ganguteli
02-03 11:00 AM
In the current economic environment, removing country quota seems like the only argument that can fly, since it does not increase actual visas.
In the current economic envireonment where H1Bs are being blamed in media do you think anything can fly. There is so much anti-India sentiment in the softare industry due to consulting companies. Do you think they will want more Indians as greencard holders? Think about it?
I think the first step should be to do a media campaign and clear all negative publicity H1Bs are getting. Second, all of us working for consulting companies and feel they are exploited need to come out and file lawsuits against employers and clean the system. If there is no exploitation and it is only a misinformation campaign by anti-immigrants then we need to clear that wrong too so that foriegn workers get their due recognition for helping this economy grow.
In the current economic envireonment where H1Bs are being blamed in media do you think anything can fly. There is so much anti-India sentiment in the softare industry due to consulting companies. Do you think they will want more Indians as greencard holders? Think about it?
I think the first step should be to do a media campaign and clear all negative publicity H1Bs are getting. Second, all of us working for consulting companies and feel they are exploited need to come out and file lawsuits against employers and clean the system. If there is no exploitation and it is only a misinformation campaign by anti-immigrants then we need to clear that wrong too so that foriegn workers get their due recognition for helping this economy grow.
wallpaper hot Hairstyles for Round Faces
kandhu
06-10 04:55 PM
Done
gimme_GC2006
04-07 06:45 PM
first of all cut this BS. citizens and GC holders have different queues at POE and all visa people have different queues.how the hell ur friends heard the officers questions.do they have snake ears or what.use ur common sense.
i came recently on march 20th and how come i did not see when there were 50 desis in the visa's queues.stop these rumours.
i went to sbi when i was in india. that sbi manager came to know this and he was telling about that.i thought it might be a rumour but it still gave me couple of sleepless nights.see how fast this BS is spreading.
Well..you cut your BS first..just because Its not first hand doesnt mean it is unreal..just because I posted on IV doesnt mean I expected IV to take up this case..just b'coz sucker like you saw two different lanes in the airport doesnt mean all airports are like that..I posted my experience in the airport I travelled thru..I dont have to prove to morons like you.
You dont need to be best and brightest to tell me that Airports have different lanes..Oh..yeah...how will I know..I sneaked through Texas border...I never said all ppl stand in the same lane..I said, queues are different but unless you are deaf to your a** you can hear most of the conversation..atleast I did..I dont care if you didnt in your case?
You believe or dont believe I give a rats a**..this is a free forum..I posted what a PERSON told me directly..I never read in the rules that I have to post along with a video recording of my conversation.
huh... _ _ ^ _ _ :cool:
i came recently on march 20th and how come i did not see when there were 50 desis in the visa's queues.stop these rumours.
i went to sbi when i was in india. that sbi manager came to know this and he was telling about that.i thought it might be a rumour but it still gave me couple of sleepless nights.see how fast this BS is spreading.
Well..you cut your BS first..just because Its not first hand doesnt mean it is unreal..just because I posted on IV doesnt mean I expected IV to take up this case..just b'coz sucker like you saw two different lanes in the airport doesnt mean all airports are like that..I posted my experience in the airport I travelled thru..I dont have to prove to morons like you.
You dont need to be best and brightest to tell me that Airports have different lanes..Oh..yeah...how will I know..I sneaked through Texas border...I never said all ppl stand in the same lane..I said, queues are different but unless you are deaf to your a** you can hear most of the conversation..atleast I did..I dont care if you didnt in your case?
You believe or dont believe I give a rats a**..this is a free forum..I posted what a PERSON told me directly..I never read in the rules that I have to post along with a video recording of my conversation.
huh... _ _ ^ _ _ :cool:
2011 hairstyles for round faces.
transpass
04-10 12:07 PM
Here are the details for last year and years before:
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
Thanks Kondur. That was a very good presentation of the numbers. I very much appreciate it.
Now,
1. Why did EB1 last year needed spillover visas, although it was current all the time? If a category is current, isn't that it has less demand than allocated numbers?
