.jpg)
PlainSpeak
01-13 01:24 PM
Sorry about the mutiple posting. I had issues posting that and for a second i thought IV has booted me out.
Guys if you give me some time i wil lreply back to each and everyone. I am after all a single gal with only 2 hands and please if you want to make some comments about ladies please do so in good taste:D
Guys if you give me some time i wil lreply back to each and everyone. I am after all a single gal with only 2 hands and please if you want to make some comments about ladies please do so in good taste:D
wallpaper Next gallery - Mel Gibson
forever_waiting
01-13 12:21 PM
Few questions for the self proclaimed expert analyst who started this thread -
1) How many lawmakers have you met to represent these provisions you claim to be so passionate about?
2) Have you visited capitol hill and tried to understand what the congress thinks about EB legislation? I did - during the IV advocacy event last year with hundreds of eb2 and eb3 members.
3) How many members here have you actually worked worked with? Because the people I know here who actually do the grass root work with me (both eb2 and eb3) do not care about theb category they belong to.
I know you do not have any real responses...only abuses which you responded with on the other thread.
Its funny how plainspeak is the one usually doling out the abuses but claims to be the victim.
1) How many lawmakers have you met to represent these provisions you claim to be so passionate about?
2) Have you visited capitol hill and tried to understand what the congress thinks about EB legislation? I did - during the IV advocacy event last year with hundreds of eb2 and eb3 members.
3) How many members here have you actually worked worked with? Because the people I know here who actually do the grass root work with me (both eb2 and eb3) do not care about theb category they belong to.
I know you do not have any real responses...only abuses which you responded with on the other thread.
Its funny how plainspeak is the one usually doling out the abuses but claims to be the victim.
royus77
06-27 03:49 PM
I am sorry to say that all EB-3 and EB-2 dates have gone back to 2001. Please check DOS site.
*******You want rumor.....I will give you rumor ************
why you stopped at 2001 ......go all the way to 0 for christ sake
*******You want rumor.....I will give you rumor ************
why you stopped at 2001 ......go all the way to 0 for christ sake
2011 Mel Gibson Actors Mel Gibson
TeddyKoochu
09-15 07:52 AM
Year, TOT_LBRS, Certified, LBR_INDIA PD_>_10/1/2001
2000 074048 70204 ????? 0
2001 082139 77921 ????? 0
2002 089168 79784 ????? 7873
2003 095299 62912 ????? 25956
2004 098866 43582 ????? 26569
2005 014253 06133 01350 6133
2006 105960 79782 22298 79782
2007 098753 85112 24573 85112
2008 061997 21092 07198 21092
Total 720483 526522 55419 252517
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum2-retrogression-priority-dates-and-visa-bulletins/23813-perm-labor-data-analysis.html
In 2005 there are a total of 01350 labors certified only for India.
In 2006 there are a total of 22298 labors certified only for India.
The other important thing here to note down is there are many outsourcing companies out there filed/filing GCs for their so called managers in EB1 category.
Friends looks like that there is a consensus that folks with 2005 will get their GC soon, all of you have stated that there are very few labors for this year. How do we divide the labors for 2006, if we give 50% of them to EB2 I then I believe that by Sep 2010 year 2006 should get cleaned out. Another point is how the spillover is allocated quarterly, annually or randomly (How do we explain EB2I going back to 01 Jan 2000 and then recovering back). Definitely a quarterly spillover will make predictions & life easier! Something to factor is EB2-C, EB2-I date has almost caught up, traditionally it stays 1 yr behind (EB2-I lags EB2-C) in the early part of the year, this could be huge factor if both catch up.
2000 074048 70204 ????? 0
2001 082139 77921 ????? 0
2002 089168 79784 ????? 7873
2003 095299 62912 ????? 25956
2004 098866 43582 ????? 26569
2005 014253 06133 01350 6133
2006 105960 79782 22298 79782
2007 098753 85112 24573 85112
2008 061997 21092 07198 21092
Total 720483 526522 55419 252517
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum2-retrogression-priority-dates-and-visa-bulletins/23813-perm-labor-data-analysis.html
In 2005 there are a total of 01350 labors certified only for India.
In 2006 there are a total of 22298 labors certified only for India.
The other important thing here to note down is there are many outsourcing companies out there filed/filing GCs for their so called managers in EB1 category.
