bigboy007
06-11 04:34 PM
Why are Harkin and Sanders supporting this bill. They are both children of immigrants. They need to understand the struggle their parents went through.
There were many instances where IV tried to reach out to them, They are doing this not because they are ignorant. They are aware of the outcomes but their vision is narrowed.
There were many instances where IV tried to reach out to them, They are doing this not because they are ignorant. They are aware of the outcomes but their vision is narrowed.
wallpaper dragon vs tiger tattoo
rodnyb
04-11 01:05 AM
I agree wholeheartedly. CIS has the burden for cases. DOS should do sth. too, not just a number game. They should have exact visa approval number published every months. Due to this past pdf error, I have concerns on all their numbers published.. did they give enough numbers to CIS.. are all those reports which show they approved 140K EB real?
If we know, they issued only 50K in 11 months, and we should have concern they can let CIS approve 90K in one month due to spill over... make sense? Or they can make it up some way?
Man, we paid for all these, and they even didn't blink...
Here, DOS has a bigger role than CIS...
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.
If we know, they issued only 50K in 11 months, and we should have concern they can let CIS approve 90K in one month due to spill over... make sense? Or they can make it up some way?
Man, we paid for all these, and they even didn't blink...
Here, DOS has a bigger role than CIS...
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.
Jaime
09-12 11:08 AM
Who's still thinking about going or not? Email us! We'll help you in any way possible! Let's all go together!
2011 dragon and tiger tattoo. tiger
alterego
07-04 08:31 PM
Everyone blaming CIS/DOS needs to understand some basics behind this mess. Before going to conclude anything, first, one should read all the ombudsman reports for last 3 or 4 years. Former INS or current USCIS’s functions and operations were not questionable and not known to public till ombudsman office was established. Ombudsman has helped customers and keep helping to improve efficiency of CIS. Ombudsman main concern (or goal) have been over the 4 years are
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The “documentarily qualified 485 applications” mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made “current” for all EB categories. This is how they determine “current” or “over-subscribed” and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered “Current.”
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be “oversubscribed” and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories “current” for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories “current” ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of “current” there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making “current” for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as “current” in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
Excellent analysis and reccomendations. I feel that a visa number should be assigned at the point of 485 filing. If there is a problem it can be returned to the pool. That will be the least disruptive way to allot numbers in a timely fashion. In the end, that is likely to be the change that will come out of this.
This way, it will offer prospective applicants a more clear viewpoint of what they are up against when they consider their immigration options. i.e if you know you will have to wait 10 yrs to file an AOS even if you have an approved immigrant petition ala the family based immigrants, your plans would be different. You might not feel the wait worthwhile or even if you do, you do it fully aware of the consequences, 10 yrs exploitative employer on h1b etc.
If you notice, the level of hubris and cry is less in family based immigration even though the waits are longer. Atleast they know before they apply!
Your last point about a visa recapture is on the money. It is the least disruptive and easiest of the possible changes for current EB applicants in the current hostile atmosphere. It comes across as a rectification of USCIS inefficiency rather than a request for more immigration, which the public has clearly rejected at this time. If we can get 100-150K visas recaptured, this will greatly help EVERYONE in the EB queue for various reasons. It will buy us the 1-2 yrs needed before immigration is seriously addressed again. It will help those waiting to file 485 to file, those in 485 to have a hope to get out etc. It will help heavily retrogressed countries to keep getting more visas than the annual caps etc. I think that is something everyone can agree on as well.
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The “documentarily qualified 485 applications” mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made “current” for all EB categories. This is how they determine “current” or “over-subscribed” and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered “Current.”
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be “oversubscribed” and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories “current” for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories “current” ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of “current” there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making “current” for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as “current” in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
Excellent analysis and reccomendations. I feel that a visa number should be assigned at the point of 485 filing. If there is a problem it can be returned to the pool. That will be the least disruptive way to allot numbers in a timely fashion. In the end, that is likely to be the change that will come out of this.