2. As per May bulletin, EB4 might need a cut off. So we cannot expect any spillover from EB4. So that is clear. Now the spillover chances are from EB5, EB2 ROW and EB1(?). I am including EB1 because, given the current economy over the past year, should there be a better possibility of more spillover from EB2 ROW and EB1 compared to last year?
3. Also why are the total EB numbers different in different fiscal years (e.g., 141020 in FY2009, 162949 in FY 2008 and 154497 in FY2007)? In FYs 2007 and 2008 did the extra visas come from Family based while it did not for FY 2009? If so, why is it so?
4. Based on Pending 485 data of March 2010, I barely see few hundred EB4s. And hardly considerable number of EB1s. What's going on? If we go by this data, we should be getting good chunk of spillover numbers...
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Green%20Card/Green%20Card%20Through%20a%20Job/Employment%20Based%20I-485%20Pending%20Inventory-Total%203-8-2010.pdf
Thanks,
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
Thanks Kondur. That was a very good presentation of the numbers. I very much appreciate it.
Now,
1. Why did EB1 last year needed spillover visas, although it was current all the time? If a category is current, isn't that it has less demand than allocated numbers?
2. As per May bulletin, EB4 might need a cut off. So we cannot expect any spillover from EB4. So that is clear. Now the spillover chances are from EB5, EB2 ROW and EB1(?). I am including EB1 because, given the current economy over the past year, should there be a better possibility of more spillover from EB2 ROW and EB1 compared to last year?
3. Also why are the total EB numbers different in different fiscal years (e.g., 141020 in FY2009, 162949 in FY 2008 and 154497 in FY2007)? In FYs 2007 and 2008 did the extra visas come from Family based while it did not for FY 2009? If so, why is it so?
4. Based on Pending 485 data of March 2010, I barely see few hundred EB4s. And hardly considerable number of EB1s. What's going on? If we go by this data, we should be getting good chunk of spillover numbers...
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Green%20Card/Green%20Card%20Through%20a%20Job/Employment%20Based%20I-485%20Pending%20Inventory-Total%203-8-2010.pdf
Thanks,
more...
WillIWin?
07-24 12:24 PM
This is my law firm. Seems like they have submitted many applications (140 + 485 concurrently) WITHOUT the employment offer letter.
Anyone else with this firm ? Also I see that there are people who have already sent in their 485 applications. My 2 cents:
- Dont send in multiple 485s (with the same underlying I-140. Multiple 485s with multiple I-140s is fine). Higher chances of rejection than just a missing employment letter.
- If your lawyer is a relatively reputable firm, then chances are that they have done this in the past and have not had any issues. So chances are they know what they are doing.
Anyone else with this firm ? Also I see that there are people who have already sent in their 485 applications. My 2 cents:
- Dont send in multiple 485s (with the same underlying I-140. Multiple 485s with multiple I-140s is fine). Higher chances of rejection than just a missing employment letter.
- If your lawyer is a relatively reputable firm, then chances are that they have done this in the past and have not had any issues. So chances are they know what they are doing.
gvenkat
04-07 10:41 AM
Rumor, rumor, and more rumors. We Indians get a kick out of this stuff, dont we? This actually happened with me couple of weeks ago.
POE: San Francisco. I hold a completely different job compared to my Masters degree. I was asked what qualifications I have to hold a job in marketing when my background was technology. I gave an explanation and the VO looked up and smile. He said, you memorized your answers well. I said, I've been doing it for the last five years. He laughed and said, you guys are smart cookies. Have fun, summer is around. NEXT.
Note to people who like to spread Bullshit: Please STOP spreading horsemanure. Unless your paperwork is completely out of whack, no VO at the POE has the RIGHT/AUTHORITY to send you back. I spoke to an immigration lawyer at a party couple of months ago. He said deportation procedures are not that simple. The VO has to call DHS and Immigration Services. Once they take over the case, it takes 12 to 24 hours to do a background check. Until that time, the person is held in custody at the Airport. A decent bed and food is provided. If the documents check out incorrect then authorities in the home country are informed and so is the Embassy in United States. DHS and USCIS allow folks from (Indian embassy) to interview the candidate (potential value target: crime recod back home, etc). If the embassy decides that the documents were forged then it will send a memo to the Indian Airport and ask the Indian police to book a case after the person arrives. The process is much detailed than making a call to somebody's father or father-in-law and asking, DO YOU NEED XYZ for this job.
