singhsa3
03-04 11:21 AM
I am expectin WSJ to pay a visit. So I changed the first message.
wallpaper Cute Love Poems For Guys
kashish333
09-30 05:56 PM
Here is my problem
I am currently on L1 with company A which is valid till Jan 2013. Company B has also filed for H1 for me which is not yet approved. I want to go back to home country on vacation. If my H1 gets approved
1. can I continue to work on L1.
2. What if I go back to home country for vacation. can I enter the US on L1 again. Will there be any problem? what will happne to my H1 in that case.
Please Advice
I am currently on L1 with company A which is valid till Jan 2013. Company B has also filed for H1 for me which is not yet approved. I want to go back to home country on vacation. If my H1 gets approved
1. can I continue to work on L1.
2. What if I go back to home country for vacation. can I enter the US on L1 again. Will there be any problem? what will happne to my H1 in that case.
Please Advice
giddu
07-03 05:32 PM
My action plan:
1. Contribute $100 to IV - Done
2. Send flowers to USCIS for July 10
3. Write emails to local Congressmen and Senators
1. Contribute $100 to IV - Done
2. Send flowers to USCIS for July 10
3. Write emails to local Congressmen and Senators
2011 love poems for parents. love
WeShallOvercome
07-20 02:38 PM
Few employers and few lawyers didn't apply for EAD/AP on July 2nd. My employer said they applied for 485 but not EAD/AP. They will wait for receipt notice and then apply for EAD/AP.
After Aug 17th, can we still apply for EAD/AP knowing dates won't be current.
Thanks.
you don't need PD's to be current to apply for interim benefits like EAD/AP
After Aug 17th, can we still apply for EAD/AP knowing dates won't be current.
Thanks.
you don't need PD's to be current to apply for interim benefits like EAD/AP
more...
techskill
09-18 12:28 PM
Then we shud ask him what are the fundametals of the economy.Because once he said he doesnt know anything abt economy.
msp1976
04-10 03:14 PM
Can apply through company A...
more...
priderock
04-10 04:12 PM
How about sending back all H1Bs ? If there is no cheap labor around , the salaries for all others (Citizens and GC holders) go up. I so want to see 250 an hour rates.
Applying your logic , you should get a job in your home country if you are smart enough.
If you want a good discussion on a topic stop generalizing things and do not use rants like racist engineers etc. When you make an assumption please be clear about. You have assumed most people work for consulting companies and most people are frustrated with it. Not so. I don't work for them and I am not frustrated with them. My only concern with them is they are exploiting the system to their advantage and at my cost. This has two fold affect not only the take cut from your salary but also put a bad name to H1B visa program in general. Whoever wrote the bill or whatever are the consequences there is definitely some good things in that bill. Let me list out how some provisions are good:
1. If you are employable in US and you have the skills you will get the job with or without these middlemen. They come into picture only because they can start a corporation and then start the exploitation game. If a bill is taking these guys out what's wrong with it ? This will allow genuine corporations to hire the right candidates.
2. Putting 30 days of ad. to hire US citizens first ? What's wrong with it ? If their skills are really outdated and you are the best and the brightest you will get the job.
If you need more evidence of why H1B program needs reform look no further than H1B cap used up on first day. This has put good undue hard ship for good candidates while Infosys/Wipro etc will once again take the lion's share of H1B numbers. Why do you want them to win at your cost ? Stop calling people affected by this mess as "Racist Engineers". Try to put yourself in their shoes and some of these practices are affecting both the H1B visa holders (with indentured servitude) and citizens with wage depression. No body wins in the end but the people who are exploiting the system.
Applying your logic , you should get a job in your home country if you are smart enough.
If you want a good discussion on a topic stop generalizing things and do not use rants like racist engineers etc. When you make an assumption please be clear about. You have assumed most people work for consulting companies and most people are frustrated with it. Not so. I don't work for them and I am not frustrated with them. My only concern with them is they are exploiting the system to their advantage and at my cost. This has two fold affect not only the take cut from your salary but also put a bad name to H1B visa program in general. Whoever wrote the bill or whatever are the consequences there is definitely some good things in that bill. Let me list out how some provisions are good:
1. If you are employable in US and you have the skills you will get the job with or without these middlemen. They come into picture only because they can start a corporation and then start the exploitation game. If a bill is taking these guys out what's wrong with it ? This will allow genuine corporations to hire the right candidates.
2. Putting 30 days of ad. to hire US citizens first ? What's wrong with it ? If their skills are really outdated and you are the best and the brightest you will get the job.
