nk2006
02-19 03:07 PM
I dont think this bill will survive in house - any bill with a set number of years residence as the only condition will raise the cries of amnesty and can get killed. In the current economic conditions, not sure if Obama administration will take any agressive steps to fix immigration issue - unfortunately they have far more urgent issues at hand. A bipartisan support could have made it possible but any bill which can be interpreted as 'amnesty' will sure raise emotions.
Having said that - it seems useful (irrespective of if illegals will also get benefited or only legals get benefits) for us - any bill that can potentially take thousands of people from the waiting list can also benefit people with <5 years anyways - so it should benefit everyone. Hell....even if there is a bill that grants greencards after 10 years of legal residence - I am sure it will ease the retrogession a lot (from all the stories in IV, I am sure there are quite a few still waiting after 10 years of legal residence). Whether such bill can be passed in the near future (in 2009) is another matter and I highly doubt it.
Having said that - it seems useful (irrespective of if illegals will also get benefited or only legals get benefits) for us - any bill that can potentially take thousands of people from the waiting list can also benefit people with <5 years anyways - so it should benefit everyone. Hell....even if there is a bill that grants greencards after 10 years of legal residence - I am sure it will ease the retrogession a lot (from all the stories in IV, I am sure there are quite a few still waiting after 10 years of legal residence). Whether such bill can be passed in the near future (in 2009) is another matter and I highly doubt it.
wallpaper Naruto Wallpapers ,Naruto
rkay
05-23 02:08 PM
MBA is not for everyone and in addition, an Online MBA doesn't have any value. MBA is not the same thing as learning cntrl C and cntrl V and then working for a shady desi consultant.
All these years in US, getgreensoon1's expertise in IT ?
cntrl C and cntrl V !
All these years in US, getgreensoon1's expertise in IT ?
cntrl C and cntrl V !
deepimpact
09-10 01:53 PM
If USCIS wants to do another JULY 2007 they never learnt their lession. With the Quarterly/annual quota I dont think USCIS legally can make EB2 current. I hate another JULY 2007 for sure.
They can make a category current when Demand < Supply. So once all I-485s prior to 2007 are approved the monthly demand data they publish will show demand Prior to CY2011 = 200. So unless they use approved I-140 to determine demand , DOS will make the dates current(even if for 1 month). As long as USCIS uses pending I-485 data to determine demand, the July 2007 fiasco will keep on repeating every 3-4 years. The key here is to have USCIS provide the actual demand (people with approved I-140s). It was mentioned somewhere that the current USCIS database is not capable of sorting the I-140s by country of chargebility and hence the I-140 data can't be used to determine per country demand.
They can make a category current when Demand < Supply. So once all I-485s prior to 2007 are approved the monthly demand data they publish will show demand Prior to CY2011 = 200. So unless they use approved I-140 to determine demand , DOS will make the dates current(even if for 1 month). As long as USCIS uses pending I-485 data to determine demand, the July 2007 fiasco will keep on repeating every 3-4 years. The key here is to have USCIS provide the actual demand (people with approved I-140s). It was mentioned somewhere that the current USCIS database is not capable of sorting the I-140s by country of chargebility and hence the I-140 data can't be used to determine per country demand.
2011 naruto shippuden wallpaper
oliTwist
01-17 03:06 PM
Sometime back I had read this book Inscrutable Americans by Anurag Mathur (http://www.amazon.com/Inscrutable-Americans-Anurag-Mathur/dp/1577310241) which is kind of hilarious story of someone like us duriing late 90s. I guess now your (many of our story) would worth another book :)!!
more...
immi2006
02-22 07:26 PM
Hi,
I called USCIS today, i was asked to take infopass to get a status update on my case, as it was pending in local office. I am not sure why.
My PD is 2001 March, from Dallas BEC - LC cleared on June 2007. Filed 140+485 on July 2. In my company atleast 400 - 500 number of EB2 cases came thru in June 2007, there were a few hundred lcs from BEC for EB3 too..from 2000-2001 time frame, based on some of the threads I have seen. We are one of the largest networking company in San Jose, here. I am sure there are other companoies that have good number of folks, also depends on how many stuck on..
Filed my 10 th year H1 extension,
PD March 2001
EB2 - Category - Adv Degree
Country - India
Degree - Research IIT/IISc Bangalore.
