NKR
03-17 10:16 AM
Another thing you need to consider is If anycase had a PD before sept 2004 and was filed for I-485 before July 2007. That must have got the approval unless there was a namecheck delay.
EB2 India PD came only up till April 2004 before it retrogressed. There is no way anybody whose PD is between April to Sept 2004 could have applied before July 2007. They might have applied only in July 2007 when USCIS made EB2 PD current by mistake.
EB2 India PD came only up till April 2004 before it retrogressed. There is no way anybody whose PD is between April to Sept 2004 could have applied before July 2007. They might have applied only in July 2007 when USCIS made EB2 PD current by mistake.
wallpaper rockabilly hairstyles were
kumarc123
07-18 01:51 PM
EB2 dates may be unavailable/ dont move. But it is just for a very short span of time. And after that EB2 dates start moving quickly again. I presume by 2009 october, the EB2 India PD will close to 2008. Any retrogression, if there is, in EB2 will be very mild from now on because of the spillovers.
Regarding EB3: Every year there had been about 100k approvals in EB3 category, out of around 160K(even though there are 140k visas, there have been approving more because they are using unused family visa numbers) approvals in Employment Based Category. This is because of vertical fall outs of visa numbers. Now they have changed the scenario to horizontal fall outs (spreading across at the same category level( ex. EB2) irrespective of country of chargeability.). So this time it would be around 100K approvals in EB2 category.
Let us make as much noice as we could because of EB3 retrogression. That doesnt effect EB2 movement. But may make it possible visa numbers increase for EB category by legislation. So we have to support this agitation made by our EB3 friends.
I could seee all the EB3 folks with PD older than 2006 and EB2 folks with PD older than 2008 will be cleared off in the next two years. I am sure there wont be not more than 1 or 2 years delay between EB2 and EB3 categories in near future.And there are lot of things going to happen for employment based immigratin in the next two years.
This EB2 movement of 2 and half years is just a first step by DOS.
Vldrao my friend I agree with you on that statement, their might be a small change in dates,it could be stagnant for a mild time. But eventually the dates will move fast, as USCIS wants to avoid any type of wastage of visa numbers and reduce the backlog.
It doest not make sense, that in order to clear the backlog USCIS would need to further retrogress EB2 dates in the future. It is like saying 'take one step forward and then take one step back, end results is you stand at the same place"
I Give you a green dot for it
Thanks
Regarding EB3: Every year there had been about 100k approvals in EB3 category, out of around 160K(even though there are 140k visas, there have been approving more because they are using unused family visa numbers) approvals in Employment Based Category. This is because of vertical fall outs of visa numbers. Now they have changed the scenario to horizontal fall outs (spreading across at the same category level( ex. EB2) irrespective of country of chargeability.). So this time it would be around 100K approvals in EB2 category.
Let us make as much noice as we could because of EB3 retrogression. That doesnt effect EB2 movement. But may make it possible visa numbers increase for EB category by legislation. So we have to support this agitation made by our EB3 friends.
I could seee all the EB3 folks with PD older than 2006 and EB2 folks with PD older than 2008 will be cleared off in the next two years. I am sure there wont be not more than 1 or 2 years delay between EB2 and EB3 categories in near future.And there are lot of things going to happen for employment based immigratin in the next two years.
This EB2 movement of 2 and half years is just a first step by DOS.
Vldrao my friend I agree with you on that statement, their might be a small change in dates,it could be stagnant for a mild time. But eventually the dates will move fast, as USCIS wants to avoid any type of wastage of visa numbers and reduce the backlog.
It doest not make sense, that in order to clear the backlog USCIS would need to further retrogress EB2 dates in the future. It is like saying 'take one step forward and then take one step back, end results is you stand at the same place"
I Give you a green dot for it
Thanks
bigboy007
06-10 09:06 PM
It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. Pandering to the client base will not help the clients, it will only help the service provider.
rightly said. This is not first time this came up on radar. with success of TARP this comes up everytime we fix the system.
rightly said. This is not first time this came up on radar. with success of TARP this comes up everytime we fix the system.