If you need more evidence of why H1B program needs reform look no further than H1B cap used up on first day. This has put good undue hard ship for good candidates while Infosys/Wipro etc will once again take the lion's share of H1B numbers. Why do you want them to win at your cost ? Stop calling people affected by this mess as "Racist Engineers". Try to put yourself in their shoes and some of these practices are affecting both the H1B visa holders (with indentured servitude) and citizens with wage depression. No body wins in the end but the people who are exploiting the system.
2010 love poems for guy. love poems
monkeyman
09-26 02:58 PM
It is not about politics, it is about ignorance of the people (including reporters). It is explainable, though - what do you know about... I don't know, laws around transporting hazardous materials, something you have never been exposed or subject to? Next to nothing. That's what an average American knows about immigration - their closest brush with that law was when their co-worker adopted a child from abroad. Of course, they do not know the difference between worker visas, and employment based immigrant visas (don't they even sound alike?).
Hmmmmm... I do not have any exposure to transportation industry - but the regulations are straight forward - you cannot transport hazardous materials on normal routes (there are designated routes depending on the HAZMAT code) - definitely, no tunnels / bridges. Declarations have to be obtained, MSDS (Material Safety Data sheets ) must be accessible and personnel involved need to be trained and understand the health risks. The type of material must be indicated on a HAZMAT chart and color coded!!!
And I see your point, but what do you know about the visa rules of your country? Let's say, I want to work in your country - what visa do I need - is there a CAP or quota system - validity, my rights etc. Its wrong to blame average American or any generic population because you are in deep shit. Just my thoughts - no hard feelings!!! Its more about educating people who are interested and IV (henceforth Legal IV) is the platform for doing just that.
Hmmmmm... I do not have any exposure to transportation industry - but the regulations are straight forward - you cannot transport hazardous materials on normal routes (there are designated routes depending on the HAZMAT code) - definitely, no tunnels / bridges. Declarations have to be obtained, MSDS (Material Safety Data sheets ) must be accessible and personnel involved need to be trained and understand the health risks. The type of material must be indicated on a HAZMAT chart and color coded!!!
And I see your point, but what do you know about the visa rules of your country? Let's say, I want to work in your country - what visa do I need - is there a CAP or quota system - validity, my rights etc. Its wrong to blame average American or any generic population because you are in deep shit. Just my thoughts - no hard feelings!!! Its more about educating people who are interested and IV (henceforth Legal IV) is the platform for doing just that.
more...
bobzibub
07-17 10:34 AM
NUMBERS USA TAX SERVICES!!!!!!
On an H1b? THEN PAY NO TAX!!!! WOOHOO!!!!!!!
All their "research" is suspect, this is just the most obvious. I did start building spreadsheets to regress employment/unemployment numbers with each immigration law they cite. There was no significant correlation. I should really do that again and post it somewhere.... Gotta get some better regression software though. Work like this will point out that the king has no clothes.
I'm ashamed to be a member of numbersUSA!!! :D
Cheers,
-b
On an H1b? THEN PAY NO TAX!!!! WOOHOO!!!!!!!
All their "research" is suspect, this is just the most obvious. I did start building spreadsheets to regress employment/unemployment numbers with each immigration law they cite. There was no significant correlation. I should really do that again and post it somewhere.... Gotta get some better regression software though. Work like this will point out that the king has no clothes.
I'm ashamed to be a member of numbersUSA!!! :D
Cheers,
-b
hair love poems for guy.
onemorecame
11-08 09:59 AM
Did you receive physical card?
yes i got my physical card, what about you bro? did you got approval?
yes i got my physical card, what about you bro? did you got approval?
more...
srkamath
07-20 05:34 PM
The data is organized by Govt Fiscal Year (Oct thru Sept) and by priority date not approval date. Thus anyone applying in Oct-Dec of 2005 will show up in the 2006 file.
You will notice that the PERM receipt date is always between Oct of previous year and Sept of next year. I also think that the pre-PERM data is a little suspect. I am the only GC applicant from my company and my PD is July 2004, but my case does not show up in the 2004 file. I guess during the transfer from DOL to BEC's my case got lost in translation though I got an approval in Feb 2007.
You are right about the gov fiscal being Oct - Sep.
Even if the numbers you stated are for fiscal and not calendar years, there is still an error.
To illustrate my point, there are 2766 India-Approved PERM cases of FY2005 i.e. with PDs between 3/29/2005 and 9/30/2005 in the 2006 data sheets.
Therefore total PERM cases for Fiscal 2005 ~ > 4116
Unfortunately, the 2007 data sheets do not have the "Received Date" field - i'm guessing that is not entirely accidental on part of the DOL.