Following advice of 'Googler' i skimmed through the USCIS OMbud's report. So USCIS is not able to accurately 'count' the cases because old cases at local offices are not accounted in system (?) . Otherwise it would have been a quick data base query to obtain whatever statistics.
And i was interested in knowing how many India EB2 pending till Oct.2002 ;-)
I called USCIS today, i was asked to take infopass to get a status update on my case, as it was pending in local office. I am not sure why.
My PD is 2001 March, from Dallas BEC - LC cleared on June 2007. Filed 140+485 on July 2. In my company atleast 400 - 500 number of EB2 cases came thru in June 2007, there were a few hundred lcs from BEC for EB3 too..from 2000-2001 time frame, based on some of the threads I have seen. We are one of the largest networking company in San Jose, here. I am sure there are other companoies that have good number of folks, also depends on how many stuck on..
Filed my 10 th year H1 extension,
PD March 2001
EB2 - Category - Adv Degree
Country - India
Degree - Research IIT/IISc Bangalore.
Following advice of 'Googler' i skimmed through the USCIS OMbud's report. So USCIS is not able to accurately 'count' the cases because old cases at local offices are not accounted in system (?) . Otherwise it would have been a quick data base query to obtain whatever statistics.
And i was interested in knowing how many India EB2 pending till Oct.2002 ;-)
Hinglish
01-08 10:04 PM
May the best man win !
more...
gsc999
04-08 11:02 AM
I think -We have to come to our senses. The law wants to treat us as slaves. Do the work and go back. They do not want to give the opportunity to have the american dream. They do not have problem with mexicans, or arabic country people, or anybody. All they want is - we do not want smart talented ones to take our white collar jobs.
We are screwed by our Desi employers, the law. We do it for $. So it is really upto us to choose from. Money or respect.
When I see fellow indians, at the age of 40, I feel pity. Most of us would see that they are in dilema as what to do. What they are doing is correct. They live a succumbed life.
Choose life !! is the better option !!
-------
yawn. Weak post. Just substitute "I" for wherever you use "We" start with "I have to come to my senses." Don't patronize and don't be condescending.
We are screwed by our Desi employers, the law. We do it for $. So it is really upto us to choose from. Money or respect.
When I see fellow indians, at the age of 40, I feel pity. Most of us would see that they are in dilema as what to do. What they are doing is correct. They live a succumbed life.
Choose life !! is the better option !!
-------
yawn. Weak post. Just substitute "I" for wherever you use "We" start with "I have to come to my senses." Don't patronize and don't be condescending.
2010 gaara wallpaper | naruto
vamsi_poondla
09-26 12:36 PM
Excellent coordination...
more...
sanju
04-04 03:30 PM
Your argument may be true only some extent. If you keep on asking more H1b and GC without meaningful reform of H1b then it won't sell in the congress and they will try to keep staus quo and you have to wait years to get gc. How do you resolve the problem of Cap reached within few days? Will congress accept unlimited H1bs? What is the solution for this?
Your posts seem to suggest that because we (collectively all of us on the forum) have not yet agreed to a �meaningful reform� of H-1b,that has prevented fixes to the green card process? Is that what has truly delayed fixing the current green card backlog?
Secondly, we do not have to choose between the one and the other i.e. we do not have to choose between supporting Durbin-Grassley bill and delay with the green card. Do you think that supporting Durbin-Grassley bill that contains absolutely nothing to fix green card delays will somehow speed up the green card process?
We (all of us when calling lawmakers) HAVE to differentiate between increase/decrease in H-1b and green card delays. H-1b is not our issue and we will be better of staying as far away from that issue as possible. If we have to call, then we should call in to support a bill that has our provisions, rather than a bill that has nothing for us or maybe stuff that would hurt us.
Your posts seem to suggest that because we (collectively all of us on the forum) have not yet agreed to a �meaningful reform� of H-1b,that has prevented fixes to the green card process? Is that what has truly delayed fixing the current green card backlog?
Secondly, we do not have to choose between the one and the other i.e. we do not have to choose between supporting Durbin-Grassley bill and delay with the green card. Do you think that supporting Durbin-Grassley bill that contains absolutely nothing to fix green card delays will somehow speed up the green card process?