So all this is dino-dung. Stop wasting time at your desk and do something productive.
Let the red-dots rain.
Seriosly bro. U hit the nail on the head.. It's just rumor mongering at its best and we desis surely do get a kick out of it.. the guys who start these threads/rumors should be just , banned from the forums..
Have u noticed? it's always a friend's friend or a colleagues friend or a friend's friend's wife. it's never a friend or themselves...
The logic to send back does not hold good... If u have all ur papers there is NO WAY They can send u back.. if u had overstayed, be on bench and all other issues, yes u could have a possibility of being questioned.. if ur papers or on order.. it's just like a regular travel.
POE: San Francisco. I hold a completely different job compared to my Masters degree. I was asked what qualifications I have to hold a job in marketing when my background was technology. I gave an explanation and the VO looked up and smile. He said, you memorized your answers well. I said, I've been doing it for the last five years. He laughed and said, you guys are smart cookies. Have fun, summer is around. NEXT.
Note to people who like to spread Bullshit: Please STOP spreading horsemanure. Unless your paperwork is completely out of whack, no VO at the POE has the RIGHT/AUTHORITY to send you back. I spoke to an immigration lawyer at a party couple of months ago. He said deportation procedures are not that simple. The VO has to call DHS and Immigration Services. Once they take over the case, it takes 12 to 24 hours to do a background check. Until that time, the person is held in custody at the Airport. A decent bed and food is provided. If the documents check out incorrect then authorities in the home country are informed and so is the Embassy in United States. DHS and USCIS allow folks from (Indian embassy) to interview the candidate (potential value target: crime recod back home, etc). If the embassy decides that the documents were forged then it will send a memo to the Indian Airport and ask the Indian police to book a case after the person arrives. The process is much detailed than making a call to somebody's father or father-in-law and asking, DO YOU NEED XYZ for this job.
So all this is dino-dung. Stop wasting time at your desk and do something productive.
Let the red-dots rain.
Seriosly bro. U hit the nail on the head.. It's just rumor mongering at its best and we desis surely do get a kick out of it.. the guys who start these threads/rumors should be just , banned from the forums..
Have u noticed? it's always a friend's friend or a colleagues friend or a friend's friend's wife. it's never a friend or themselves...
The logic to send back does not hold good... If u have all ur papers there is NO WAY They can send u back.. if u had overstayed, be on bench and all other issues, yes u could have a possibility of being questioned.. if ur papers or on order.. it's just like a regular travel.
more...
immigrant2007
08-12 08:10 AM
Guys,
I have thought of one more idea..
We know very well that by current interpretation EB3 is permanently fixed to the back of the line. NO EB3 will get processed until the last EB2 who files in the year 2013 gets approved, (counting out the regular quota).
And why are we here? Many believe (or know) that it is because of the 245(i) amnesty signed by Clinton and Bush.
Isn't it ironic that the illegals that were put in the line are not being moved back as the line expands? Why only we legals? Maybe there is some scope to challenge the 245(i) visa number allocation and point out that legal immigrants are waiting in line then how can you admit illegals in front
Anyone having the facts and numbers of 245(i)?
I have asked this question over and over again but Iv doesn't seem to entertain it. IV number crunchers are busy developing and applying patent for a sofware on GC estimation.
245(i) consumed EB3 worldwide quota and is responsilbe to backlog along with deliberate delay by USCIs.
But thas history now, what do we do in future matter more...I think If economy doesn't improves EB3s are infor a big shock.
Post election if Republicans win then they will do their best to deny GCs to all backlog guys so that they can enjoy thier loot (Social secuirty,foreclosed homes)...
I have thought of one more idea..