This way, it will offer prospective applicants a more clear viewpoint of what they are up against when they consider their immigration options. i.e if you know you will have to wait 10 yrs to file an AOS even if you have an approved immigrant petition ala the family based immigrants, your plans would be different. You might not feel the wait worthwhile or even if you do, you do it fully aware of the consequences, 10 yrs exploitative employer on h1b etc.
If you notice, the level of hubris and cry is less in family based immigration even though the waits are longer. Atleast they know before they apply!
Your last point about a visa recapture is on the money. It is the least disruptive and easiest of the possible changes for current EB applicants in the current hostile atmosphere. It comes across as a rectification of USCIS inefficiency rather than a request for more immigration, which the public has clearly rejected at this time. If we can get 100-150K visas recaptured, this will greatly help EVERYONE in the EB queue for various reasons. It will buy us the 1-2 yrs needed before immigration is seriously addressed again. It will help those waiting to file 485 to file, those in 485 to have a hope to get out etc. It will help heavily retrogressed countries to keep getting more visas than the annual caps etc. I think that is something everyone can agree on as well.
more...
vin13
03-03 12:02 PM
We have been successful in arranging tickets for a couple of individuals.
Thanks for the donors of air tickets and air miles. We can still use some more air miles if some one has closer to 20K-25K air miles.
Please PM me if anyone wishes to donate air miles.
Thanks
Thanks for the donors of air tickets and air miles. We can still use some more air miles if some one has closer to 20K-25K air miles.
Please PM me if anyone wishes to donate air miles.
Thanks
mallu
02-14 01:08 PM
...... But truly they don't want too many immigrants from one or two specific country. ...
What about taking into account the current US population ( and calculating the per country counts and then decide which country needs more or less limit ? ) . In that case, i think many europian countries will be severely backlogged. :-)
What about taking into account the current US population ( and calculating the per country counts and then decide which country needs more or less limit ? ) . In that case, i think many europian countries will be severely backlogged. :-)
more...
NKR
03-17 10:50 AM
Before retrogression started in "October 2005 Bulletin, Nov 2005 effective", there are quite a few people who applied for I-485 and had PD upto sept 2004. Those cases are approved. I know couple of cases myself.
I think I was current then and I missed out on that date since I was stuck in backlog elimination centre. you could be right.
I think I was current then and I missed out on that date since I was stuck in backlog elimination centre. you could be right.
2010 dragon and tiger tattoos.
ajthakur
07-15 07:08 PM
I spoke with my ex employer. He never did revoke the 140. He is also willing to provide an EVL. I can join him once I get GC. I felt sorry for having left him earlier.Talk to an attorney soon then.
more...
ArunAntonio
04-23 12:17 AM
I was the first person in the QnA - disappointed at the intent of this meeting - they really care about illegal immigration - not once legal immigrants were discussed. It was a farce and IV was just used as an organization to show support to him - very disappointed.:mad:
gautamagg,
I was at the meeting and I was really taken aback by your question, it was totally out of context, I think I understand your position which is 'You wanted GC - you are not getting it - you decide to go back - but before that you decide to attend school - but cant get F1 coz you extablizhed Intent to Immigrate' -- This is a unique situation... atleast not something the larger IV community is affected by, but the accusing tone of your question to the Rep. was uncalled for .. I dont even know what you expected out of this meeting for your situation .. just try to get some perspective and place things incontext.. and again numbers matter.. if there were thousands of ppl in your situation your problem would have been addressed... anyways.. I beg to differ on your opinion about it being a farce.. There is effort being put to address the issues and IV has to maintain presence and make sure our issues are out there and are being noticed and not forgotten.. and thats what precisely happened yesterday.. IV members who are affected by Retrogression made their presence felt, the Core members were present on the dias rubbing shoulders with Congressman Gutierrez and representing the retrogressed community.
