immique
07-01 04:22 PM
online petition is a very good idea. it is bound to gain increased attention as we make our views clear. having country quotas/limits in EB system does not make any sense. if not addressed quickly the people from retrogressed countries have to wait 15-20 years before they can ever see their green card while applicants from other countries get their green cards in a few months.
wallpaper -shadow-mobile-wallpaper
walker15
09-10 03:28 PM
Still HR5882 not yet tabled, please stay tuned I will update whatever is happening.
Still they are discussing HR6020(Illegal Alien left over at Iraq while on duty :)) and it looks like this will drag a bit. So Rep. Zoe Lofgren is fighting for that family.
Hope there will be sufficient time to discuss HR5882.
Still they are discussing HR6020(Illegal Alien left over at Iraq while on duty :)) and it looks like this will drag a bit. So Rep. Zoe Lofgren is fighting for that family.
Hope there will be sufficient time to discuss HR5882.
tapukakababa
07-03 03:54 PM
I have contributed $100 yesterday. We can do it.
2011 Naked Woman Shadow Wallpaper
.soulty
03-02 07:52 AM
nice link blue.. yep learning-maya is a great resource, make sure you also check out the partners on the right on that learning-maya link. ;)
more...
mheggade
07-14 12:00 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.
vdlrao,
Can you tell us , Which Crystal ball are you looking in to ?
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.
vdlrao,
Can you tell us , Which Crystal ball are you looking in to ?
immigrant2007
09-10 12:50 PM
Thats what exactly I said
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/1984591-post28.html
sorry brother..didn't see your post earlier...but that makes two os us thinking the same way.....I think we should ask for more transprecany from USCIS/DOs on numbers and approvals and all backdoors being closed.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/1984591-post28.html
sorry brother..didn't see your post earlier...but that makes two os us thinking the same way.....I think we should ask for more transprecany from USCIS/DOs on numbers and approvals and all backdoors being closed.
more...
HereIComeGC
04-24 08:52 AM
Congratulations Googler! Keep in touch with your words of wisdom!
2010 Raiden Shadow Wallpaper
nixstor
10-16 05:30 PM
Don't you think we should be more clear in requesting information per specific country instead of lumping China and India together for EB-2 and others for EB-3? Also will it be too much to request pending applications by month/quarter instead of year?
We probably want the report in this format? This is just a suggestion.
This is what is in the letter.
>>>> I request you to provide me with the number of pending employment based AOS applications, (excluding approved/denied) sorted by priority date from 2001 on a yearly basis broken down for each of the following country and category. (Not the combined total of pending EB AOS applications altogether) <<<<
I clearly mentioned each of the following country and category. To make sure, I also mentioned that we do not need combined total of pending AOS applications. If the request is ambiguous or means different things to different people,please let us know and we can make needed modifications asap. Are you recommending to hand out a blank tabular format .to USCIS FOIA?
As far as the year vs quarter thing is concerned, we felt that its best to get some thing out of this rather than tossed around. Most of the data from 2005/post perm can be found on the flcdatacenter and we can sort these ourselves. This leaves with pre perm applications and I believe DOS will have a better handle in moving the PD's a lot better in the last Q, if they have a handle on the number of applications by year. I agree that if info available on a monthly/quarterly basis, it would be even better. But I feel that we will get tossed around
We probably want the report in this format? This is just a suggestion.
This is what is in the letter.
>>>> I request you to provide me with the number of pending employment based AOS applications, (excluding approved/denied) sorted by priority date from 2001 on a yearly basis broken down for each of the following country and category. (Not the combined total of pending EB AOS applications altogether) <<<<
I clearly mentioned each of the following country and category. To make sure, I also mentioned that we do not need combined total of pending AOS applications. If the request is ambiguous or means different things to different people,please let us know and we can make needed modifications asap. Are you recommending to hand out a blank tabular format .to USCIS FOIA?