We (all of us when calling lawmakers) HAVE to differentiate between increase/decrease in H-1b and green card delays. H-1b is not our issue and we will be better of staying as far away from that issue as possible. If we have to call, then we should call in to support a bill that has our provisions, rather than a bill that has nothing for us or maybe stuff that would hurt us.
hair Still on three tails naruto
zuhail
03-10 01:25 PM
I disagree that this is not the right time for visa recapturing. It will be never be the right time.
Do you think the efforts like sending 1000 pizzas etc would not draw negative publicity. Think again.
What we are asking is to recapture the unused visa numbers. In this climate of high unemployment rate, I do not think there is any other legislation that would draw less negative publicity.
It is to be strongly publicized and understood that these recapturing unused visa numbers are only going to help the non-immigrants who are already employed and who are on the path to seek permanent resident status. This is NOT creating new H1B visas NOR giving away the jobs to the non-immigrants.
Do you think the efforts like sending 1000 pizzas etc would not draw negative publicity. Think again.
What we are asking is to recapture the unused visa numbers. In this climate of high unemployment rate, I do not think there is any other legislation that would draw less negative publicity.
It is to be strongly publicized and understood that these recapturing unused visa numbers are only going to help the non-immigrants who are already employed and who are on the path to seek permanent resident status. This is NOT creating new H1B visas NOR giving away the jobs to the non-immigrants.
more...
vin13
11-13 12:27 PM
The 1st quarter ends Dec 31. So technically, USCIS has until that to allocate the total of 35,000 visas. Now, let's assume they have only approved 5000 visas across all categories thus far, then that doesn't mean they can go and allocate the remaining 30,000 in December to the retrogressed countries.
I think the way the spillover works (except for the last month of last quarter) is at the end of the quarter (technically Jan bulletin is published around Dec 15) based on the demand for the last 2 weeks for that quarter, USCIS will spillover visas. So I think we should wait until the Jan bulletin that comes out in December before we push for a lawsuit. If you want to send letters to people, then so be it, but I am pretty sure USCIS is well within its operating procedure wrt spillover. If spillover doesn't happen in the Jan bulletin, then we have ground for a strong case.
I guess we will be fine if they are not able to complete the spillover within the calandar quarter and issue them the month after (except when it is end of fiscal year). I hope you are right that the spillover happens in January for the 1st quarter.
But look at previous visa bulletins. Do you see major movements 4 times a year. Its always the end of the year. So we are asking for clarification on following the law which seems to say that spillover need to happen during the remainder of the calander quarter.
(5) 2/ RULES FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS
(A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
I think the way the spillover works (except for the last month of last quarter) is at the end of the quarter (technically Jan bulletin is published around Dec 15) based on the demand for the last 2 weeks for that quarter, USCIS will spillover visas. So I think we should wait until the Jan bulletin that comes out in December before we push for a lawsuit. If you want to send letters to people, then so be it, but I am pretty sure USCIS is well within its operating procedure wrt spillover. If spillover doesn't happen in the Jan bulletin, then we have ground for a strong case.
I guess we will be fine if they are not able to complete the spillover within the calandar quarter and issue them the month after (except when it is end of fiscal year). I hope you are right that the spillover happens in January for the 1st quarter.
But look at previous visa bulletins. Do you see major movements 4 times a year. Its always the end of the year. So we are asking for clarification on following the law which seems to say that spillover need to happen during the remainder of the calander quarter.
(5) 2/ RULES FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS
(A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
hot naruto shippuden wallpaper for
onemorecame
10-15 01:18 PM
any one got approval after submitting recent RFE?
more...