You will notice that the PERM receipt date is always between Oct of previous year and Sept of next year. I also think that the pre-PERM data is a little suspect. I am the only GC applicant from my company and my PD is July 2004, but my case does not show up in the 2004 file. I guess during the transfer from DOL to BEC's my case got lost in translation though I got an approval in Feb 2007.
You are right about the gov fiscal being Oct - Sep.
Even if the numbers you stated are for fiscal and not calendar years, there is still an error.
To illustrate my point, there are 2766 India-Approved PERM cases of FY2005 i.e. with PDs between 3/29/2005 and 9/30/2005 in the 2006 data sheets.
Therefore total PERM cases for Fiscal 2005 ~ > 4116
Unfortunately, the 2007 data sheets do not have the "Received Date" field - i'm guessing that is not entirely accidental on part of the DOL.
hot love poems for guy. love poems
feedfront
10-12 04:19 PM
Hello!
I don't know if anyone is in or has been in a similar situation. But would appreciate sound advise on the next steps...
thecipher5
Do you have attorney? It will be better if he/she write letter for status of the case. I had RFE in last year (around summer'09). My PD was current since Aug, but no change in the status or specific response (tried congressman, senator, SR). But, I got new RFE (medical report required) when my attorney contacted them. I don't know what triggered it, but my attorney contacted USCIS last (after I did not get any specific info from other sources).
You can write to USCIS director. Someone here in this forum wrote to director, when he did not get any progress on his SR.
What's your receipt date? I heard that they are using receipt date. I know couple of people (including myself) whose application was picked (or generated RFE) matched the pattern of receipt date not PD.
I don't know if anyone is in or has been in a similar situation. But would appreciate sound advise on the next steps...
thecipher5
Do you have attorney? It will be better if he/she write letter for status of the case. I had RFE in last year (around summer'09). My PD was current since Aug, but no change in the status or specific response (tried congressman, senator, SR). But, I got new RFE (medical report required) when my attorney contacted them. I don't know what triggered it, but my attorney contacted USCIS last (after I did not get any specific info from other sources).
You can write to USCIS director. Someone here in this forum wrote to director, when he did not get any progress on his SR.
What's your receipt date? I heard that they are using receipt date. I know couple of people (including myself) whose application was picked (or generated RFE) matched the pattern of receipt date not PD.
more...
house love poems for guy. love poems
Madhuri
01-16 03:17 PM
Just set up monthly $20 contribution from my bank account.
tattoo love poems for guy. love poems
delax
07-22 05:15 PM
I485 Receipt I485 Pending I485-processed FB I-485 EB I-485
Oct-07 237915 842231 50548 42500 8048
Nov-07 51773 845691 48313 42500 5813
Dec-07 35020 833141 47570 42500 5070
Jan-08 35771 813238 55674 42500 13174
Feb-08 38210 787516 63932 42500 21432
Mar-08 43548 762938 68126 42500 25626
Apr-08 50951 742597 71292 42500 28792
May-08 45357 739934 48020 42500 5520
* Data from USCIS months processing report
** Oct 07 Receipt number changed from 137915 to 237915 (just looked incorrect)
** FB is flat (730k-220k CP / 12 months)
We have 113475 EB I-485 processed until May 08 (in 8 months), if we take 80% acceptance rate the number of visa used will be 90780 and if we use 90% acceptance rate USCIS may have used 102127 visas.
Wow! Great Job. I guess I can call you vdlrao2. That means there are around 40k visas available and most should go to EB2-I.......
Oct-07 237915 842231 50548 42500 8048
Nov-07 51773 845691 48313 42500 5813
Dec-07 35020 833141 47570 42500 5070
Jan-08 35771 813238 55674 42500 13174
Feb-08 38210 787516 63932 42500 21432
Mar-08 43548 762938 68126 42500 25626
Apr-08 50951 742597 71292 42500 28792
May-08 45357 739934 48020 42500 5520
* Data from USCIS months processing report
** Oct 07 Receipt number changed from 137915 to 237915 (just looked incorrect)
** FB is flat (730k-220k CP / 12 months)
We have 113475 EB I-485 processed until May 08 (in 8 months), if we take 80% acceptance rate the number of visa used will be 90780 and if we use 90% acceptance rate USCIS may have used 102127 visas.
Wow! Great Job. I guess I can call you vdlrao2. That means there are around 40k visas available and most should go to EB2-I.......
more...
pictures love poems for guy. poems for
morpheus
07-24 10:21 AM
I believe you are overlooking three very important facts.
1. The USCIS main priority at the moment is to reduce backlogs. Unfortunately retrogression works in their favor because it reduces the processing they have to do. Your proposal would increase the processing by forcing them to accept 485 filings and building up a backlog.