Friends looks like that there is a consensus that folks with 2005 will get their GC soon, all of you have stated that there are very few labors for this year. How do we divide the labors for 2006, if we give 50% of them to EB2 I then I believe that by Sep 2010 year 2006 should get cleaned out. Another point is how the spillover is allocated quarterly, annually or randomly (How do we explain EB2I going back to 01 Jan 2000 and then recovering back). Definitely a quarterly spillover will make predictions & life easier! Something to factor is EB2-C, EB2-I date has almost caught up, traditionally it stays 1 yr behind (EB2-I lags EB2-C) in the early part of the year, this could be huge factor if both catch up.
more...
snathan
01-16 01:36 PM
And who is asking your advice ? This is usa and I have a right to express my views.If you don't like it please ignore my post.Who has forced you to read my post ? Who is stopping to go back to India ?
You are not expressing your views...You are just spewing your venom and hatred. You are an ideal fit for loser's guild. I am not the one talking all BS about my employer and claiming gladly will back to India. Its YOU... if you dont remember what you are talking..I pity you. Did anyone force you to work for your employer? It was your choice and why you whine now.
I dont want to waste my time with your garbage. Have fun.
You are not expressing your views...You are just spewing your venom and hatred. You are an ideal fit for loser's guild. I am not the one talking all BS about my employer and claiming gladly will back to India. Its YOU... if you dont remember what you are talking..I pity you. Did anyone force you to work for your employer? It was your choice and why you whine now.
I dont want to waste my time with your garbage. Have fun.
tikka
07-03 11:48 PM
http://digg.com/politics/Rep_Lofgren_Issues_Statement_on_Updated_Visa_Bulle tin - 229 DIGS
http://digg.com/politics/U_S_Withdraws_Offer_of_60_000_Job_Based_Visas_Ange ring_Immigration_Lawyer/who 40 DIGS
http://digg.com/politics/USCIS_Visa_scandal - 31 DIGS
please DIGG!!
http://digg.com/politics/U_S_Withdraws_Offer_of_60_000_Job_Based_Visas_Ange ring_Immigration_Lawyer/who 40 DIGS
http://digg.com/politics/USCIS_Visa_scandal - 31 DIGS
please DIGG!!
more...
amoljak
10-24 11:11 AM
We have so much discussion on this topic in many threads but i dont know why people want to discuss samething again and again.
We know LC substituion is good for few and worst for many...
Admins can you please close the thread...
One person stepped out of the line and another one took his place... How is that worse for you (or anybody else)? (let alone worst) You are still 957,643rd in the line :)
We know LC substituion is good for few and worst for many...
Admins can you please close the thread...
One person stepped out of the line and another one took his place... How is that worse for you (or anybody else)? (let alone worst) You are still 957,643rd in the line :)
2010 Jodie Foster and Mel Gibson
harikris
06-01 09:38 PM
Basically message is, this is a reasonably big chunk of your vote bank, you can support them and gain their loyalty.
No. We are not big enough to come under the radar.
But Indians that are citizens of US are a size-able chunk. If they demand action, then the politicians might be obligated to server their citizens.
No. We are not big enough to come under the radar.
But Indians that are citizens of US are a size-able chunk. If they demand action, then the politicians might be obligated to server their citizens.
more...
vivekm1309
02-12 09:12 PM
That is an apples to dinosaur analogy.
The per-country ceiling was originally created in order to establish and maintain proportionality in various immigrants coming from different countries in FAMILY BASED IMMIGRATION.
Family based immigration is driven by family relationship. Its not driven by talent or economic contribution. Therefore its important to make sure that no country completely dominates the family based immigration system by getting a head start. If one country is ahead initially in sending immigrants (like the Irish in the 1920s and Italians in 1930s), then that country's immigrants would sponsor their family and that new family would in turn sponsor their relatives and so on. Whichever country has an advantage in the begining would keep building on that advantage and eat up the entire family based quota. That's why when they wrote the INA in 1965 by codifying a bunch of loose federal regulations that governed immigration, they inserted the per-country ceiling. And that makes sense even today in Family based immigration.
Every country in the world has unlimited potential to send family members and relatives to America. But every country in the world does not have unlimited potential to send Ph.Ds and skilled labor. That ability is disproportionately huge with India, China, Mexico and Phillipines.
The per-country ceilings got INHERITED into employment based system because our legislators were too lazy to spot the difference in two systems. One system gives you a green card because you are related to someone. Other system gives you a green card because you have skills that are wanted by an employer here.