Your issue.. my friend .. unfortunately is not on the mandate of IV or the congressman..no doubt you were disappointed.. but good luck with you efforts and struggle.
gautamagg,
I was at the meeting and I was really taken aback by your question, it was totally out of context, I think I understand your position which is 'You wanted GC - you are not getting it - you decide to go back - but before that you decide to attend school - but cant get F1 coz you extablizhed Intent to Immigrate' -- This is a unique situation... atleast not something the larger IV community is affected by, but the accusing tone of your question to the Rep. was uncalled for .. I dont even know what you expected out of this meeting for your situation .. just try to get some perspective and place things incontext.. and again numbers matter.. if there were thousands of ppl in your situation your problem would have been addressed... anyways.. I beg to differ on your opinion about it being a farce.. There is effort being put to address the issues and IV has to maintain presence and make sure our issues are out there and are being noticed and not forgotten.. and thats what precisely happened yesterday.. IV members who are affected by Retrogression made their presence felt, the Core members were present on the dias rubbing shoulders with Congressman Gutierrez and representing the retrogressed community.
Your issue.. my friend .. unfortunately is not on the mandate of IV or the congressman..no doubt you were disappointed.. but good luck with you efforts and struggle.
hair Wolf Dragon Tiger Color Tattoo
ajthakur
07-14 06:41 PM
You are correct. I joined the new employer on H1 B transfer. I didnt use AC21(ead)to work for my new employer.
Nowhere in this post, do I see the fact that the OP used AC21 when he moved in August 2007.
Does not AC21 come in when you have used EAD to move instead of a H1 transfer?
In my understanding, by doing a H1 transfer rather than invoking AC21, the OP preserved the status of the original petition unless the employer revoked the I140 for fraud. If that's the case, shouldn't the RFE be worded differently?
If that's not the case, all the OP has to do is craft a response to the RFE with an Employment Verification Letter from his current employer attesting to the similar nature of job etc.. and move forward.
Either way, an attorney would be the safest bet..
Nowhere in this post, do I see the fact that the OP used AC21 when he moved in August 2007.
Does not AC21 come in when you have used EAD to move instead of a H1 transfer?
In my understanding, by doing a H1 transfer rather than invoking AC21, the OP preserved the status of the original petition unless the employer revoked the I140 for fraud. If that's the case, shouldn't the RFE be worded differently?
If that's not the case, all the OP has to do is craft a response to the RFE with an Employment Verification Letter from his current employer attesting to the similar nature of job etc.. and move forward.
Either way, an attorney would be the safest bet..
more...
PresidentO
02-11 01:23 PM
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV.pdf
Family based visa used for FY2009 = 215,343
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = 10,567
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2010.
*********
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY08-AR-TableV.pdf
Family based visa used for FY2008 = 226,105
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = ZERO
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2009.
Always go by the facts.
___________________
Not a legal advice.
You rock dude! Am I the only one to remember how visa numbers spill between FB and EB every other year? (or) Am I hallucinating?
Family based visa used for FY2009 = 215,343
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = 10,567
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2010.
*********
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY08-AR-TableV.pdf
Family based visa used for FY2008 = 226,105
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = ZERO
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2009.
Always go by the facts.
___________________
Not a legal advice.
You rock dude! Am I the only one to remember how visa numbers spill between FB and EB every other year? (or) Am I hallucinating?
hot dragon tiger tattoo.
minimalist
09-10 12:29 PM
girijas, your comment is both funny and sad... we are behind horses.. :(
The picture is not pretty.
The picture is not pretty.
more...
house Dragon And Tiger Tattoos
saggi13
01-22 08:15 PM
Texcan,
Thanks for reading a long vent. Trust me, what happened to me in 9 months could happen to people in matter of moments.
So, I still consider myself lucky. Please pray for all those who arent lucky enough.
Thanks
Thanks for reading a long vent. Trust me, what happened to me in 9 months could happen to people in matter of moments.
