immigrant2007
09-10 10:20 AM
EB2 I/C won't be current in the next 4-5 Years, the EB2 I/C demand till date (Today�s Date) is in the 100K - 120K Range. The EB2I/C demand till Jul/Aug 2007 is easily in the 40-45K Range so it will require a very over optimistic scenario to clear by Sep 2011. EB3 ROW will reach end of 2006 by FY 2011. So there is a very long way to go. All the movement is under many assumptions most important being the economy and unemployment, anytime this changes all spillover will collapse and there will really be no difference between EB2 I/C and EB3 I/C.
One of the main things that could help us to make a correct guess is number of approved and pending I-140s per country per year of priority.
USCIs shouldn't say they don't have this data and we shouldn't say we never requested this
One of the main things that could help us to make a correct guess is number of approved and pending I-140s per country per year of priority.
USCIs shouldn't say they don't have this data and we shouldn't say we never requested this
wallpaper 5, Kristen Stewart broke the
anandsun
04-21 11:01 PM
Pratik and Jay spent some quality time with the Congressman AFTER the meeting was over. They should be updating us very soon.
Thanks
Anand
Thanks
Anand
alterego
09-17 10:59 PM
It is not end of the world. But end of the economy as we know it. People smarter than me and you have said this is turning into an armageddon.
Armageddon or not, smart or fool, time will tell. My view is recession yes, outside chance of a depression. Armageddon...........not really.
Interesting thing is Berkshire stock is up while all this is going on. Gives you an idea how much high regard people have for its balance sheet, Buffet and Co. stock picking prowess and his 30 plus billion cash war chest at this time.
Armageddon or not, smart or fool, time will tell. My view is recession yes, outside chance of a depression. Armageddon...........not really.
Interesting thing is Berkshire stock is up while all this is going on. Gives you an idea how much high regard people have for its balance sheet, Buffet and Co. stock picking prowess and his 30 plus billion cash war chest at this time.
2011 Kristen Stewart as vampire
Humhongekamyab
03-09 02:13 PM
lol..dont say 2019..my PD is almost same as yours and I aint hanging around till 2019..by that time I will be old and no idea what will I do with..GC..probaly hope for citizenship and apply for retirement benefits :confused::confused::confused:
Edit: Never mind..yours is EB3..so may be mine will come in 2015
If your kids were born in the US then maybe they will be able to file for you by then and that will be definitely faster than EB-3. :D
Edit: Never mind..yours is EB3..so may be mine will come in 2015
If your kids were born in the US then maybe they will be able to file for you by then and that will be definitely faster than EB-3. :D
more...
rockstart
07-16 08:46 AM
I hope some lawyer on this forum or on their respective websites can answer this question I think most folks have given their FP's only once some where from Oct - Dec 2007 time frame and USCIS said they do not need more FP's for most cases since they now have the ability to reuse the FP's. My guess is unless you have a criminal record of some kind or perhaps your name appears in the POI list they do not call you for FP again perhaps some random cases as part of Quality checks might be included but thats it.
Does any one remember any statements made by the Ombudsman about preadjudication?
Does any one remember any statements made by the Ombudsman about preadjudication?
perm
07-03 02:44 PM
where's the petetion, where do we sign?
more...
frostrated
09-09 04:20 PM
I have read so many posts in the past where senior members have clearly said that their is nothing possible for EB3 alone and if something is possible it would be for EB.
(as per calculator, I am going to get my GC in 2030) Would contribution of all EB3 help them in any way?
Contributing money will not help, but contributing time and effort will go a long way in alleviating the pain that IV members are going through.
Make it a point to talk to the senators and representatives. They will have meet and greets every now and then. Go to those meetings. Set up appointments with them. Educate them.
If not, there is not going to be any CIR, and all the money that you send to IV will be a donation to IV, and that is all it is to it.
(as per calculator, I am going to get my GC in 2030) Would contribution of all EB3 help them in any way?
Contributing money will not help, but contributing time and effort will go a long way in alleviating the pain that IV members are going through.
Make it a point to talk to the senators and representatives. They will have meet and greets every now and then. Go to those meetings. Set up appointments with them. Educate them.
If not, there is not going to be any CIR, and all the money that you send to IV will be a donation to IV, and that is all it is to it.
2010 dresses Kristen Stewart
sunnymit
07-12 04:58 PM
Thanks KartiKiran and spicy_guy...
more...
andycool
03-16 02:04 PM
141,020 visa numbers used in FY2009
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV.pdf
Look at the last page.
The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is 140,000. So the usage was actually more.
__________________
Not a legal advice.