Benefits driven by family relationship should be rationed and given out propotionally because an Irish family, Italian family and a Chinese family all love their families equally and the value of family re-unification is the same. You cant say that the Irish love their sibilings more than the Chinese or Indians do. HENCE THE COUNTRY LIMITS IN FAMILY BASED SYSTEM.
But in employment based system, what the system is doing is that an Irish guy, (or any ROW guy) with Bachelor's degree in EB3 is getting green card sooner than an Indian guy or Chinese guy with masters degree in EB2. THAT IS DISCRIMINATION. Yes, that is discrimination not matter how you slice it and dice it with your olympic analogies.
Agreed this is discrimination, what stops us from fighting this discrimination using legal class action lawsuit? Is it the money required or did a lawsuit fail earlier that inhibits us to file class action lawsuit?
The per-country ceiling was originally created in order to establish and maintain proportionality in various immigrants coming from different countries in FAMILY BASED IMMIGRATION.
Family based immigration is driven by family relationship. Its not driven by talent or economic contribution. Therefore its important to make sure that no country completely dominates the family based immigration system by getting a head start. If one country is ahead initially in sending immigrants (like the Irish in the 1920s and Italians in 1930s), then that country's immigrants would sponsor their family and that new family would in turn sponsor their relatives and so on. Whichever country has an advantage in the begining would keep building on that advantage and eat up the entire family based quota. That's why when they wrote the INA in 1965 by codifying a bunch of loose federal regulations that governed immigration, they inserted the per-country ceiling. And that makes sense even today in Family based immigration.
Every country in the world has unlimited potential to send family members and relatives to America. But every country in the world does not have unlimited potential to send Ph.Ds and skilled labor. That ability is disproportionately huge with India, China, Mexico and Phillipines.
The per-country ceilings got INHERITED into employment based system because our legislators were too lazy to spot the difference in two systems. One system gives you a green card because you are related to someone. Other system gives you a green card because you have skills that are wanted by an employer here.
Benefits driven by family relationship should be rationed and given out propotionally because an Irish family, Italian family and a Chinese family all love their families equally and the value of family re-unification is the same. You cant say that the Irish love their sibilings more than the Chinese or Indians do. HENCE THE COUNTRY LIMITS IN FAMILY BASED SYSTEM.
But in employment based system, what the system is doing is that an Irish guy, (or any ROW guy) with Bachelor's degree in EB3 is getting green card sooner than an Indian guy or Chinese guy with masters degree in EB2. THAT IS DISCRIMINATION. Yes, that is discrimination not matter how you slice it and dice it with your olympic analogies.
Agreed this is discrimination, what stops us from fighting this discrimination using legal class action lawsuit? Is it the money required or did a lawsuit fail earlier that inhibits us to file class action lawsuit?
hair Tilda Swinton, Mel Gibson,
vdlrao
07-18 08:19 PM
this is not correct. ROW continues to get preference.
what has changed is that for a while USCIS chose to interpret the law in a way that gave EB2 GC numbers (the law mandated 28.6%) to EB3 ROW rather than spill them over the EB2 I/C. now they have corrected that and EB2 numbers (which include any spillover from EB1) are first used in EB2 ie category numbers are given priority.
so the bonus advantage that EB3 ROW got for 1-2 years has been withdrawn. however with EB3 retrogressed and with EB2 I/C retrogressed, EB3 ROW continues to get all EB3 numbers except the 7% each for the retrogressed nation states.
i would also like to know where the 20K number is coming from if anyone has a source please share it.
Hi Paskal,
We dont have any official source of available visas for EB2 India as of now.
But based on the information availale it seems there would be about 30k visas, which are about 10 times more than what its been now (3,267 VISAS for EB2 India), available for EB2 India. Even though China shares with us for these visas, it would be minimal for china sharing as because china had already a cutoff date of Jan 2006 by Jul 2007. EB2 India has to be current pretty soon as of the increase in visa numbers allotment to almost about 10 times due to the horizontal fallout.
We need your inputs as well, on this calculation of estimated visas for EB2 India.
.................................................. ...
Originally Posted by sumagiri :
There are some significant flaws in your analysis. If you correct them, the number comes to around 25K.
First. The family spill over has to be applied to all categories. So the total number is 140,000 + 19,000.
Second. You calculated EB1/2/3 gets 1/3 which is not correct. They use only 28.6% not 33.3% This makes difference.
Third. The EB1+EB2 combined 70K already counted 9,800 visas for India. We should not add them again.