As far as the year vs quarter thing is concerned, we felt that its best to get some thing out of this rather than tossed around. Most of the data from 2005/post perm can be found on the flcdatacenter and we can sort these ourselves. This leaves with pre perm applications and I believe DOS will have a better handle in moving the PD's a lot better in the last Q, if they have a handle on the number of applications by year. I agree that if info available on a monthly/quarterly basis, it would be even better. But I feel that we will get tossed around
more...
485Mbe4001
04-23 04:10 PM
technically you are an IV member because you have an ID, that you created on your own. You probably went to the meeting with the IV crowd then branched out..good for you. Wonder why the Stanfords and Harvards are dying to admit you:D
Obviously you seem to be in a very unique situation, and you are taking steps to solve your issues in your own way, nothing wrong with that. good luck, to each his own.
Read my message - I am *NOT* an IV member and nor did I represent myself as one - like many people I just subscribed to public portal - if you want to limit it to IV members, you must consider doing that .
As far as talking in the meeting was considered, it was not an IV meeting and open to the public and I have all the right to say what I want to - whether it is inline with what you want to hear or not is not my problem.
Tone yourself down before you point fingers elsewhere. GC is not your birth right.
Obviously you seem to be in a very unique situation, and you are taking steps to solve your issues in your own way, nothing wrong with that. good luck, to each his own.
Read my message - I am *NOT* an IV member and nor did I represent myself as one - like many people I just subscribed to public portal - if you want to limit it to IV members, you must consider doing that .
As far as talking in the meeting was considered, it was not an IV meeting and open to the public and I have all the right to say what I want to - whether it is inline with what you want to hear or not is not my problem.
Tone yourself down before you point fingers elsewhere. GC is not your birth right.
hair Lords of Shadow wallpapers
boreal
12-28 02:36 PM
Yes this is correct. If you have an approved I-140 and your I-485 is pending for 180 days, the employer cannot revoke your I-140 unless there is fraud in getting the I-140. If you have done joint filing of the two, if you get your I-140 within 6 months of the joint filing, you can change employers immediately after that. Of course, you can't just go to any employer; it has a to be a similar job.
welcome back qplearn :-)
welcome back qplearn :-)
more...
bheemi123
10-03 01:25 PM
Hi friends,
Please advise me on this situation.
I am currently in US with L1B with Company A.
Company B has already filed H1B petition for me.
Assuming it gets selected & approved, Is it Possible for me to Continue with Company A after Oct1 2007 with the L1 itself.
Thanks.
u can be in L1 status..just go out of the contry and come back in L1b status..u r status will be autoamtically be L1 again...however u have to remember that u r h1b will be wasted...my friend did same thing last week..
Please advise me on this situation.
I am currently in US with L1B with Company A.
Company B has already filed H1B petition for me.
Assuming it gets selected & approved, Is it Possible for me to Continue with Company A after Oct1 2007 with the L1 itself.
Thanks.
u can be in L1 status..just go out of the contry and come back in L1b status..u r status will be autoamtically be L1 again...however u have to remember that u r h1b will be wasted...my friend did same thing last week..
hot Shadow the Hedgehog Wallpaper
vghc
07-03 11:59 AM
If you call it re-distribution of pain, I would call it sharing the pain. I think its high time ROW candidates felt the pain which we non-ROW have suffered for a long time. You are objecting just because you are on the better side and wish to continue with the better bargain. If you think about it as a EB group in general, then its absolutely ridiculous that there should be country limits for EB category GC when there is no limits on H1B which is the primary route for most EB category GC applications. I completely agree with you on the family quotient of your arguement, they should not get the GC numbers which is meant only for primary EB applicant. Not that I want families to suffer, but the family GC numbers for EB applicants should not count towards GC number cap.
Don't be ignorant, i am still bloody waiting for mine and counting!!!! :mad:
Problem is not country quota, its the ones with families!!! ><
Don't be ignorant, i am still bloody waiting for mine and counting!!!! :mad:
Problem is not country quota, its the ones with families!!! ><
more...
house Children Wallpapers
nervous-wreck
03-15 05:08 PM
C'mon guys, what the hell have you been doing for so long?