Hello Desi,
"Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by documentarily qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation, that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may require the establishment of an earlier cut-off date than that which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
Furthermore, Section 202(a)(2) reads, �2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. Subject to paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed seven percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or two percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.� The seven percent per-country limit specified in INA 202(a)(2) is considered to be for both Family-sponsored and Employment-based numbers combined.
Allocation of visa numbers under Section 202(e) is accomplished as follows:
1. If based on historical patterns or current demand it appears that during a fiscal year number use by aliens chargeable to a particular country will exceed the per-country numerical limit for both the Family and Employment preferences combined, that country would be considered oversubscribed. Both the Family and Employment preferences would be subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1).
2. Sometimes during a fiscal year it may become apparent that because of a lack of demand in the Family preferences, number use by aliens chargeable to an oversubscribed country will be well within the per-country numerical limit. In such case the excess Family numbers would be made available to the Employment preferences subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1). Each of the first three Employment categories would receive 28.6% of the excess numbers, and each of the Fourth and Fifth preference categories 7.1%. (Fall-across would likewise apply if an oversubscribed country lacked sufficient demand in the Employment preferences but had excess demand in the Family preferences.)
If a foreign state other than an oversubscribed country has little Family preference demand but considerable Employment preference demand, the otherwise unused Family numbers fall across to Employment (and vice versa) for purposes of that foreign state�s annual numerical limit. For example, in FY-2009 South Korea used a grand total of 15,899 Family and Employment preference numbers, of which 1,688 were Family numbers and 14,211 were Employment numbers. This grand total was well within the FY-2009 per-country numerical limit of 25,620 Family and Employment numbers combined, so South Korea was not oversubscribed. The unused Family numbers were distributed within the Employment categories, allowing South Korea to be considerably over the 9,800 Employment limit which would have been in effect had it been an oversubscribed country.
This is from April Visa Bulletin , according to this S korea got 14,211 visas from FB ( spill over from FB - EB) then dont you think the total EB visas issued in 2009 should be around 150000 instead of 141000....
I am little confused...
your comment will be greatly appreciated ;)
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV.pdf
Look at the last page.
The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is 140,000. So the usage was actually more.
__________________
Not a legal advice.
Hello Desi,
"Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by documentarily qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation, that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may require the establishment of an earlier cut-off date than that which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
Furthermore, Section 202(a)(2) reads, �2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. Subject to paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed seven percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or two percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.� The seven percent per-country limit specified in INA 202(a)(2) is considered to be for both Family-sponsored and Employment-based numbers combined.
Allocation of visa numbers under Section 202(e) is accomplished as follows:
1. If based on historical patterns or current demand it appears that during a fiscal year number use by aliens chargeable to a particular country will exceed the per-country numerical limit for both the Family and Employment preferences combined, that country would be considered oversubscribed. Both the Family and Employment preferences would be subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1).
2. Sometimes during a fiscal year it may become apparent that because of a lack of demand in the Family preferences, number use by aliens chargeable to an oversubscribed country will be well within the per-country numerical limit. In such case the excess Family numbers would be made available to the Employment preferences subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1). Each of the first three Employment categories would receive 28.6% of the excess numbers, and each of the Fourth and Fifth preference categories 7.1%. (Fall-across would likewise apply if an oversubscribed country lacked sufficient demand in the Employment preferences but had excess demand in the Family preferences.)
If a foreign state other than an oversubscribed country has little Family preference demand but considerable Employment preference demand, the otherwise unused Family numbers fall across to Employment (and vice versa) for purposes of that foreign state�s annual numerical limit. For example, in FY-2009 South Korea used a grand total of 15,899 Family and Employment preference numbers, of which 1,688 were Family numbers and 14,211 were Employment numbers. This grand total was well within the FY-2009 per-country numerical limit of 25,620 Family and Employment numbers combined, so South Korea was not oversubscribed. The unused Family numbers were distributed within the Employment categories, allowing South Korea to be considerably over the 9,800 Employment limit which would have been in effect had it been an oversubscribed country.
This is from April Visa Bulletin , according to this S korea got 14,211 visas from FB ( spill over from FB - EB) then dont you think the total EB visas issued in 2009 should be around 150000 instead of 141000....
I am little confused...
your comment will be greatly appreciated ;)
hair Kristen Stewart Will #39;Look To
seahawks
07-26 08:58 AM
The underlying reason to stop cocurrent filing as I understand was non availability of visas and of course no proper system in place for FIFO. Well, my memory could be fading, but I think the reason was not to over use quota systems. Cocurrent filing was allowed, because there was a delay in processing time but the visas were available, now there is no delay in processing time, well i don't agree that is true, but visas are not available. There was no organized way within different centers in approving cases, some centers approved cases faster which meant, other centers did not have the visas available when they got their act together and so on.