So, I still consider myself lucky. Please pray for all those who arent lucky enough.
Thanks
tattoo Tiger tattoos, along with
quizzer
04-08 04:19 PM
I look at this bill in a different perspective:
1. This will give the Indian IT companies an opportunity to move up the value chain. Rather than body shop its employees to clients...they can have all the IT work done at its development locations. Also they can fill americans for half of its US workforce.
2. It will put an end to 100% H1b bodyshoppers who just make money without having any office and putting their employees onto client locations. These scrupulous bodyshops even dont pay on bench.
Thanks
1. This will give the Indian IT companies an opportunity to move up the value chain. Rather than body shop its employees to clients...they can have all the IT work done at its development locations. Also they can fill americans for half of its US workforce.
2. It will put an end to 100% H1b bodyshoppers who just make money without having any office and putting their employees onto client locations. These scrupulous bodyshops even dont pay on bench.
Thanks
more...
pictures chinese dragon tattoo
sunny1000
09-19 11:47 PM
Whilst in general a name change does sound like a good idea, we have spent a lot of time and money making sure that Immigration Voice as an organization is known.
It makes no sense to through that away
Good point...
One thing we can do immediately is to add the words " An organisation of Legal Immigrants" or something to that effect under the globe which says immigration voice on it on the top left corner of the web page. This will immediately make know of our status to those who visit us..Just my 25 cents...;)
It makes no sense to through that away
Good point...
One thing we can do immediately is to add the words " An organisation of Legal Immigrants" or something to that effect under the globe which says immigration voice on it on the top left corner of the web page. This will immediately make know of our status to those who visit us..Just my 25 cents...;)
dresses Japanese Tattoo #4
danila
07-10 09:09 AM
Certainty is releated to belief not reality. It still means the name check was not completed. The law does not say they "when you are certain that the FBI name check can be cleared..please allot a visa."
Nowhere in that statement he says anything about the name check. It might be just the expired biometrics. And coming from some anonymous immigration officials how can you be sure that the information is absolutely credible or represents the facts and not their speculations? Were those applications really approved or they've just requested the visa numbers for them?
Nowhere in that statement he says anything about the name check. It might be just the expired biometrics. And coming from some anonymous immigration officials how can you be sure that the information is absolutely credible or represents the facts and not their speculations? Were those applications really approved or they've just requested the visa numbers for them?
more...
makeup Tiger Forearm Tattoo Gallery 3
PHANI_TAVVALA
05-15 10:46 AM
Thanks Phani!!.
This is great information. I will do some research. How much GMAT score is required?
Probably I will check on the site.
Are you married and kids? You are doing online one right?
GMAT score alone is not the criteria but they are a bit liberal on the online version. Your recommendations matter and your experience, essay and previous education credentials matter too. I am not sure about the cut-off for KD but I started part-time and converted to KD when I moved out of Indiana. My GMAT score was either 620 or 630, which I thought was on the lower end of the curve. I started my M.B.A a year before I got married and found it much easier to manage my time then. But these days my wife keeps complaining that I spend way too much time studying rather then with her. Managing with kids is going to be even more tough but definitely not unmanageable. I have colleagues, in my M.B.A program who are married with 2-3 young kids, who have said that I made the right move by trying to complete my M.B.A before having kids.
My intent is to just let you know that it won't be a cake-walk but then online will allow you lot more flexibility and time than regular or part-time M.B.A. You do not need to worry about attending classes and getting struck in traffic, assuming you could find a good school close by.
This is great information. I will do some research. How much GMAT score is required?
Probably I will check on the site.
Are you married and kids? You are doing online one right?
