will crash. It has a huge population and a huge demand for 70 lakh apartments( even though there are only few people who can afford it)".:rolleyes:
One more argument I hear.
Prices in good school districts will never go down.
They are still selling more than asking prices..
Now This sounds what I heard in 2001 dot com crash. When dot coms started crashing, people used to say stock of big ships like Cisco, Sun, Lucent etc can not and WILL NOT be affected.. It is just the small companies linked only to dot com will suffer.
Sounds similar?
more...
house To Thine Own Self Be True for
rpatel
07-24 08:42 AM
To the core group/Senior Members,
If I understand it right, the ability to concurrently file I40/I485 was introduced by the legacy INS through a memo in July of 2002 and it went effective almost immediately on July 31st 2002. I've tried to search for news archives on different law websites and to best of my knowledge it was purely an executive decision taken by INS governing body and no congressional or judicial intervention was needed to allow concurrent filing. In a very similar fashion, the new USCIS has indicated that it wants to discontinue concurrent filing in near future...an executive decision again.
Is it a possibility to get an audience with the USCIS director/start a letter campaign with the goal of getting them issue a memo allowing filing of I485/EAD even if the visa number is not available? The adjucation of the case would obviously happen only after visa number becomes available but as we all know this will be a big relief for all those who want to use AC21 provisions.
Passage of CIR/SKIL is very important in the longer run to reduce the overall greencard processing time and alleviate heavy backlogs but if we get this small relief right now it would help a lot of individuals from retrogressed countries waiting to file I485...and the good thing is, it looks like USCIS might have the ability to effect this change without a lengthy legislative process.
Any thoughts ??
If I understand it right, the ability to concurrently file I40/I485 was introduced by the legacy INS through a memo in July of 2002 and it went effective almost immediately on July 31st 2002. I've tried to search for news archives on different law websites and to best of my knowledge it was purely an executive decision taken by INS governing body and no congressional or judicial intervention was needed to allow concurrent filing. In a very similar fashion, the new USCIS has indicated that it wants to discontinue concurrent filing in near future...an executive decision again.
Is it a possibility to get an audience with the USCIS director/start a letter campaign with the goal of getting them issue a memo allowing filing of I485/EAD even if the visa number is not available? The adjucation of the case would obviously happen only after visa number becomes available but as we all know this will be a big relief for all those who want to use AC21 provisions.
Passage of CIR/SKIL is very important in the longer run to reduce the overall greencard processing time and alleviate heavy backlogs but if we get this small relief right now it would help a lot of individuals from retrogressed countries waiting to file I485...and the good thing is, it looks like USCIS might have the ability to effect this change without a lengthy legislative process.
Any thoughts ??
tattoo to thine own self be true
ashatara78
03-10 04:38 PM
The EB immigration system was fine before then; thus, the problem is supply/demand, not the immigration policies.
I have no comments about comparison of family vs EB but the EB immigration system was not find before then. I have friends who were in this system in the late 1980s, early 1990s and had huge problems - had to wait a long time, could not switch jobs, could not visit back home for sibling's weddings etc.
It was probably fine during the Clinton administration for a few years 1996-1999 but I only know of a few cases, not many.
I have no comments about comparison of family vs EB but the EB immigration system was not find before then. I have friends who were in this system in the late 1980s, early 1990s and had huge problems - had to wait a long time, could not switch jobs, could not visit back home for sibling's weddings etc.
It was probably fine during the Clinton administration for a few years 1996-1999 but I only know of a few cases, not many.
more...
pictures to thine own self be true
anukcs
09-26 09:53 AM
I sent a message
dresses hairstyles to thine own self be true tattoo to thine own self be true tattoo
walking_dude
10-29 10:22 PM
I'm surprised only 70 members are interested in accurate prediction of future VB movements, and orderly processing of 485 applications instead of the current random lottery!
It would help lot of us make informed decisions if we were to know how many are in the queue and how long we have to wait.We can spend much of the wasted Tracking, VB prediction time with our families. Don't you think it's important? And that your time is too precious to be wasted over such pursuits?