2011 makeup Japanese rockabilly hairstyle. how to do rockabilly hairstyle. female
BharatPremi
03-17 12:14 PM
If we assume this poll is a mirror of actual application load at USCIS then 70% applications were filed before January 2005 (529/750). Out of 529, 223 were filed during June 2003 or before (42% load). Now during last May-June 2007 EB3-I's current PD reached to June 2003. So assuming current stuck ones were product of either PBEC/DBEC labor approval delay and /or Name check delay, they will be virtually ready to go, I mean get a GC rightaway. People with PD having DEC 2003 and before will have fair chance as well.
more...
frostrated
08-21 11:20 AM
I am NOT here illegally. I was told BY someone at USCIS when I submitted the first application that as long as I was submitting requested applications and the required fees, I was not considered an illegal alien. If that was the case, why has no one at USCIS ever told me that? They know where I live, who I live with and everything else they need to know, I have no secrets from them, but not once have I received a letter, phone call or anything else to request for me to leave. I guess those of you that are professionals or those who already have a green card, are better than people like myself who are considered blue collar. I don't receive a dime for what I do, room and board is it so therefore I am not taking away anything from Americans who were born in this country.
In 2003 when I arrived here, PASSPORTS WERE NOT REQUIRED. I had a birth certificate and valid driver's license, that is all customs asked for at the Toronto airport and that is all I gave them. IF passports were required, I would have gotten one, but since they were not, what was I to do? I am not from an overseas country and I have visited the US most of my life as a child and as an adult without any trouble and was never asked for a passport. All that changed in 2005 - not my fault.
I came here looking for some assistance but seem to have gotten a bunch of sarcastic comments that are really not helpful and weren't necessary.
It's funny how you make assumptions and you all are here for similar reasons and needed help at some point. As for not criticizing USCIS for doing their job right - I doubt you would say the same thing if you were my shoes. I do not appreciate the criticism or sarcasm, I thought this was supposed to be a place to get some help, I guess I was wrong.
I won't be back.
It is true that when you entered the country, passports were not required of Canadian citizens. But you overlook one aspect. Canadian citizens who are visitors to the United States need to leave at the end of 6 months. Any visitor who stays beyond six months is accuring illegal stay. If you came in 2005, either in late 2005 or early 2006 you started to accure illegal stay. This is not a fault of the USCIS, but yours in not finding out about the rule. Also, A visitor who intends to live, work or study in the U.S. may be permanently barred from the U.S. Please refer to Canadian Citizens • U.S. Consular Services in Canada (http://www.consular.canada.usembassy.gov/canadians.asp) for more details on your stay.
As for blaming the USCIS for not notifying you earlier, there are a plethora of applications pending before yours, so it will take time for them to look at your application. The additional forms that USCIS has asked you, were forms that you need to have sent when you applied your I-485. These were all suplments you would have found had you looked up the filing instructions. no I-485 can be approved without those forms. It has been law since the early 1990s when the law was made.
And, since you entered the country to marry your fiance, when that did not happen, you should have left and re-applied through another means. If the people you are looking after cannot afford to pay for your adjustment, and pay you only food and board, they are in fact breaking the law by hiring an illegal alien. Room and food is considered pay as far as USCIS is concerned.
In 2003 when I arrived here, PASSPORTS WERE NOT REQUIRED. I had a birth certificate and valid driver's license, that is all customs asked for at the Toronto airport and that is all I gave them. IF passports were required, I would have gotten one, but since they were not, what was I to do? I am not from an overseas country and I have visited the US most of my life as a child and as an adult without any trouble and was never asked for a passport. All that changed in 2005 - not my fault.
I came here looking for some assistance but seem to have gotten a bunch of sarcastic comments that are really not helpful and weren't necessary.
It's funny how you make assumptions and you all are here for similar reasons and needed help at some point. As for not criticizing USCIS for doing their job right - I doubt you would say the same thing if you were my shoes. I do not appreciate the criticism or sarcasm, I thought this was supposed to be a place to get some help, I guess I was wrong.
I won't be back.
It is true that when you entered the country, passports were not required of Canadian citizens. But you overlook one aspect. Canadian citizens who are visitors to the United States need to leave at the end of 6 months. Any visitor who stays beyond six months is accuring illegal stay. If you came in 2005, either in late 2005 or early 2006 you started to accure illegal stay. This is not a fault of the USCIS, but yours in not finding out about the rule. Also, A visitor who intends to live, work or study in the U.S. may be permanently barred from the U.S. Please refer to Canadian Citizens • U.S. Consular Services in Canada (http://www.consular.canada.usembassy.gov/canadians.asp) for more details on your stay.