GMAT score alone is not the criteria but they are a bit liberal on the online version. Your recommendations matter and your experience, essay and previous education credentials matter too. I am not sure about the cut-off for KD but I started part-time and converted to KD when I moved out of Indiana. My GMAT score was either 620 or 630, which I thought was on the lower end of the curve. I started my M.B.A a year before I got married and found it much easier to manage my time then. But these days my wife keeps complaining that I spend way too much time studying rather then with her. Managing with kids is going to be even more tough but definitely not unmanageable. I have colleagues, in my M.B.A program who are married with 2-3 young kids, who have said that I made the right move by trying to complete my M.B.A before having kids.
My intent is to just let you know that it won't be a cake-walk but then online will allow you lot more flexibility and time than regular or part-time M.B.A. You do not need to worry about attending classes and getting struck in traffic, assuming you could find a good school close by.
girlfriend Tiger Tattoos
Maverick1
07-29 01:12 PM
i guess now i know why EB3 I is being ignored, is is a VERY VERY VERY INDIA specific issue ? :p
:D:D
:D:D
hairstyles new tiger tattoo tribal
never_giveup
09-10 02:40 PM
can some one pls post the link for live telecast
thanks
http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/calendar.html
Look for today's date and link next to it.
thanks
http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/calendar.html
Look for today's date and link next to it.
sc3
10-20 01:06 PM
Hello there,
I cant less concur to what you jsut said, if someone has something to say and critique , they can very well post their response or send a private message.
Anyways the focus is the campaign. Have we decided on what and when we should do this flower campaign?
I request all IV members, to please unite and do something, we all need to be mobile and create more awareness.
Have we all forgotten how much publicity we got in 2007? lets all wait till the election day is over and the right candidate is elected.
Then we should plan a rally.
I am lucky, because I work hard. We all can be lucky as well, all we need to do is, work hard on these rally's. A flower campaign, a rally and maybe someone earlier suggested the EB community should take one day off work and attend that rally. This way, they will understand our Importance
How stupid can someone be to give me a red for my previous post.
Now for this. Why should someone hide behind a red dot (just to say "you suck" and things like that). Most, if not all, red dots are personal attack on the person rather than the post. The very few reds which actually are justifiable are the ones where someone is given the red for his offensive remarks.
I realize that a side discussion on red dots is not germane to this post, but it is the participants in the discussion here who have brought it up. As evidenced by so many posts that keep happening now and then, some feel bad to post when people intimidate them with reds. Of course, some may say that red dots doesn't matter, but to a new member (who has contrarian views), getting red pretty much means some people are not going to take them seriously.
I cant less concur to what you jsut said, if someone has something to say and critique , they can very well post their response or send a private message.
Anyways the focus is the campaign. Have we decided on what and when we should do this flower campaign?
I request all IV members, to please unite and do something, we all need to be mobile and create more awareness.
Have we all forgotten how much publicity we got in 2007? lets all wait till the election day is over and the right candidate is elected.
Then we should plan a rally.
I am lucky, because I work hard. We all can be lucky as well, all we need to do is, work hard on these rally's. A flower campaign, a rally and maybe someone earlier suggested the EB community should take one day off work and attend that rally. This way, they will understand our Importance
How stupid can someone be to give me a red for my previous post.
Now for this. Why should someone hide behind a red dot (just to say "you suck" and things like that). Most, if not all, red dots are personal attack on the person rather than the post. The very few reds which actually are justifiable are the ones where someone is given the red for his offensive remarks.
I realize that a side discussion on red dots is not germane to this post, but it is the participants in the discussion here who have brought it up. As evidenced by so many posts that keep happening now and then, some feel bad to post when people intimidate them with reds. Of course, some may say that red dots doesn't matter, but to a new member (who has contrarian views), getting red pretty much means some people are not going to take them seriously.
Jaime
09-18 09:15 PM
First, I would like to congratulate everyone who contributed to the success of the DC rally on Sep 18, 2007...
I was there and I am proud of our ImmigrationVoice members for this FANTASTIC effort!
We are just starting and taking baby steps with these kind of activities...So, anything I mention below is not a critic, but a humble feedback/opinion...Please don't get offended.