According to USCIS/DOS testimonies they will usually end up using only 95% of total quota. They go conservatively because they must ensure that they won't use up even a single visa more than what law allows.So total available is approximately 159000*.95 = 151050
Third. EB1, EB2, EB3 each will get 28.6%. Not one third (33.3%). That makes lot of difference. So each category will get around 43,200.
EB4 and EB5 combined will get around 21,449
Now again, going by statistics and your assumptions that EB1 and EB2 takes up 70K and EB4, EB5 takes up around 10K. The unused visas are
((43,200*2)+21,449) - (70,000+10000) = 27849.
So the total EB2 visa usage will be around 70K + 25K =95K.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=20167&highlight=vdlrao&page=7
what has changed is that for a while USCIS chose to interpret the law in a way that gave EB2 GC numbers (the law mandated 28.6%) to EB3 ROW rather than spill them over the EB2 I/C. now they have corrected that and EB2 numbers (which include any spillover from EB1) are first used in EB2 ie category numbers are given priority.
so the bonus advantage that EB3 ROW got for 1-2 years has been withdrawn. however with EB3 retrogressed and with EB2 I/C retrogressed, EB3 ROW continues to get all EB3 numbers except the 7% each for the retrogressed nation states.
i would also like to know where the 20K number is coming from if anyone has a source please share it.
Hi Paskal,
We dont have any official source of available visas for EB2 India as of now.
But based on the information availale it seems there would be about 30k visas, which are about 10 times more than what its been now (3,267 VISAS for EB2 India), available for EB2 India. Even though China shares with us for these visas, it would be minimal for china sharing as because china had already a cutoff date of Jan 2006 by Jul 2007. EB2 India has to be current pretty soon as of the increase in visa numbers allotment to almost about 10 times due to the horizontal fallout.
We need your inputs as well, on this calculation of estimated visas for EB2 India.
.................................................. ...
Originally Posted by sumagiri :
There are some significant flaws in your analysis. If you correct them, the number comes to around 25K.
First. The family spill over has to be applied to all categories. So the total number is 140,000 + 19,000.
Second. You calculated EB1/2/3 gets 1/3 which is not correct. They use only 28.6% not 33.3% This makes difference.
Third. The EB1+EB2 combined 70K already counted 9,800 visas for India. We should not add them again.
According to USCIS/DOS testimonies they will usually end up using only 95% of total quota. They go conservatively because they must ensure that they won't use up even a single visa more than what law allows.So total available is approximately 159000*.95 = 151050
Third. EB1, EB2, EB3 each will get 28.6%. Not one third (33.3%). That makes lot of difference. So each category will get around 43,200.
EB4 and EB5 combined will get around 21,449
Now again, going by statistics and your assumptions that EB1 and EB2 takes up 70K and EB4, EB5 takes up around 10K. The unused visas are
((43,200*2)+21,449) - (70,000+10000) = 27849.
So the total EB2 visa usage will be around 70K + 25K =95K.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=20167&highlight=vdlrao&page=7
more...
srikondoji
06-26 12:32 PM
nope. The august bulletin which gets released mid july didn't get into our arguements at all. We were specifially talking about july filers and july month.
Yes, i agree that if August bulletin retrogresses than that affects only august filers and not the people eligible to file in july.
Yes, the august bulletin will be showing retrogressed dates. But when August bulletin is issued in mid-July, it does not impact the petitions received in July, because the August bulletin applies to August and even if August is retrogressed until 1975, they still have to accept 485s until 31st July.
That's what your lawyer said. Right?
Yes, i agree that if August bulletin retrogresses than that affects only august filers and not the people eligible to file in july.
Yes, the august bulletin will be showing retrogressed dates. But when August bulletin is issued in mid-July, it does not impact the petitions received in July, because the August bulletin applies to August and even if August is retrogressed until 1975, they still have to accept 485s until 31st July.
That's what your lawyer said. Right?
hot To Cannes; Mel Gibson Gets
mbawa2574
02-14 01:34 PM
Let's stay united and focus on the orignal agenda. Removing country based caps from Employment Based Green cards is a valid agenda and is been there before this VB popped up. Skills don't need a cap.Business should be able to hire best and brightest here without any country limits.
Enforce country cap on Family based GC/DV lotterry for the diversity sake. FYI India and China don't have access to DV Lottery. This system is insane and let's not fight among ourselves to defend this crappy immigration system. . U may see ROW retrogress to 1998 in next VB and what will u say then ?. Bottom line is Fighting will not take us anywhere and changing this unpredictable system will be the only way to go.