We know very well that by current interpretation EB3 is permanently fixed to the back of the line. NO EB3 will get processed until the last EB2 who files in the year 2013 gets approved, (counting out the regular quota).
And why are we here? Many believe (or know) that it is because of the 245(i) amnesty signed by Clinton and Bush.
Isn't it ironic that the illegals that were put in the line are not being moved back as the line expands? Why only we legals? Maybe there is some scope to challenge the 245(i) visa number allocation and point out that legal immigrants are waiting in line then how can you admit illegals in front
Anyone having the facts and numbers of 245(i)?
I have asked this question over and over again but Iv doesn't seem to entertain it. IV number crunchers are busy developing and applying patent for a sofware on GC estimation.
245(i) consumed EB3 worldwide quota and is responsilbe to backlog along with deliberate delay by USCIs.
But thas history now, what do we do in future matter more...I think If economy doesn't improves EB3s are infor a big shock.
Post election if Republicans win then they will do their best to deny GCs to all backlog guys so that they can enjoy thier loot (Social secuirty,foreclosed homes)...
2010 hairstyle for round faces.
zram1977
06-08 06:08 PM
Welcome to the club, China! :D
What is the status of unused Eb1 /Eb2 visas of ROW?
Will it spill over or be wasted?
GOK
What is the status of unused Eb1 /Eb2 visas of ROW?
Will it spill over or be wasted?
GOK
more...
eilsoe
02-16 06:52 PM
I'll have a WIP screen up in a few minutes.. and then it's off to bed :sleep:
hair hairstyles for round faces for
zuhail
03-10 01:09 PM
Hello,
I strongly suggest that we focus our time and efforts on a single and achievable target in this calendar year 2009.
Recapturing unused visa numbers from the last two decades would help us eliminate the retrogression issue. Other changes like Comprehensive Immigration Reform, Eliminating per country limits etc would require a leap of faith in the political process and it is unlikely to be achieved in this calendar year. The economy, unemployment rates, health care etc are bound to dominate the legislative agenda this year.
I suggest writing a petition or letter to the White House and the administrative offices strongly urging them to recapture the unused visa numbers.
I think we should follow the KISS ("Keep it Simple, Stupid") Principle to achieve this target.
If we add any other immigration provisions, it would increase the complexity of the legislation and it is bound to fail.
Could the administrators of this forum please consider my suggestion of focusing on recapturing the visa numbers and assign this task the highest priority.
By re-capturing the visa numbers, we are not asking for any change in the immigration laws. We are simply asking to use the visa numbers that had been lost due to inefficient processing by the USCIS.
Let us start preparing a petition and create a dedicated fund to achieve this goal of visa number recapturing.
Thank you.
I strongly suggest that we focus our time and efforts on a single and achievable target in this calendar year 2009.
Recapturing unused visa numbers from the last two decades would help us eliminate the retrogression issue. Other changes like Comprehensive Immigration Reform, Eliminating per country limits etc would require a leap of faith in the political process and it is unlikely to be achieved in this calendar year. The economy, unemployment rates, health care etc are bound to dominate the legislative agenda this year.
I suggest writing a petition or letter to the White House and the administrative offices strongly urging them to recapture the unused visa numbers.
I think we should follow the KISS ("Keep it Simple, Stupid") Principle to achieve this target.
If we add any other immigration provisions, it would increase the complexity of the legislation and it is bound to fail.
Could the administrators of this forum please consider my suggestion of focusing on recapturing the visa numbers and assign this task the highest priority.
By re-capturing the visa numbers, we are not asking for any change in the immigration laws. We are simply asking to use the visa numbers that had been lost due to inefficient processing by the USCIS.
Let us start preparing a petition and create a dedicated fund to achieve this goal of visa number recapturing.
Thank you.
more...
chmur
09-11 12:41 AM
The problem with your analysis is not every one in the backlog has equal access to excess of 35-40K visas available each year. Most of the excess comes from EB4,5,1 and 2ROW and all goes to EB2 I/C. EB3 ROW gets ~30K every year (42K- 4*2.8K).