1. We must immediately change our name to LegalImmigrationVoice.org( LIV.org)...But still Immigrationvoice.org should work....This should be done ASAP...like within next week...Please conduct a poll for this ASAP.
2. We must/should always wear formal suits for these kind of rally....this would definitely give us a very high status and definitely there will not be any confusion if the rally is by legal or illegal immigrants. Even if it is hot summer, we must stick to this dress code...
3. In all the signs we had today, we need to have one line clearly in bold as "Legal Immigrants - LegalImmigrationVoice.com - Faster Green cards for Legal highly skilled Immigrants" - bold and clear..
Also, all our T-shirts should have
"Legal Immigrants - LegalImmigrationVoice.com - Faster Green cards for Legal highly skilled Immigrants" in the back
4. One of the rally participants told me that a guide was telling a tourists bus passengers quote "these folks are illegal immigrants...", the rally participant who heard this went to the guide and explained that we are legal immigrants...if you think the guide is not smart enough to read our signs and understand that we are legal immigrants, read next point...
5. On the rally route, one gentleman, who was dressed in suit, looked well educated came up to me and asked what we are concerned about...I told him that green card process for Legal Immigrants is taking between 5-10 years and we are requesting to expedite it.....so it is clear that all our signs need this text at the bottom "Legal Immigrants - LegalImmigrationVoice.com - Faster Green cards for Legal highly skilled Immigrants"
We cannot be perfect the first or second time....Lets learn from this rally....
A pat in the back to all those who attended the rally....
Good Luck
I totally agree, even the congressman that addressed us had the two (legal and illegal confused and lumped together) He was great otherwise, but it's just that Congress and Americans are so used to associating the two, or they plain don't know about "legal highly-skilled". A major next step we need to undertake is education! Whenever we've explained the difference to our American friends they wholeheartedly support us!
I was there and I am proud of our ImmigrationVoice members for this FANTASTIC effort!
We are just starting and taking baby steps with these kind of activities...So, anything I mention below is not a critic, but a humble feedback/opinion...Please don't get offended.
1. We must immediately change our name to LegalImmigrationVoice.org( LIV.org)...But still Immigrationvoice.org should work....This should be done ASAP...like within next week...Please conduct a poll for this ASAP.
2. We must/should always wear formal suits for these kind of rally....this would definitely give us a very high status and definitely there will not be any confusion if the rally is by legal or illegal immigrants. Even if it is hot summer, we must stick to this dress code...
3. In all the signs we had today, we need to have one line clearly in bold as "Legal Immigrants - LegalImmigrationVoice.com - Faster Green cards for Legal highly skilled Immigrants" - bold and clear..
Also, all our T-shirts should have
"Legal Immigrants - LegalImmigrationVoice.com - Faster Green cards for Legal highly skilled Immigrants" in the back
4. One of the rally participants told me that a guide was telling a tourists bus passengers quote "these folks are illegal immigrants...", the rally participant who heard this went to the guide and explained that we are legal immigrants...if you think the guide is not smart enough to read our signs and understand that we are legal immigrants, read next point...
5. On the rally route, one gentleman, who was dressed in suit, looked well educated came up to me and asked what we are concerned about...I told him that green card process for Legal Immigrants is taking between 5-10 years and we are requesting to expedite it.....so it is clear that all our signs need this text at the bottom "Legal Immigrants - LegalImmigrationVoice.com - Faster Green cards for Legal highly skilled Immigrants"
We cannot be perfect the first or second time....Lets learn from this rally....
A pat in the back to all those who attended the rally....
Good Luck
I totally agree, even the congressman that addressed us had the two (legal and illegal confused and lumped together) He was great otherwise, but it's just that Congress and Americans are so used to associating the two, or they plain don't know about "legal highly-skilled". A major next step we need to undertake is education! Whenever we've explained the difference to our American friends they wholeheartedly support us!