Enforce country cap on Family based GC/DV lotterry for the diversity sake. FYI India and China don't have access to DV Lottery. This system is insane and let's not fight among ourselves to defend this crappy immigration system. . U may see ROW retrogress to 1998 in next VB and what will u say then ?. Bottom line is Fighting will not take us anywhere and changing this unpredictable system will be the only way to go.
more...
house mel gibson cannes 2011.
coopheal
06-11 09:32 AM
Can someone put the numbers for EB2 similar to already entered EB3 numbers on wiki
EB3 numbers - EB3 Movement Tracking - Immigration Wiki (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/EB3_Movement_Tracking)
EB2 numbers (needed) - EB2-I USCIS Data - Immigration Wiki (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/EB2-I_USCIS_Data)
EB3 numbers - EB3 Movement Tracking - Immigration Wiki (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/EB3_Movement_Tracking)
EB2 numbers (needed) - EB2-I USCIS Data - Immigration Wiki (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/EB2-I_USCIS_Data)
tattoo Cannes: Mel Gibson, Jodie
ivar
08-15 10:16 PM
-- Deleted ---
more...
pictures Mel Gibson Actors Mel Gibson
vbkris77
06-16 03:07 PM
Why do you have to resort to calling names ? Are ad hominem arguments the best you could come up with ? Let me give you an analogous case wherein people say that a recession is a good thing. Recession occurs in order to cleanse the economy of bohemian excesses and inefficiencies. Do you think that such people are sadists and belong to the mental asylum ? Of course there are people who get affected in a recession. Does it mean it is not desired ? In a similar vein, you need to understand that there were and are huge gaping inefficiencies in the current immigration process. There has to be a way to curb these excesses and inefficiencies. Retrogression may not be the best way but it is the only way utilized right now. If you still believe that I have to subscribe to these inefficiencies despite having gone through the immigration process, I am sorry I beg to differ.
This attitude was the reason, it took India a lot of time to get freedom from British. Then lot many nobel indians thought British invasion was good for India..
This attitude was the reason, it took India a lot of time to get freedom from British. Then lot many nobel indians thought British invasion was good for India..
dresses Mel Gibson Guests attend the
Jerrome
09-24 05:40 PM
Scenario 1:
Assumptions on Visa Usage by EB1 + EB2 ROW
1) About the Volume of EB1+ ROW for this year
(Pending + 2010) Total GC Spill over
EB1 ALL 4050 + 4050 8100 21995
EB2 ROW 7871 + 7871 15742 10492 (Total of 32487)
2) This data is as of August 25 2009, So in the months of September and October approval for India and China assume overall 3000+2000 = 5000
3) I have not considered EB4+EB5 spill over because that would be a bonus and would result in 2-3 months variation.
4) Spill over is 50% between China and India
China would get (16223 spill over + 2387 regular), so china would become current
India would get (16223 spilover+2387 regular), so India would move to March 06
5) Let us say 3000 are un-approvable so they will move to June 06
Scenario 2:
If the volume of EB1+ROW for this year is 50% of pending then it would result of additional 6000 visas, India would move additional 6 months to December 2006.
Scenario 3:
If the volume of EB1+ROW for this year is 25% of pending then it would result of additional 9000 visas, India would move additional 6 months to May 2007.
I don�t think in any case they won�t move beyond May 2007 for EB2 India as they would not want to add more cases to the Backlog.
In my gut feel I think Scenario 1 has 60% possibility, 2 has 30% possibility and 3 has 10% possibility/
Assumptions on Visa Usage by EB1 + EB2 ROW
1) About the Volume of EB1+ ROW for this year
(Pending + 2010) Total GC Spill over
EB1 ALL 4050 + 4050 8100 21995
EB2 ROW 7871 + 7871 15742 10492 (Total of 32487)
2) This data is as of August 25 2009, So in the months of September and October approval for India and China assume overall 3000+2000 = 5000
3) I have not considered EB4+EB5 spill over because that would be a bonus and would result in 2-3 months variation.
4) Spill over is 50% between China and India
China would get (16223 spill over + 2387 regular), so china would become current
India would get (16223 spilover+2387 regular), so India would move to March 06
5) Let us say 3000 are un-approvable so they will move to June 06
Scenario 2:
If the volume of EB1+ROW for this year is 50% of pending then it would result of additional 6000 visas, India would move additional 6 months to December 2006.