I mean look at the archived Visa Bulletins, you observe the following:
1. EB2 was current for India ALL THROUGH 2003
2. EB2 was current for India ALL THROUGH 2004
3. EB2 was current for India till August 2005
4. After the retrogression in 2005, EB2 India moved up quickly through 2003-2004 to April 2004 by the beginning of 2007
5. Even after the summer 2007 fiasco (EB2 Current fro July, August 2007), the priority date for EB2 India moved to April 2004 and stayed there for 3 months
What more do you wish for?
I don't understand how there any can be anyone from 2004-2005 India still left in the EB2 category.
This is pathetic. What the hell have you been waiting for?
I mean look at the archived Visa Bulletins, you observe the following:
1. EB2 was current for India ALL THROUGH 2003
2. EB2 was current for India ALL THROUGH 2004
3. EB2 was current for India till August 2005
4. After the retrogression in 2005, EB2 India moved up quickly through 2003-2004 to April 2004 by the beginning of 2007
5. Even after the summer 2007 fiasco (EB2 Current fro July, August 2007), the priority date for EB2 India moved to April 2004 and stayed there for 3 months
What more do you wish for?
I don't understand how there any can be anyone from 2004-2005 India still left in the EB2 category.
This is pathetic. What the hell have you been waiting for?
tattoo Symbol Wallpaper - Shadow
uma001
10-01 09:58 AM
I work at one of these companies & they applied for my GC.
1. This company only applies only after you get certain level of ranking in your year-end appraisal - disclosed during hiring process
2. You must complete x years of service.
3. Right now, economy is down & they won't apply if they feel that Labor application is going to get rejected; as it hurts their reputation & process.
I know one person in my company - whom company denied GC 'cos of Labor market but now they are starting the process of the person..(once law firm gave the green light)
So just saying - these companies don't apply - is not right.
Also, once everything is ok - you need to realize that sponsoring GC is approved by your manager as all the associated costs are allocated to his/her cost center; so company as such doesn't have issue with the cost.
Dont trust these kind of companies. if you don't get good rating in appraisal , you will be laid off .
1. This company only applies only after you get certain level of ranking in your year-end appraisal - disclosed during hiring process
2. You must complete x years of service.
3. Right now, economy is down & they won't apply if they feel that Labor application is going to get rejected; as it hurts their reputation & process.
I know one person in my company - whom company denied GC 'cos of Labor market but now they are starting the process of the person..(once law firm gave the green light)
So just saying - these companies don't apply - is not right.
Also, once everything is ok - you need to realize that sponsoring GC is approved by your manager as all the associated costs are allocated to his/her cost center; so company as such doesn't have issue with the cost.
Dont trust these kind of companies. if you don't get good rating in appraisal , you will be laid off .
more...
pictures The shadow wallpaper
va_labor2002
07-24 09:23 AM
I just posted this very question on the website above. I hope it gets selected for the chat
rpatel, Can you please talk to IV core members about this issue ? Please call them and explain your point.
Any comments from logiclife or any other IV core team ? we should send a webfax to USCIS director immediately.
rpatel, Can you please talk to IV core members about this issue ? Please call them and explain your point.
Any comments from logiclife or any other IV core team ? we should send a webfax to USCIS director immediately.
dresses MOTOROLA SHADOW WALLPAPERS
jsb
03-09 12:27 PM
This is horrible. Does not make much sense.
No significant, if any, movement, even though it is supposed be a new quarter?
No significant, if any, movement, even though it is supposed be a new quarter?
more...
makeup MOTOROLA SHADOW WALLPAPERS
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.
girlfriend 3D Super Shadow Wallpaper
sc3
10-16 02:48 PM
I beg to disagree. If it was the visa bulletin, then why did they process newer applications first?. That shows some disorder out there. Even when Amazon breaks up, they set their operations right. Here we are being fed the same story over and over again.
Coming to backlogs, they introduced perm before all the existing labor applications were processed and what happened after that?. All the existing applications were sent to the infamous backlog elimination centers. While those applications were waiting to be picked up, perm applications were being processed left, right and centre.