As for blaming the USCIS for not notifying you earlier, there are a plethora of applications pending before yours, so it will take time for them to look at your application. The additional forms that USCIS has asked you, were forms that you need to have sent when you applied your I-485. These were all suplments you would have found had you looked up the filing instructions. no I-485 can be approved without those forms. It has been law since the early 1990s when the law was made.
And, since you entered the country to marry your fiance, when that did not happen, you should have left and re-applied through another means. If the people you are looking after cannot afford to pay for your adjustment, and pay you only food and board, they are in fact breaking the law by hiring an illegal alien. Room and food is considered pay as far as USCIS is concerned.
new_horizon
10-20 02:36 PM
I missed on some of the conversation here
- '92-'00 was a good economic time because of the dot com boom.
- the repubs were in charge of the house and senate, and they helped in part to frame/pass the policies during that time.
- the housing sector debacle started in the clinton era, when the dems pushed the fannie may & freddie mac to lower the lending standards to give loans to the people who couldn't afford it. though it sounded like a good objective they all knew that at one point it would boomerang.
- the dems did that for their own purposes:
1. to gain the support of the lower income/middle income population which they did.
2. to fatten their own wallets-they changed the compensation rules so that the more they loan out the more their compensation. the dem guy in charge of the loaning agencies earned 90 mil in 6 years.
3. the top two beneficiaries of contribution from fm/fm were guess who chris dodd & barck obama (barack got 130K in just 3 years). not to mention the favorable interest rates on their mortgage loans.
- the US has prospered so far because of its capitalistic philosophy. it has advanced innovation, and entrepreneurship, because innovators know they'll be compensated for their hardwork. barack recently claimed he want's to spread the wealth around which is a socialist philosophy...you've seen that in the communist countries (no growth, poverty, and low standards).
- barack has had no accomplishment at all...no executive decision made, no major legislation (bills) introduced or passed (let alone through bipartisan efforts). so all of a sudden to assume he's going to bring change is ridiculous. hillary would have made a better president of course the press decides/controls everything now.
- look at the huge spending plan he has (free giveaways to everybody)...to fund that he'll tax you and I (take away whatever money we've saved).
- he's ambiguous on everything...he changed his initial position on almost everything, and not just once (again according to the audience)
I don't think we need to go thru all this again. all i care now is my gc, and I don't think obama is for it. even if he says he's for it, you can't trust him. he'll change his position when it becomes unpopular.
again be rational in your thinking.
p.s with the limited time I had I wrote all this...so don't pounce on any gramatical errors (of course the dems like to do that).
- '92-'00 was a good economic time because of the dot com boom.
- the repubs were in charge of the house and senate, and they helped in part to frame/pass the policies during that time.
- the housing sector debacle started in the clinton era, when the dems pushed the fannie may & freddie mac to lower the lending standards to give loans to the people who couldn't afford it. though it sounded like a good objective they all knew that at one point it would boomerang.
- the dems did that for their own purposes:
1. to gain the support of the lower income/middle income population which they did.
2. to fatten their own wallets-they changed the compensation rules so that the more they loan out the more their compensation. the dem guy in charge of the loaning agencies earned 90 mil in 6 years.
3. the top two beneficiaries of contribution from fm/fm were guess who chris dodd & barck obama (barack got 130K in just 3 years). not to mention the favorable interest rates on their mortgage loans.
- the US has prospered so far because of its capitalistic philosophy. it has advanced innovation, and entrepreneurship, because innovators know they'll be compensated for their hardwork. barack recently claimed he want's to spread the wealth around which is a socialist philosophy...you've seen that in the communist countries (no growth, poverty, and low standards).
- barack has had no accomplishment at all...no executive decision made, no major legislation (bills) introduced or passed (let alone through bipartisan efforts). so all of a sudden to assume he's going to bring change is ridiculous. hillary would have made a better president of course the press decides/controls everything now.
- look at the huge spending plan he has (free giveaways to everybody)...to fund that he'll tax you and I (take away whatever money we've saved).