It would help lot of us make informed decisions if we were to know how many are in the queue and how long we have to wait.We can spend much of the wasted Tracking, VB prediction time with our families. Don't you think it's important? And that your time is too precious to be wasted over such pursuits?
more...
makeup house #39;To thine own self be true#39;, to thine own self be true tattoo.
vivid_bharti
05-06 05:08 PM
We thought the same way 3 years ago, 2 years ago, and last year too, but nothing happened, it could be another year and we could be sitting here in same situation 2 years from now. Question is when IV has already collected money for FOIA request than why it is not proceeding in that direction ? We get it in time or not is not the question now.... Its too late. I am sure in coming 15 months whole immigration system will be changed. May be we will see point based system or something different. And at that time information will be no use.
girlfriend To Thine Own Self Be True.
satishku_2000
07-09 03:18 PM
Her PD is 2003 .. She has a reason to be pissed off ...
hairstyles hot Cooridinates Tattoo Via to thine own self be true tattoo. to thine own
grinch
03-11 04:15 PM
Here's my entry with wire :
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v403/grinchvader/final.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v403/grinchvader/wire.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v403/grinchvader/final.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v403/grinchvader/wire.jpg
logiclife
02-17 04:47 PM
Immigration Voice is a volunteer organization. It has been assured several times here on this thread that it is a part of "transparency" issue on IV goals as mentioned in the Brochure. Transparency includes everything. Including name-check process.
Its a sub-item and not a main item because it is ONE OF THE SEVERAL administrative issues facing us.
However, if people feel that this issue is not receiving enough attention, then there are few things to do besides posting here in this thread (posting is welcome):
1. Call the phone number and speak to a volunteer. You will be connected to someone who is admin/founder of this organization. The phone number is under "Contact Us" menu.
2. Go to resources menu and find out how to contact your lawmaker. See if you can find an appointment and apprise them of the issue. Although there is no legislative solution to this problem and it remains an enforcement/administrative issue, the basic feature of the government includes the congressional oversight on the executive(DOS, FBI, USCIS etc in this case).
3. Ask your lawyer to file a lawsuit against the FBI for causing you irreparable damage due to mental agony, loss of pay due to missed promotions, job opportunities etc.
4. Call your local media or national media and tell them the our dear FBI takes 36 months to check if a permenant residency applicant is a terrorist/criminal/shop-lifter/DUI/DWI etc or not while that applicant is free to work on provisional work-permit called EAD issued by USCIS. Two things: if there is nothing wrong with the guy, he suffers long wait for his greencard. If he is a criminal, he works and enjoys the American dream on his EAD instead of being deported.
5. Send letters to Department of Justice (top levels) since FBI I think falls under Department of Justice.
--logiclife.
Its a sub-item and not a main item because it is ONE OF THE SEVERAL administrative issues facing us.
However, if people feel that this issue is not receiving enough attention, then there are few things to do besides posting here in this thread (posting is welcome):
1. Call the phone number and speak to a volunteer. You will be connected to someone who is admin/founder of this organization. The phone number is under "Contact Us" menu.
2. Go to resources menu and find out how to contact your lawmaker. See if you can find an appointment and apprise them of the issue. Although there is no legislative solution to this problem and it remains an enforcement/administrative issue, the basic feature of the government includes the congressional oversight on the executive(DOS, FBI, USCIS etc in this case).
3. Ask your lawyer to file a lawsuit against the FBI for causing you irreparable damage due to mental agony, loss of pay due to missed promotions, job opportunities etc.
4. Call your local media or national media and tell them the our dear FBI takes 36 months to check if a permenant residency applicant is a terrorist/criminal/shop-lifter/DUI/DWI etc or not while that applicant is free to work on provisional work-permit called EAD issued by USCIS. Two things: if there is nothing wrong with the guy, he suffers long wait for his greencard. If he is a criminal, he works and enjoys the American dream on his EAD instead of being deported.
5. Send letters to Department of Justice (top levels) since FBI I think falls under Department of Justice.
--logiclife.
BumbleBee
08-16 06:22 PM
Because you guys are not as clever as EB2s.
Very Good first post :eek:!!! Please hide wherever you were hiding till now, STOP judging.
clever adj
Definition: bright, ingenious
Antonyms: awkward, foolish, idiotic, ignorant, naive, senseless, stupid, unclever
Very Good first post :eek:!!! Please hide wherever you were hiding till now, STOP judging.
clever adj
Definition: bright, ingenious
Antonyms: awkward, foolish, idiotic, ignorant, naive, senseless, stupid, unclever