Scenario 3:
If the volume of EB1+ROW for this year is 25% of pending then it would result of additional 9000 visas, India would move additional 6 months to May 2007.
I don�t think in any case they won�t move beyond May 2007 for EB2 India as they would not want to add more cases to the Backlog.
In my gut feel I think Scenario 1 has 60% possibility, 2 has 30% possibility and 3 has 10% possibility/
more...
makeup Mel Gibson Gets Booed In
samay
07-14 07:05 AM
My question: I came to us on F1 Visa. I do not have my last name in my passport. Yes it is true ..stupid passport department missed it as they write names with hand ... passport was made when I was in high school�9th grade to be precise. I never got it corrected and came to us �visa was issued to me using FNU firstname format. When I applied for I-20 SSN, and everything in US after that I added my last name (my actual family name which got missed in passport) as us system does not allow blank last name. Note that my passport last page correctly shows my fathers and mothers last name which I have added on all my us documents like SSN, DL, � now I have been in us from past 5 years with all ( and I actually mean all) my us docs like H1, SSN, I-20, License, 495 application etc in firstname lastname format. �.. the only 2 things which are not in my first name last name format is
1) visa which is FNU Firstname ( FNU = First name used)
2) My passport which has just my first name and no last name
one of my good friend got a 485 query as his first, middle and last name are mixed up with respect to his passport and 485 application. Which I feel is a much simpler case as compared to mine.
Now my question is should I go ahead and change my name in my passport which is nothing but add my last name and get a new passport preemptively�or I should wait for USCIS decision .. Usually RFE is given 30 � 40 days to reply and I don�t think I will have time to get my passport fixed if and when RFE comes on my 485 .. the only issue I have with preemptive fixing name is sometime it is just better not to add complication to a case when it comes to USCIS �. A lawyer�s opinion is much needed and appreciated.
Thanks for your help
-M
PS: my priority is Feb 2007 EB3
Please do get your passport in order. You should have got it done a long time back. I think it is fairly straightforward procedure. You can make an appointment with the Indian Consulate and take it from there.
Please do not wait for a RFE to do that.
1) visa which is FNU Firstname ( FNU = First name used)
2) My passport which has just my first name and no last name
one of my good friend got a 485 query as his first, middle and last name are mixed up with respect to his passport and 485 application. Which I feel is a much simpler case as compared to mine.
Now my question is should I go ahead and change my name in my passport which is nothing but add my last name and get a new passport preemptively�or I should wait for USCIS decision .. Usually RFE is given 30 � 40 days to reply and I don�t think I will have time to get my passport fixed if and when RFE comes on my 485 .. the only issue I have with preemptive fixing name is sometime it is just better not to add complication to a case when it comes to USCIS �. A lawyer�s opinion is much needed and appreciated.
Thanks for your help
-M
PS: my priority is Feb 2007 EB3
Please do get your passport in order. You should have got it done a long time back. I think it is fairly straightforward procedure. You can make an appointment with the Indian Consulate and take it from there.
Please do not wait for a RFE to do that.
girlfriend PHOTOS: Mel Gibson #39;Looked
logiclife
06-26 01:17 PM
Thanks for making me look like an idiot in front of my lawyer and HR, everyone.
Based on RUMORs, I asked my lawyer this question:
I have a question about July Visa bulletin. If the August bulletin is retrogressed when announced in mid-July, can the USCIS change rules and stop accepting new Adjustment of status petitions in mid-July ? I know that it sounds illogical and that July bulletin's current dates would apply thru July 31st but I am hearing from my professional colleagues that USCIS could change rules and stop accepting new AOS petitions in middle of the month.
And I got this reply :
Yes, what you raise is quite illogical. The visa bulletin controls which AOS can be filed during the calendar month for which it is published, there is no way for USCIS to stop receiving an AOS application received say on July 16th. AOS is not like an H1B filing, where there is a finite # that must be received by a date certain and then allocated.
See, hear that ? "NO WAY FOR USCIS". Now, I dont know why some lawyers are spreading this nonsense that "BEWARE, USCIS will stop accepting new petitions if they receive 'too many petitions'. What is 'too many ??? Who defines 'too many'? Is 'too many' defined as the time when the mail room clerk gets back pain from lifting boxes of petitions ? Or the guy printing 485 receipt notices gets carpel tunnel syndrome ?