Even if we are to assume that post 2007 the demand for EB2 I/C and EB3 is low then also it is ~ 15K for EB2 I/C and ~ 10K for EB3 ROW. But the way INA law is framed EB3 I (most backlogged with ~ 60K) will only get 2800 visa till either of EB2 I/C or EB3 row becomes current. And by current I mean real current, not July 2007. Using these numbers it will still take 4-5 for both EB2 I/C and EB3 Row to become current.
This is assuming low demand in all EB categories continue.
It will be only after 2014-15 that EB3I will get ~ 50K SOFAD(35K SOFAD which EB2 I/C was getting plus about 15K from EB3 ROW category). So in 2015 EB3 I will see a jump of ~ 4 yrs (2003-2007). So EB3I folks with PD after 2007 will have a relative wait time of ~ 8 yrs but folks from 2003-4 are looking at a 12-13 year wait unless reform like Recapture/STEM Degree holders & Dependents excluded from cap is passed.
I understand how overflow gets distributed and Eb3-I is last in line. However , if net reduction is 35-40K each year starting 2010(i.e oct 2009 to oct 2010) and the backlog is 200 K at the beginning of 2010 (Inventory report) , we should work through all the backlog in 5 (40 *5) years.
That means in 2-3 years overflow should get to EB3 I because rest of the category will be current by then .
I agree people who applied in 2003 -2004 are looking at 10 year wait as against someone applying for EB3-I - today . Infact someone applying today will get GC in 5 years from now.
Even if we are to assume that post 2007 the demand for EB2 I/C and EB3 is low then also it is ~ 15K for EB2 I/C and ~ 10K for EB3 ROW. But the way INA law is framed EB3 I (most backlogged with ~ 60K) will only get 2800 visa till either of EB2 I/C or EB3 row becomes current. And by current I mean real current, not July 2007. Using these numbers it will still take 4-5 for both EB2 I/C and EB3 Row to become current.
This is assuming low demand in all EB categories continue.
It will be only after 2014-15 that EB3I will get ~ 50K SOFAD(35K SOFAD which EB2 I/C was getting plus about 15K from EB3 ROW category). So in 2015 EB3 I will see a jump of ~ 4 yrs (2003-2007). So EB3I folks with PD after 2007 will have a relative wait time of ~ 8 yrs but folks from 2003-4 are looking at a 12-13 year wait unless reform like Recapture/STEM Degree holders & Dependents excluded from cap is passed.
I understand how overflow gets distributed and Eb3-I is last in line. However , if net reduction is 35-40K each year starting 2010(i.e oct 2009 to oct 2010) and the backlog is 200 K at the beginning of 2010 (Inventory report) , we should work through all the backlog in 5 (40 *5) years.
That means in 2-3 years overflow should get to EB3 I because rest of the category will be current by then .
I agree people who applied in 2003 -2004 are looking at 10 year wait as against someone applying for EB3-I - today . Infact someone applying today will get GC in 5 years from now.
hot long haircuts for round faces.
sammas
07-12 04:01 PM
F. DETERMINATION OF THE NUMERICAL LIMITS ON IMMIGRANTS REQUIRED UNDER THE TERMS OF THE IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT (INA)
The State Department is required to make a determination of the worldwide numerical limitations, as outlined in Section 201(c) and (d) of the INA, on an annual basis. These calculations are based in part on data provided by U.S. Citizen and Immigration Services (CIS) regarding the number of immediate relative adjustments in the preceding year and the number of aliens paroled into the United States under Section 212(d)(5) in the second preceding year. Without this information, it is impossible to make an official determination of the annual limits. To avoid delays in processing while waiting for the CIS data, the Visa Office (VO) bases allocations on the minimum annual limits outlined in Section 201 of the INA. On July 7th, CIS provided the required data to VO.
The Department of State has determined the Family and Employment preference numerical limits for FY-2010 in accordance with the terms of Section 201 of the INA. These numerical limitations for FY-2010 are as follows:
Worldwide Family-Sponsored preference limit: 226,000
Worldwide Employment-Based preference limit: 150,667
Under INA Section 202(A), the per-country limit is fixed at 7% of the family and employment annual limits. For FY-2010 the per-country limit is 26,367. The dependent area annual limit is 2%, or 7,533.