So, with check and balances, if you are not allowed to file 485 until visa numbers are available, they dont have to build in a checks and balances from their side of the equation on keeping track of that:).
So, with check and balances, if you are not allowed to file 485 until visa numbers are available, they dont have to build in a checks and balances from their side of the equation on keeping track of that:).
more...
EkAurAaya
07-16 07:38 PM
I've so many hard working American friends... it really make me want to work harder to compete with them, but these bunch of cry babies at Numbers are scared of skilled workers, they don't want to upgrade their skills, they want to work 9-5 and get paid for their incompetencies.
hot Without Kristen Stewart!
xyz2005
07-18 09:43 AM
What is meant by "Rejected" here?
-FedEx not accepted on July 2nd
-They took the packet and in 2-3 days they opened it and returned back some after inputting in their database
-Packet is still with them but they generated a rejection notice that was sent to lawyer/candidate
-Rejection email was sent to lawyer/candidate
OR
-USCIS's July 2nd bulletin just said all applications received would be returned/rejected and Greg's thought is that the whole pile must be kept somewhere with the action planned "to be rejected" and nobody is taking action on it and USCIS has to be made aware about that or in their yesterday's UPDATE they forgot to touch about this. ( To me this is internal processing matter of USCIS)
Well to be honest with you, I was 1 million % convinced that we all should be OK because yesterday's press release very clearly mentions " All properly filed cases would be accepted" until I stumbled on Greg's blog. Now I am confused as well.
I contacted my attorney but so far no reply. Will update all of you.
I don't think so that we have to refile as it does not make sense. Plus even those who are rejected would have proof of filing )FedEx and rejection notice and through Motion to reopen case can be resurrected. Pls keep everybody updated as and when your attorney advises you.
Thanks
-FedEx not accepted on July 2nd
-They took the packet and in 2-3 days they opened it and returned back some after inputting in their database
-Packet is still with them but they generated a rejection notice that was sent to lawyer/candidate
-Rejection email was sent to lawyer/candidate
OR
-USCIS's July 2nd bulletin just said all applications received would be returned/rejected and Greg's thought is that the whole pile must be kept somewhere with the action planned "to be rejected" and nobody is taking action on it and USCIS has to be made aware about that or in their yesterday's UPDATE they forgot to touch about this. ( To me this is internal processing matter of USCIS)
Well to be honest with you, I was 1 million % convinced that we all should be OK because yesterday's press release very clearly mentions " All properly filed cases would be accepted" until I stumbled on Greg's blog. Now I am confused as well.
I contacted my attorney but so far no reply. Will update all of you.
I don't think so that we have to refile as it does not make sense. Plus even those who are rejected would have proof of filing )FedEx and rejection notice and through Motion to reopen case can be resurrected. Pls keep everybody updated as and when your attorney advises you.
Thanks
more...
house Kristen Stewart#39;s Breaking
thamizhan
07-24 11:24 AM
Do you know to which center he applied and which center sent his packet back ?
tattoo Kristen Stewart Talks About
natrajs
06-06 03:40 PM
We got the "welcome" and "card production ordered" email for my wife and I today too. It was a long frustrating wait at times but I am glad its over for us now. Our best wishes to those that are still waiting.
No RFE at any stage, straight forward case, never called them for status or infopass. Took them about 4.5 years.
Here are our dates for those interested in tracking.
PD: Jan 29, 2004, EB2
Ohio labor approved - Oct 2004
45 day letter - Jan 2005
Labor approved from Dalla BEC - June 2006
I I140 regular, non concurrent approved - Sept 2006
I 485 sent to Nebraska - July 13 2007
EAD approved - Oct 2007
I485 approval email - June,06, 2008
Congrats and Best Wishes
No RFE at any stage, straight forward case, never called them for status or infopass. Took them about 4.5 years.
Here are our dates for those interested in tracking.
PD: Jan 29, 2004, EB2
Ohio labor approved - Oct 2004
45 day letter - Jan 2005
Labor approved from Dalla BEC - June 2006
I I140 regular, non concurrent approved - Sept 2006
I 485 sent to Nebraska - July 13 2007
EAD approved - Oct 2007
I485 approval email - June,06, 2008
Congrats and Best Wishes
more...
pictures Kristen Stewart#39;s Breaking
gauravster
05-26 05:40 PM
This border patrol authority applies 100 miles from International border. Guess what, most of US population is in that region, all of NJ, MA, most of CA, etc etc as all are within 100 miles from the border (including the sea border, which marks international maritime border). Though not normally done, Border Patrol can set up checkpoints anywhere in this region. I remember reading in depth of this ridiculous rule sometime back.