PLEASE PUT THIS IDEA TO REST. USCIS WILL ACCEPT PETITIONS THRU JULY 31, NO MATTER HOW TIRED THEY ARE AND NO MATTER HOW SICK THEY GET OF SEEING 485 FEDEXes COMING IN DAY AFTER DAY AFTER DAY. GOT IT ????
Based on RUMORs, I asked my lawyer this question:
I have a question about July Visa bulletin. If the August bulletin is retrogressed when announced in mid-July, can the USCIS change rules and stop accepting new Adjustment of status petitions in mid-July ? I know that it sounds illogical and that July bulletin's current dates would apply thru July 31st but I am hearing from my professional colleagues that USCIS could change rules and stop accepting new AOS petitions in middle of the month.
And I got this reply :
Yes, what you raise is quite illogical. The visa bulletin controls which AOS can be filed during the calendar month for which it is published, there is no way for USCIS to stop receiving an AOS application received say on July 16th. AOS is not like an H1B filing, where there is a finite # that must be received by a date certain and then allocated.
See, hear that ? "NO WAY FOR USCIS". Now, I dont know why some lawyers are spreading this nonsense that "BEWARE, USCIS will stop accepting new petitions if they receive 'too many petitions'. What is 'too many ??? Who defines 'too many'? Is 'too many' defined as the time when the mail room clerk gets back pain from lifting boxes of petitions ? Or the guy printing 485 receipt notices gets carpel tunnel syndrome ?
PLEASE PUT THIS IDEA TO REST. USCIS WILL ACCEPT PETITIONS THRU JULY 31, NO MATTER HOW TIRED THEY ARE AND NO MATTER HOW SICK THEY GET OF SEEING 485 FEDEXes COMING IN DAY AFTER DAY AFTER DAY. GOT IT ????
hairstyles Mel Gibson Celebrities attend
tikka
07-04 09:11 AM
Originally Posted by Macaca ( add ons from forum in red)
I am trying an outline for sending to media + lawmakers + ...
The following is a very rough draft without reading some of the letters posted in the thread. I will read the posts tomorrow and polish it by tomorrow evening. I will need everyone's input since I don't know all the issues.
Introduction
Retrogression in GC process.
What happened
� USCIS announced at the time the forms were due.
� Applicants started filling forms 2-3 weeks before July 2.
� Applicants changed their schedules to submit forms.
Advantages of EAD + AP
Don't know all!
� Travel without visa -> saves Embassy overhead.
� Spouse can work.
� Can switch job.
Why does it hurt
� Medical will not be valid after 1 year.
� Rejected June filers can not file.
� June filers did not file because they thought they will file in July.
� Fees more then doubling
� Name checking (which can take 1+ year) done in parallel with waiting for GC #.
� Load balancing for USCIS.
� USCIS which is supported 90% by application fee needs to care for applicants.
� Very little chance of legislative relief for a looong time.
� Many had to take MMR vaccine and hence postpone their plans to have kids by 3-6 months as recommended by NIH.
� Lawyers who charged upwards of $2000 for filing will not refund the service fee, so candidates have to pay again when dates become current in future.
The biggest loss is the trust, coz, next time people will not believe these mid month bulletins at all as they can come around anytime and revise the dates. So, applicants will always have to live in fear untill they receive the receipt
Age out situations with children
Once a child turns 21 he/she can no longer be filed with the primary applicant. However, once the I485 is filed with USCIS the child is regarded as "safe" regardless of how long the USCIS takes to adjudicate the I485.
I have that very situation. My son turn 21 in mid-January 2008. The original July brought great relief from years of worrying about whether our PD would become "current" in time. We scrambled to get ready to file 2nd July, only to have everything collapse around us again
Hope the info clarifies the "age out" situation!
For "Spouse can work" we might want to word it such that it just does not look like one job less for Americans. Something like spouse can exercise the freedom to get out of the house and contribute to the American economy.
I am trying an outline for sending to media + lawmakers + ...
The following is a very rough draft without reading some of the letters posted in the thread. I will read the posts tomorrow and polish it by tomorrow evening. I will need everyone's input since I don't know all the issues.
Introduction
Retrogression in GC process.
What happened
� USCIS announced at the time the forms were due.
� Applicants started filling forms 2-3 weeks before July 2.
� Applicants changed their schedules to submit forms.
Advantages of EAD + AP
Don't know all!
� Travel without visa -> saves Embassy overhead.
� Spouse can work.