2. The USCIS administrator would not be allowed to make a decision like this without input from Congress. It's radically different from concurrent processing, which is a minor administrative change. With AC21, filing 485 without a visa number would allow people to change jobs etc, so it is in the realm of political decisions, not administrative.
3. The USCIS can't even manage to get premium I140 processing (planned since 2002), multi-year EAD's (overdue for years now) or issue regulations on AC21 (due since 2000). Even Congress can barely get them to act!
1. The USCIS main priority at the moment is to reduce backlogs. Unfortunately retrogression works in their favor because it reduces the processing they have to do. Your proposal would increase the processing by forcing them to accept 485 filings and building up a backlog.
2. The USCIS administrator would not be allowed to make a decision like this without input from Congress. It's radically different from concurrent processing, which is a minor administrative change. With AC21, filing 485 without a visa number would allow people to change jobs etc, so it is in the realm of political decisions, not administrative.
3. The USCIS can't even manage to get premium I140 processing (planned since 2002), multi-year EAD's (overdue for years now) or issue regulations on AC21 (due since 2000). Even Congress can barely get them to act!
dresses funny love poems for girl.
Dolly20
10-03 01:14 PM
Hi!
When i was in India, my company applied for H1B visa. In the meantime I got married and came to US on H4 visa. After a month, my H1B was approved. Now, my company is planning to apply for a change of status. I have the following queries:
1. Do we have to fill in I 539 form or I 129 form
2. How long is the processing time?
3. Will i be eligible to work from Oct 1st, 2007 even though the change of status case is in process? Or should i wait till its been approved?
please help me. Your responses will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks in advance :)
When i was in India, my company applied for H1B visa. In the meantime I got married and came to US on H4 visa. After a month, my H1B was approved. Now, my company is planning to apply for a change of status. I have the following queries:
1. Do we have to fill in I 539 form or I 129 form
2. How long is the processing time?
3. Will i be eligible to work from Oct 1st, 2007 even though the change of status case is in process? Or should i wait till its been approved?
please help me. Your responses will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks in advance :)
more...
makeup love poems for guy. anime love
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.
girlfriend poems for guys. love poems for
sledge_hammer
06-19 06:12 PM
What is the "period of stay form"?
hairstyles valentine love poems. pen to
jayleno
09-05 02:39 PM
I can understand why an individual fake resonably to get a job, though I do not support it. I dont understand these stupid companies hiring the desperate students and doing all these stuff in the name of business. I dont know how people who have those companies do all this stuff just for extra money and sleep peacefully at night.
I can put 100 arguments in support of MS students graduating and trying to get into a new job. Similarly you can come up with 100 other arguments that they are all non ethical and lies.
It is more costly for companies big and small to hire a new grad, train and eventually have him work on the business and that process is carried only by a minute percentage of all the companies that do business and also they look at elite schools.
Every MS student has to undergo a vigorous financial crisis situation there by the time they graduate they are left with no choice other than accepting what ever comes there way, at the earliest.
They don't have the liberty financially as well as law wise to sit and try for 1 year to get into a full time job. Given those kind of situations it is nothing wrong in projecting themselves to certain years of experience.
At the same, contracting, consulting is all about this. When no party likes, they can always let go.
-the116
I can put 100 arguments in support of MS students graduating and trying to get into a new job. Similarly you can come up with 100 other arguments that they are all non ethical and lies.
It is more costly for companies big and small to hire a new grad, train and eventually have him work on the business and that process is carried only by a minute percentage of all the companies that do business and also they look at elite schools.
Every MS student has to undergo a vigorous financial crisis situation there by the time they graduate they are left with no choice other than accepting what ever comes there way, at the earliest.
They don't have the liberty financially as well as law wise to sit and try for 1 year to get into a full time job. Given those kind of situations it is nothing wrong in projecting themselves to certain years of experience.
At the same, contracting, consulting is all about this. When no party likes, they can always let go.
-the116
gcseeker2002
03-20 07:56 PM
How do you know that the labour process has slowed down from Mar 01 2011 ? Any source for this info? Please share.
Yes I would also like to know where it says that Labor process is stalled from Mar 1st,as it is impacting my current decision.
Yes I would also like to know where it says that Labor process is stalled from Mar 1st,as it is impacting my current decision.
Googler
02-21 07:49 PM
how about eb 3 priority date for philippines? mine is september 27,2005. any predictions?
Those who are asking about other categories: I just want to say I am not holding back any info, and I don't have any magical powers, so..;)
Those who are asking about other categories: I just want to say I am not holding back any info, and I don't have any magical powers, so..;)