Firstly: If USCIS was reacting, they would not have approved the so called "newer" applications. USCIS had to use up the numbers so they took the path of least resistance -- not the right thing to do -- but it can't be branded as a "reaction" to the July 07 issue.
Second: When you say "approving" newer applications, are you saying approving older applications by PD or older applications by RD/ND (with older being 3-4 year older RD/PD)?? USCIS has never had to process applications by PD, only factor they have is RD/ND. PD just tells when someone can be approved (or apply), it doesn't get you any priority in the processing queue. I am sure you dont want the situation where you have your later PD, earlier RD, but someone who chose to delay his app to come with an ancient PD, but a fresh RD to get processed ahead of you (when both of you are current) do you?
I am bit out of touch, but isn't PERM/BEC a DoL operation not USCIS. Then again, those were the factors you have no control. Even when it was just the Labor Cert process, there had been disparities between various processing centers. Some people made use of provisions (sometimes fraudulently) to get their LCs through these "fast" process centers. I too have been affected by the Perm/LC situation, but I don't think USCIS is to take blame on that.
Am I defending USCIS: No, I am just saying if people want a Flower campaign, they should go ahead with it. No point putting FUD to stop people from doing what they want.
Coming to backlogs, they introduced perm before all the existing labor applications were processed and what happened after that?. All the existing applications were sent to the infamous backlog elimination centers. While those applications were waiting to be picked up, perm applications were being processed left, right and centre.
Firstly: If USCIS was reacting, they would not have approved the so called "newer" applications. USCIS had to use up the numbers so they took the path of least resistance -- not the right thing to do -- but it can't be branded as a "reaction" to the July 07 issue.
Second: When you say "approving" newer applications, are you saying approving older applications by PD or older applications by RD/ND (with older being 3-4 year older RD/PD)?? USCIS has never had to process applications by PD, only factor they have is RD/ND. PD just tells when someone can be approved (or apply), it doesn't get you any priority in the processing queue. I am sure you dont want the situation where you have your later PD, earlier RD, but someone who chose to delay his app to come with an ancient PD, but a fresh RD to get processed ahead of you (when both of you are current) do you?
I am bit out of touch, but isn't PERM/BEC a DoL operation not USCIS. Then again, those were the factors you have no control. Even when it was just the Labor Cert process, there had been disparities between various processing centers. Some people made use of provisions (sometimes fraudulently) to get their LCs through these "fast" process centers. I too have been affected by the Perm/LC situation, but I don't think USCIS is to take blame on that.
Am I defending USCIS: No, I am just saying if people want a Flower campaign, they should go ahead with it. No point putting FUD to stop people from doing what they want.
hairstyles Lords of Shadow wallpapers
WeldonSprings
03-19 05:02 PM
Can EB2 move to March 06?
I hope this happens. :)
I hope this happens. :)
pappu
12-27 10:02 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Permanent_Resident_Card#Other_Immigr ation_Sites
for some reason these people delete our links whenever we put it. In the past I spent a lot of time to go on each of these diff pages related to immigration, greencard, indian americans , chineese americans etc and inserted IV links in their content as well as external links but everytime the editors have deleted them. Dont know why? maybe I dont know much about wikipedia and how it works.
thanks for the initiative, go_gc_way. and thanks to all those that helped in this effort. Pls. continue to help spread the message on various sites.
for some reason these people delete our links whenever we put it. In the past I spent a lot of time to go on each of these diff pages related to immigration, greencard, indian americans , chineese americans etc and inserted IV links in their content as well as external links but everytime the editors have deleted them. Dont know why? maybe I dont know much about wikipedia and how it works.
thanks for the initiative, go_gc_way. and thanks to all those that helped in this effort. Pls. continue to help spread the message on various sites.
eager_immi
01-18 11:15 AM
Signed up for $20 a month. Have contributed $300 earlier.
Thanks
Thanks
No comments:
Post a Comment