house tattoo Naruto vs Sasuke naruto shippuden vs sasuke wallpaper. wallpapers
maverick_s39
12-10 02:49 PM
With all the porting nonsense going on eb2 will move backward and eb3 will inch forward slowly. We might end up with eb2 and eb3 in 2002. congrats to all the people who ported, the only thing you accomplished is you made sure eb2 does not progress (it does not mean you have have moved forward by porting, it just means that you have made sure you have prevented original eb2 guys from getting green card), the people who ported wont gain any benefit but they will make it worse for everyone, they have to file a second i140 which will take at least another 1 year to clear and after 1 year when the ported 140's clear the eb2 will go back to 2002. You have also accomplished another great feat, DOL is going to make it impossible to file eb2 in IT jobs so even genuine people are screwed. Before people start giving red dots and justifying there porting I have an message for you, your behavior is no different from the people who did labor substitution, the end result was DOL ended labor substitution and the result of all this porting is DOL has made it impossible to get eb2 even for genuine cases. Just because others are doing it does not mean you can do it, obviously it is wrong therefore dol removed labor substitution and now dol is making it impossible to get eb2 for IT jobs even for genuine cases. 90 % of people doing this porting are desi consulting employees, they wine and complain about desi consulting companies as blood suckers (justifiably) but they themselves are bloodsuckers on the EB2 community by doing this eb3 to eb2 porting.
I was not happy with porting and labor substitution myself but if you are playing by rules what's wrong in that? I am assuming you filed your labor under eb2, so tomorrow if there a law that lets you port your case to eb1 (hey, anything can happen) what would you do? Well that's what everyone is doing.
I was not happy with porting and labor substitution myself but if you are playing by rules what's wrong in that? I am assuming you filed your labor under eb2, so tomorrow if there a law that lets you port your case to eb1 (hey, anything can happen) what would you do? Well that's what everyone is doing.
tattoo naruto shippuden x hinata.
brick2006
11-11 03:06 AM
he cant act on immigration when the economy is down and ppl are losing their jobs..so we are in a sinking boat...
better to wait and watch!!!
better to wait and watch!!!
more...
pictures wallpaper naruto shippuden 2.
db_greencard
09-26 09:46 AM
This article is totally messed up.
dresses view full size Wallpaper
jonty_11
07-09 06:36 PM
I came across this law about the departmental control of numerical limitations, and I'd appreciate it if you all could post your interpretations of the same.
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
text in bold has a GREY area....'plus remaining balance from previous months.'
They can always say the additional approvals were left over from previous months...
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
text in bold has a GREY area....'plus remaining balance from previous months.'
They can always say the additional approvals were left over from previous months...
more...
makeup Naruto Shippuden Wallpaper for
gemini23
09-26 10:13 AM
Can the IV core make this a sticky thread or display it prominently in the main page..so that we can this as one of the action items for today.
girlfriend NARUTO/naruto shippuden 2
justAnotherFile
07-24 05:57 PM
.. there should definitely be some policy interpretation at the discretion of the USCIS
1) The law does not explicitly state that the visa number availability is a pre-requisite for filing the application
2) If you are interpreting it based on the words ....
"an immigrant visa is immediately available to him at the time his application is filed"
Then according to 245(a)(2)....
"the alien is eligible to receive an immigrant visa and is admissible to the United States for permanent residence, and "
....concurrent filing of I-140/I-485 should also be illegal because at the time of filing I-140 there is no determination of whether the alien is eligible to recieve the EB visa. If so how can USCIS allow filing of I-485 at that time.
1) The law does not explicitly state that the visa number availability is a pre-requisite for filing the application
2) If you are interpreting it based on the words ....
"an immigrant visa is immediately available to him at the time his application is filed"
Then according to 245(a)(2)....
"the alien is eligible to receive an immigrant visa and is admissible to the United States for permanent residence, and "
....concurrent filing of I-140/I-485 should also be illegal because at the time of filing I-140 there is no determination of whether the alien is eligible to recieve the EB visa. If so how can USCIS allow filing of I-485 at that time.
hairstyles Naruto Shippuden Wallpapers
ronhira
02-08 08:33 PM
Frankly I think that this lawyer is just posting provocative material to make himself popular. He has made many predictions and number of "useful" analysis in the past, most of which were found to be untrue. I used to read his posts until recently I figured out that the analysis was unreliable. This is just my opinion.
agree 100%
agree 100%
mirage
02-03 10:38 AM
I spoke to Congresswoman Zoe Logfren's staff few days, back and they specifically pointed out on the country quota issue. I'm sure lot of lawmakers are aware about this issue, I wan to give it a try, guys who think it is an unfair system, please PM me, this is my own initiative so no there is no arguement on whether IV supports this or not...
pappu
01-10 11:59 PM
Thank you again perm2gc for helping with this effort.