The State Department is required to make a determination of the worldwide numerical limitations, as outlined in Section 201(c) and (d) of the INA, on an annual basis. These calculations are based in part on data provided by U.S. Citizen and Immigration Services (CIS) regarding the number of immediate relative adjustments in the preceding year and the number of aliens paroled into the United States under Section 212(d)(5) in the second preceding year. Without this information, it is impossible to make an official determination of the annual limits. To avoid delays in processing while waiting for the CIS data, the Visa Office (VO) bases allocations on the minimum annual limits outlined in Section 201 of the INA. On July 7th, CIS provided the required data to VO.
The Department of State has determined the Family and Employment preference numerical limits for FY-2010 in accordance with the terms of Section 201 of the INA. These numerical limitations for FY-2010 are as follows:
Worldwide Family-Sponsored preference limit: 226,000
Worldwide Employment-Based preference limit: 150,667
Under INA Section 202(A), the per-country limit is fixed at 7% of the family and employment annual limits. For FY-2010 the per-country limit is 26,367. The dependent area annual limit is 2%, or 7,533.
more...
house Hairstyles For Round Faces
greyhair
02-08 06:01 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.
tattoo Hairstyle For Round Face Curly
Canuck
02-13 10:46 PM
Dear friends,
I am appalled and disgusted by the mudslinging going on between ROW and India-born applicants. If any of you remember your history lessons from high school, the English used this exact policy of "Divide and Rule" to keep control over their colonies.
For example, in India, they would go into Moslem dominated cities, discriminate against them for jobs, and put Hindus in more prestigious positions, and vice-versa. They did this after the first war for independence in 1857 where Hindus, Moslems, rich and poor fought to overthrow the British occupation.
The very same policy is used by the U.S. government to control their population:
1) Per country quotas in EB immigration cause infighting
2) Infighting causes immigrant activists like IV to lose focus and weaken the agenda
3) Infighting results in racism between ROW, India, and China, which causes Americans to watch the circus, shake their heads and lobby for more immigration control
4) Poor regulation in the H1B program cause Americans to lose their jobs and blame the Indians and Chinese
...and the elite sit back, sip their martinis, and watch the fun.
So you have two choices before you:
1) Keep fighting, achieve none of the 3 main IV objectives, and continue your bonded slavery or
2) Unite as one to achieve all 3 objectives, and throw off your shackles
Remember, "Injustice Anywhere is a Threat to Justice Everywhere" - Martin Luther King
I am appalled and disgusted by the mudslinging going on between ROW and India-born applicants. If any of you remember your history lessons from high school, the English used this exact policy of "Divide and Rule" to keep control over their colonies.
For example, in India, they would go into Moslem dominated cities, discriminate against them for jobs, and put Hindus in more prestigious positions, and vice-versa. They did this after the first war for independence in 1857 where Hindus, Moslems, rich and poor fought to overthrow the British occupation.
The very same policy is used by the U.S. government to control their population:
1) Per country quotas in EB immigration cause infighting
2) Infighting causes immigrant activists like IV to lose focus and weaken the agenda
3) Infighting results in racism between ROW, India, and China, which causes Americans to watch the circus, shake their heads and lobby for more immigration control
4) Poor regulation in the H1B program cause Americans to lose their jobs and blame the Indians and Chinese
...and the elite sit back, sip their martinis, and watch the fun.
So you have two choices before you:
1) Keep fighting, achieve none of the 3 main IV objectives, and continue your bonded slavery or
2) Unite as one to achieve all 3 objectives, and throw off your shackles
Remember, "Injustice Anywhere is a Threat to Justice Everywhere" - Martin Luther King
more...
pictures hairstyles for round faces.
ajthakur
07-14 08:08 PM
The LUD on my 140 is for sunday 7/13/2008. Why would they touch it on a sunday.
dresses hairstyles for round faces
rock
06-23 10:25 AM
For AP it doesn't matter approved I-140 or not. For EAD it's safer not to use it till I-140 approval. I would apply for it and hold just in case. Also your spouse can use EAD without I-140 approval, she/he can switch back to H4 if 140 is denied. I's critical for main applicant to maintain H1/L1 status.