� Can switch job.
Why does it hurt
� Medical will not be valid after 1 year.
� Rejected June filers can not file.
� June filers did not file because they thought they will file in July.
� Fees more then doubling
� Name checking (which can take 1+ year) done in parallel with waiting for GC #.
� Load balancing for USCIS.
� USCIS which is supported 90% by application fee needs to care for applicants.
� Very little chance of legislative relief for a looong time.
� Many had to take MMR vaccine and hence postpone their plans to have kids by 3-6 months as recommended by NIH.
� Lawyers who charged upwards of $2000 for filing will not refund the service fee, so candidates have to pay again when dates become current in future.
The biggest loss is the trust, coz, next time people will not believe these mid month bulletins at all as they can come around anytime and revise the dates. So, applicants will always have to live in fear untill they receive the receipt
Age out situations with children
Once a child turns 21 he/she can no longer be filed with the primary applicant. However, once the I485 is filed with USCIS the child is regarded as "safe" regardless of how long the USCIS takes to adjudicate the I485.
I have that very situation. My son turn 21 in mid-January 2008. The original July brought great relief from years of worrying about whether our PD would become "current" in time. We scrambled to get ready to file 2nd July, only to have everything collapse around us again
Hope the info clarifies the "age out" situation!
For "Spouse can work" we might want to word it such that it just does not look like one job less for Americans. Something like spouse can exercise the freedom to get out of the house and contribute to the American economy.
unitednations
02-13 05:41 PM
In the first three quarter the 'heavy' countries(India/China) would get numbers until the 7% caps hits and in the fourth quarter they would get the big chunck...
If the law contains a 'continous recapture' provision( anything not used this year get recaptured again immediately for next year...) then it would not be long befor e all categories become current....By the way 'continous recapture' is one of the IV goals...
Pl. Correct me if I am wrong....
Now I have really started to appreciate the IV goals listed on the front page.....
IV core team have gone through all this junk long before we got started and the goals take care of every point raised until now....
As a business person; I don't agree with country limits. I understand why they are there but I don't think they should be.
Continuous recapture of unused visas is a good goal. It makes sense and isn't a controversial topic.
Regarding: Goals - very few people look out for the greater good of everyone. I myself think if I was looking out for the greater good of everyone; I wouldn't focus on EB relief but rather other areas of immigration (greencard holder spouse issue; dream act, undocumented, etc.). Don't jump on me for saying this but I had written in another posting that of all the people who are disadvantaged with immigration; it would appear that eb candidates are the least disadvantaged of all.
If the law contains a 'continous recapture' provision( anything not used this year get recaptured again immediately for next year...) then it would not be long befor e all categories become current....By the way 'continous recapture' is one of the IV goals...
Pl. Correct me if I am wrong....
Now I have really started to appreciate the IV goals listed on the front page.....
IV core team have gone through all this junk long before we got started and the goals take care of every point raised until now....
As a business person; I don't agree with country limits. I understand why they are there but I don't think they should be.
Continuous recapture of unused visas is a good goal. It makes sense and isn't a controversial topic.
Regarding: Goals - very few people look out for the greater good of everyone. I myself think if I was looking out for the greater good of everyone; I wouldn't focus on EB relief but rather other areas of immigration (greencard holder spouse issue; dream act, undocumented, etc.). Don't jump on me for saying this but I had written in another posting that of all the people who are disadvantaged with immigration; it would appear that eb candidates are the least disadvantaged of all.
mariusp
03-28 03:25 PM
I'm more concerned about this:
(2) A permanent labor certification involving a specific job offer
is valid only for the particular job opportunity, the alien named on
the original application (unless a substitution was approved prior to
[effective date of the final rule]), and the area of intended
employment stated on the Application for Alien Employment Certification
(ETA Form 750) or the Application for Permanent Employment
Certification (ETA Form 9089).
Does this actually say that unless the substitution is approved before the rule becomes effective, the labor cert. would be invalidated?
:confused:
(2) A permanent labor certification involving a specific job offer
is valid only for the particular job opportunity, the alien named on
the original application (unless a substitution was approved prior to
[effective date of the final rule]), and the area of intended
employment stated on the Application for Alien Employment Certification
(ETA Form 750) or the Application for Permanent Employment
Certification (ETA Form 9089).
Does this actually say that unless the substitution is approved before the rule becomes effective, the labor cert. would be invalidated?
:confused:
0 comments:
Post a Comment