Found this when I googled. Borderpatrol seems to have the authority to do whatever they did within 100 miles off any international border. It falls under 8 CFR 287.1. Entire state of NH is within 100 miles of Canada.
http://www.usborderpatrol.com/Border_Patrol608_2.htm
Found this when I googled. Borderpatrol seems to have the authority to do whatever they did within 100 miles off any international border. It falls under 8 CFR 287.1. Entire state of NH is within 100 miles of Canada.
http://www.usborderpatrol.com/Border_Patrol608_2.htm
dresses NEWS: KRISTEN STEWART amp; ROBERT
jsb
08-15 04:26 PM
What do EB cutoff dates in Sept VB mean? All eligible for filing AOS did in July/Aug. Does it mean that USCIS will be giving visa (approving GC) to those within the new cutoff dates?
more...
makeup Kristen Stewart has revealed
pbojja
12-11 10:17 AM
Stop the non-sense . As if USCIS-DOL knows exactly how many portings are going on ..do you think all the movement of this dates make sense ? just check last year movements .. they have no theory no logic or no numbers they just move with no logic ... At the end of year they move to 2006 or 2007and back to 2003 next year ..
I m EB2 2006 and I have no problems with portings ..go for it EB3 folks ..I know it will be a year or more process but worth it , I think EB3 early 2000 folks deserve GC than a 2006-2007 EB2 folks(Dont think you are genious just because you are EB2 ..we know we all do same jobs).
I m ready for reds and dont care a bit .
Some one left a nasty message for this post with a red. I m not even worried about red but your comment made me sick and here is the message for you .
Looks like you are grown up wrong ? either you lived in a environment like the one in your message or completely out of your mind after you grow up .
I m surprsied you are educated and made it to US and waiting for GC ..wow what a sick idiot ..
I m EB2 2006 and I have no problems with portings ..go for it EB3 folks ..I know it will be a year or more process but worth it , I think EB3 early 2000 folks deserve GC than a 2006-2007 EB2 folks(Dont think you are genious just because you are EB2 ..we know we all do same jobs).
I m ready for reds and dont care a bit .
Some one left a nasty message for this post with a red. I m not even worried about red but your comment made me sick and here is the message for you .
Looks like you are grown up wrong ? either you lived in a environment like the one in your message or completely out of your mind after you grow up .
I m surprsied you are educated and made it to US and waiting for GC ..wow what a sick idiot ..
girlfriend The film stars Kristen Stewart
thepaew
05-12 03:00 PM
You might want to research your options some more. Maybe, have a talk with someone who is a more senior colleague or mentor, preferably one who has an MBA.
It appears from your comment on investment banking that you haven't done your research. IBs usually recruit only from the top-10 type schools.
Good Luck!
Also, what kind of disciplines we should check in an MBA..I dont know if MBA finance will be good..as such I have no preferences. (anything related to Investment banking etc will be good though)
It appears from your comment on investment banking that you haven't done your research. IBs usually recruit only from the top-10 type schools.
Good Luck!
Also, what kind of disciplines we should check in an MBA..I dont know if MBA finance will be good..as such I have no preferences. (anything related to Investment banking etc will be good though)
hairstyles Lorena Says: Kristen Stewart
nixstor
07-05 01:35 PM
I think IV should allow only paid members to create a new thread. Any non-paid member wants to create a new thread, then make them pay before creating one.
Very decent idea. But Its very difficult to implement as we might have to some code tweaks. I myself am not a programmer. I remember Pappu or some one asking for PHP/My SQL help which I believe went unanswered.
Very decent idea. But Its very difficult to implement as we might have to some code tweaks. I myself am not a programmer. I remember Pappu or some one asking for PHP/My SQL help which I believe went unanswered.
immigrant2007
07-29 09:13 AM
Yea sure, be scared of corporatiions and defamation suits and let them enslave you. Sheeple mentality.
Add, the "now dead" Sun Microsystems to the list.
They even give you an offer letter/appointment letter which says "We will file for your greencard", and then dilly-dally about it for 4 years.
fuck em.
Take control of your own destiny.
Did the companies ever give in written that our gc will be filed? and H1 extension will be applied? If yes you have a case at hand otherwise frustration
Add, the "now dead" Sun Microsystems to the list.
They even give you an offer letter/appointment letter which says "We will file for your greencard", and then dilly-dally about it for 4 years.
fuck em.
Take control of your own destiny.
Did the companies ever give in written that our gc will be filed? and H1 extension will be applied? If yes you have a case at hand otherwise frustration
axp817
02-13 02:54 PM
Congratulations on the new job, glad everything worked out for you, even in these difficult times. The hard part is behind you now, replying to the RFE shouldn't be an issue anymore.
Godspeed.
Godspeed.
No comments:
Post a Comment