- he's ambiguous on everything...he changed his initial position on almost everything, and not just once (again according to the audience)
I don't think we need to go thru all this again. all i care now is my gc, and I don't think obama is for it. even if he says he's for it, you can't trust him. he'll change his position when it becomes unpopular.
again be rational in your thinking.
p.s with the limited time I had I wrote all this...so don't pounce on any gramatical errors (of course the dems like to do that).
more...
amslonewolf
10-15 08:56 PM
I am all set, just need to drop it in the mailbox..
This is the easiest campaign and hardly takes more than a couple of minutes..
Just do it..
This is the easiest campaign and hardly takes more than a couple of minutes..
Just do it..
2010 girlfriend do it yourself hair styles how to do rockabilly hairstyle.
prioritydate
12-20 08:10 PM
It is difficult to interpret their statement, but I believe in what you are saying.
more...
waitnwatch
04-07 07:25 PM
.... One cannot argue (or complaint with the supervisor) with them in the long line at POE to ask them to follow the rules and regulations; or you do not have your lawyer standing next to you in the line. You do not have much option at POE. ...
A few years back the IO's at Portland Oregon started harassing visitors. A Chinese businesswoman was sent back for no apparent reason. This lady came back through LA and sued the USCIS. The upshot of what happened at Oregon was that all international flights stopped coming to Oregon. So I wonder if the IO's ultimately got to keep their jobs!
When you talk about "tremendous" power it is not as if the IO can just send someone home because the IO had a fight with his/her spouse. Sending someone back from the POE will have to be documented rigorously with specific reasons assigned. Therefore an IO can determine that a student or visitor is a potential immigrant but I'm sure that reasons have to be documented. With an H1-B that cannot be the case so the only check the IO can run is to ensure that the documents are genuine. Remember someone has to pay for a person to be sent back. An airlines get fined if they bring in someone without proper documents. So to cut the long story short - the IO has a lot of power in that they can go through a lot of details but sending someone back is a pretty serious thing as a diplomatic row can erupt. No IO would want to lose his job by meaninglessly and fraudulently sending someone back.
A few years back the IO's at Portland Oregon started harassing visitors. A Chinese businesswoman was sent back for no apparent reason. This lady came back through LA and sued the USCIS. The upshot of what happened at Oregon was that all international flights stopped coming to Oregon. So I wonder if the IO's ultimately got to keep their jobs!
When you talk about "tremendous" power it is not as if the IO can just send someone home because the IO had a fight with his/her spouse. Sending someone back from the POE will have to be documented rigorously with specific reasons assigned. Therefore an IO can determine that a student or visitor is a potential immigrant but I'm sure that reasons have to be documented. With an H1-B that cannot be the case so the only check the IO can run is to ensure that the documents are genuine. Remember someone has to pay for a person to be sent back. An airlines get fined if they bring in someone without proper documents. So to cut the long story short - the IO has a lot of power in that they can go through a lot of details but sending someone back is a pretty serious thing as a diplomatic row can erupt. No IO would want to lose his job by meaninglessly and fraudulently sending someone back.
hair how to do rockabilly hairstyle. haircuts short hair layered
eeezzz
02-15 03:08 PM
Exactly, And how many from South America? 30% of the population is going to be hispanic by 2050.
Perhaps your number is not based on legal immigration. It might reach this number if you add up the illegal ones, and that is why the gov. is building the walls to stop them enter at borders and try to find the illegal ones and send them out.
Perhaps your number is not based on legal immigration. It might reach this number if you add up the illegal ones, and that is why the gov. is building the walls to stop them enter at borders and try to find the illegal ones and send them out.
more...
nomi
12-11 02:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by god_bless_you
SO if USCIS wants to make a new rule of filing I485 for the one whose I 140 is cleared and priority date is not current, It CAN DO That RULE Right?
We do not need any Congress approval for that Right?
If so can we explore this option??
Yes, I was wondering the same thing.
The only plausible explanation for requiring congress' approval, that I am able to come up with, is that we bundled many requests along with the request for concurrent processing of 140/485, like additional visa numbers etc., which I think are not in the hands of USCIS.
We would need congress approval to increase visa numbers, etc. But for changing the rule to allow concurrent 140/485 processing is probably within the jurisdiction of the USCIS.
Originally Posted by god_bless_you
SO if USCIS wants to make a new rule of filing I485 for the one whose I 140 is cleared and priority date is not current, It CAN DO That RULE Right?
We do not need any Congress approval for that Right?
If so can we explore this option??
Yes, I was wondering the same thing.
The only plausible explanation for requiring congress' approval, that I am able to come up with, is that we bundled many requests along with the request for concurrent processing of 140/485, like additional visa numbers etc., which I think are not in the hands of USCIS.
We would need congress approval to increase visa numbers, etc. But for changing the rule to allow concurrent 140/485 processing is probably within the jurisdiction of the USCIS.
hot How to Do Rockabilly
meridiani.planum
08-07 02:38 AM
Hi Sachug22,
Some of the data you specified does not add up well. For example 2006 India, EB-total is 17,358 but 3,156+3,720+3,006 adds upto 9882.
Any idea?
Type 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
EB1-All 41,672 34,168 14,453 31,291 64,731 36,960 26,697
EB2-All 42,550 44,316 15,406 32,534 42,597 21,911 44,162
EB3-All 85,847 88,002 46,415 85,969 129,070 89,922 85,030
EB-All 179,195 174,968 82,137 155,330 246,878 159,081 155,889
EB1-I 3,543 2,820 1,266 2,998 6,336 3,156 2,855
EB2-I 21,355 21,310 8,536 16,262 16,687 3,720 6,203
EB3-I 16,339 17,354 10,647 19,889 23,250 3,006 17,795
EB-I 41,720 41,919 20,818 39,496 47,160 17,358 26,853
Thanks
that difference in numbers between total(EB) and total-india-GC for 2006 is because of a special provision of 50k visas made for schedule-A (nurses). Folks from Philippines and India took a big chunk of those visas. There was a lot of discussion of that on IV, because those 50k were recaptured visa numbers, which instead of being put into the general pool, were all given to schedule-A.
Some of the data you specified does not add up well. For example 2006 India, EB-total is 17,358 but 3,156+3,720+3,006 adds upto 9882.
Any idea?
Type 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
EB1-All 41,672 34,168 14,453 31,291 64,731 36,960 26,697
EB2-All 42,550 44,316 15,406 32,534 42,597 21,911 44,162
EB3-All 85,847 88,002 46,415 85,969 129,070 89,922 85,030
EB-All 179,195 174,968 82,137 155,330 246,878 159,081 155,889
EB1-I 3,543 2,820 1,266 2,998 6,336 3,156 2,855
EB2-I 21,355 21,310 8,536 16,262 16,687 3,720 6,203
EB3-I 16,339 17,354 10,647 19,889 23,250 3,006 17,795
EB-I 41,720 41,919 20,818 39,496 47,160 17,358 26,853
Thanks
that difference in numbers between total(EB) and total-india-GC for 2006 is because of a special provision of 50k visas made for schedule-A (nurses). Folks from Philippines and India took a big chunk of those visas. There was a lot of discussion of that on IV, because those 50k were recaptured visa numbers, which instead of being put into the general pool, were all given to schedule-A.
more...
house to do rockabilly hairstyle
go_gc_way
12-29 11:32 AM
Whatever you guys are doing ... its working.
We are seeing higher than usual new registrations on this website in the past week.
Thank you all for posting about Immigration Voice everywhere else.
Thanks logiclife.
I AM SURE , ALL MEMBERS REALIZE THEY HAVE A REASON TO VISIT IMMIGRATIONVOICE.COM AND KNOW EVERY ONE'S CONTRIBUTION IS NEEDED FOR US TO MOVE ALONG , AND WE NEED IT SOON.
ALL TOGETHER CAN WORK MAGICS.
We are seeing higher than usual new registrations on this website in the past week.
Thank you all for posting about Immigration Voice everywhere else.
Thanks logiclife.
I AM SURE , ALL MEMBERS REALIZE THEY HAVE A REASON TO VISIT IMMIGRATIONVOICE.COM AND KNOW EVERY ONE'S CONTRIBUTION IS NEEDED FOR US TO MOVE ALONG , AND WE NEED IT SOON.
ALL TOGETHER CAN WORK MAGICS.
tattoo mens rockabilly hairstyles. rockabilly hairstyles for
rayoflight
05-27 06:38 PM
Well you can certainly make copies but I was talking about making 'color' copies. As far as I know making color copies is illegal.
more...
pictures how to do rockabilly hair,
apb
08-16 01:04 PM
Provided there is a separate check associated with that. If 485 is not filed your EAD/AP application will be rejected. Once your date becomes current CHANGE your lawyer because from my understanding of your situation either your lawyer is ignorant or he/she has pathetic attitude towards your case.
dresses I#39;m going to get a rockabilly
delax
07-13 10:34 AM
Why didnt the EB2 ROW number trickle to ROW EB3 first?
Think about this for a minute. By doing so EB3-ROW is given precedence over EB2-Retro country after the ROW within EB2 has been satisfied. I cant see how that can make sense - not that anything in the GC sojourn makes sense. The categorization across employment categories is due to a difference in skill, training and experience level. Once the ROW demand within a category has been satisified, the retro country within the same category needs to get a preference over any lower category - sounds very harsh and heirarchical but thats how it is.
Think about this for a minute. By doing so EB3-ROW is given precedence over EB2-Retro country after the ROW within EB2 has been satisfied. I cant see how that can make sense - not that anything in the GC sojourn makes sense. The categorization across employment categories is due to a difference in skill, training and experience level. Once the ROW demand within a category has been satisified, the retro country within the same category needs to get a preference over any lower category - sounds very harsh and heirarchical but thats how it is.
more...
makeup rockabilly hairstylequot;).
gcisadawg
02-13 01:49 PM
Ash, I agree with the message but you need to work on the choice of words. This not ethnic cleansing or lynching or systematic targetting. I'd say America is going into a protectionist mode. When you are in that mode, the first step is to keep aliens at a distance.
girlfriend short fall hairstyles
CSPAvictim
07-09 07:24 PM
Clause B is not the only thing. In any quarter they are not supposed to issue any more than 27% of 140,000(100%) = 37800. according to Clause A. After June 15th they issued 140,000 - 66000 = 74000. What about the last quarter quota of 37800? Where did it go? It was not supposed to be used before July.
On second thoughts, it seems like you're talking about the 37800 for the last quarter. Well, I havent yet come across any law/regulation that prevents USCIS from using up all the visa numbers before the last quarter. And like I said before, the last quarter is not subject to the 27% limitation. Over the years, USCIS has not been using up all the numbers for the fiscal year. This time, they did the opposite and used them up in the first three quarters itself!:eek:
On second thoughts, it seems like you're talking about the 37800 for the last quarter. Well, I havent yet come across any law/regulation that prevents USCIS from using up all the visa numbers before the last quarter. And like I said before, the last quarter is not subject to the 27% limitation. Over the years, USCIS has not been using up all the numbers for the fiscal year. This time, they did the opposite and used them up in the first three quarters itself!:eek:
hairstyles rockabilly hairstyles for men. rockabilly hairstyles for
BharatPremi
03-17 03:18 PM
But when that happens, I guess, guys in CP wil get their interview scheduled (as long as their PD is current; no RD date concept there) as the queue in CP is not as long. Correct?
In general CP ones get out of this mess first always... I know you are CP one and you would be out well before the guy having same PD but stuck in AOS.
In general CP ones get out of this mess first always... I know you are CP one and you would be out well before the guy having same PD but stuck in AOS.
kanaihya
09-26 12:22 PM
What paragraph ? what is the update in the CNN link ? i don't see any, every where its h1B..can somebody pl. help..
desibechara
04-07 06:26 PM
I dont even remember off hand about my date.
I think its Oct29, 2001 so I am just about there to become current.
And if I am not wrong, they seem to be working on files which have become current. So I guess my I140 and 485 gets adjudicated together.
Hope for the best. I hope they dont wate any time for finances because my colleague had furnished for her I140 last year only. So i guess they do ahve record and process my case quickly. its been long time now.
db
I think its Oct29, 2001 so I am just about there to become current.
And if I am not wrong, they seem to be working on files which have become current. So I guess my I140 and 485 gets adjudicated together.
Hope for the best. I hope they dont wate any time for finances because my colleague had furnished for her I140 last year only. So i guess they do ahve record and process my case quickly. its been long time now.
db
No comments:
Post a Comment