Yes, you can continue to file and use AD and AP while dates retrogressed. Thanks Volemar for the reply. Do you have any official link for both these answers? I just want to apply EAD along with I-140 and I-485. I will not use EAD until the I-140 is approved. Every time I talk to my employer and attorney, they always ask me about the proof in form of any official uscis link for any damn thing.
Any help would be highly appreciated.
Yes, you can continue to file and use AD and AP while dates retrogressed. Thanks Volemar for the reply. Do you have any official link for both these answers? I just want to apply EAD along with I-140 and I-485. I will not use EAD until the I-140 is approved. Every time I talk to my employer and attorney, they always ask me about the proof in form of any official uscis link for any damn thing.
Any help would be highly appreciated.
more...
makeup Short Hairstyles Round Faces.
Madhuri
11-10 05:24 PM
I received receipt number from USCIS for my letter.
girlfriend hairstyles for round faces
GCcomesoon
04-25 12:20 PM
Hi
As mentioned in my previous post
I got the approval email for my 485 filed in June - 2007.I guess my wife's case should be approved soon.So does that mean biometrics is needed in my case as the message which is commmon - Card production is not given which I guess is sent for most of the approved cases ?
Or has anyone updates after the approval message ?
Thanks
GCcomesoon
As mentioned in my previous post
I got the approval email for my 485 filed in June - 2007.I guess my wife's case should be approved soon.So does that mean biometrics is needed in my case as the message which is commmon - Card production is not given which I guess is sent for most of the approved cases ?
Or has anyone updates after the approval message ?
Thanks
GCcomesoon
hairstyles long haircuts for round faces
amitjoey
01-18 01:10 PM
we now have 110 members signed up for monthly contributions. Thanks to all those that signed up.
Thanks 890 MORE MEMBERS NEEDED.
Thanks 890 MORE MEMBERS NEEDED.
mhtanim
10-20 03:47 PM
McCain was in favor of two major immigration bills. I guess he has better chances to do something about immigration. On the other hand, Obama has never voted for any major immigration bill and who knows what he really will do. Also, people assume that Obama is close to senator Dick Durbin who tried to screw the legal immigrants many times. If Obama wins and Dick Durbin becomes a more influential senator, we probably will be screwed even big time.
Nobody knows who will win the election. What I find interesting is that many assume McCain will somehow help us to speed up our GC process. I don't know who will do what as the economy is in the toilet. I don't think either one will do anything about immigration for next 4 years as they have other things to take care of and legal immigration probably won't be a priority.
However, if no changes are made and things keep going the way it has been going for a while such as - dollar keeps falling, economy keeps going down, businesses keeps going bankrupt - you may not even have a job for too long. With no job, you can pretty much say "goodbye" to your GC right there.
So who really is better? Anyone?
Nobody knows who will win the election. What I find interesting is that many assume McCain will somehow help us to speed up our GC process. I don't know who will do what as the economy is in the toilet. I don't think either one will do anything about immigration for next 4 years as they have other things to take care of and legal immigration probably won't be a priority.
However, if no changes are made and things keep going the way it has been going for a while such as - dollar keeps falling, economy keeps going down, businesses keeps going bankrupt - you may not even have a job for too long. With no job, you can pretty much say "goodbye" to your GC right there.
So who really is better? Anyone?
sh2005
07-13 04:42 PM
I wasn't going to jump in the debate on what was Murthy's intention when she published that letter. But I can't help noting something odd in the posts where some are claiming she will try to take credit later on for making this "big development" happen. We don't even know what this big development is!! All we have is a posting by the Core Group and couple of attorneys' websites' speculation. I am hoping it's will be a big positive development for us when it is announced, but right now we are counting our chickens before they are hatched and denouncing someone's intention based on speculations and guesses!
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar