Rb_newsletter
04-09 06:39 PM
i don't..... becoz i' not in sarah palin brigade of mindless freaks who have to find someone to blame others for the sake of it..... we live in a complicated world..... just becoz we applied with uscis..... & just becoz they've to approve applications..... it doesn't mean
backlogs & delays is uscis fault..... the least amongst us can easily figure out that the problem is with the congress, not with cis.....
y the hell do u blame cis...... r they not allocating 140K per year..... what more do u want from them....... oh well...... for the sarah palin brigade on this forum i'm now an outcast.....
- the problem is with the congress, not with cis
Congress did not ask USCIS/DOS to subtract dependent visa numbers from 140K. If USCIS/DOS excludes dependent numbers from 140k, congress cannot question that because law doesn't mandate to include the dependent numbers in 140K.
-y the hell do u blame cis...... r they not allocating 140K per year
If USCIS/DOS doesn't agree to change their administration policy to exclude dependent visas from 140K after seeing our backlog, then who else do we have to blame.
Yes they are allocating 140K per year. But to who? In my view to the same applicant; one for primary applicant, another for his spouse, another for his kid, ....
Most of us here are 'keyboard ninjas'. Only very few contribute in actions and that contribution is hidden under donor forums. Without awareness of the good things happening, these keyboard-ninjas are not going to contribute in actions.
We all understand that blaming is not going to help anyone. But what else to do.
backlogs & delays is uscis fault..... the least amongst us can easily figure out that the problem is with the congress, not with cis.....
y the hell do u blame cis...... r they not allocating 140K per year..... what more do u want from them....... oh well...... for the sarah palin brigade on this forum i'm now an outcast.....
- the problem is with the congress, not with cis
Congress did not ask USCIS/DOS to subtract dependent visa numbers from 140K. If USCIS/DOS excludes dependent numbers from 140k, congress cannot question that because law doesn't mandate to include the dependent numbers in 140K.
-y the hell do u blame cis...... r they not allocating 140K per year
If USCIS/DOS doesn't agree to change their administration policy to exclude dependent visas from 140K after seeing our backlog, then who else do we have to blame.
Yes they are allocating 140K per year. But to who? In my view to the same applicant; one for primary applicant, another for his spouse, another for his kid, ....
Most of us here are 'keyboard ninjas'. Only very few contribute in actions and that contribution is hidden under donor forums. Without awareness of the good things happening, these keyboard-ninjas are not going to contribute in actions.
We all understand that blaming is not going to help anyone. But what else to do.
wallpaper cricket world cup final 2011
mgmanoj
06-10 07:49 PM
Done - sent to Alabama senators
Jaime
09-10 09:13 PM
I wish these bills the best! Also, once we have a new president we will have another shot at solving our immigration woes! Let's go for it guys!
2011 World Cup Final 2011 at
himu73
07-02 07:34 AM
Hope you understand this is not the only issue we are concerned. If you feel this organization is not for you , why are you browsing here. Keep away. This is not the time we need negative energy like you.
i can say only one thing..IV willl not be able to do anythingin this regard.USCIS can do anything whatever the way hat want to do.
i can say only one thing..IV willl not be able to do anythingin this regard.USCIS can do anything whatever the way hat want to do.
more...
starscream
06-12 11:34 AM
Kyl: CIR can be finished in a few days
Sen. Kyl (R-Az), one of the architects of the Senate�s CIR announced today that the Senate CIR can be finished in a few days. On CNN this morning he mentioned that the Senate Republican leadership is crafting a few necessary amendments and will take them to the Majority Leader. It is expected that the Cantwell amendment, albeit in a revised form, will be one of the amendments. The NY Times has a similar report.
please post the link to the NYTimes report and also to the report which says Cantwell amendment will be included
Sen. Kyl (R-Az), one of the architects of the Senate�s CIR announced today that the Senate CIR can be finished in a few days. On CNN this morning he mentioned that the Senate Republican leadership is crafting a few necessary amendments and will take them to the Majority Leader. It is expected that the Cantwell amendment, albeit in a revised form, will be one of the amendments. The NY Times has a similar report.
please post the link to the NYTimes report and also to the report which says Cantwell amendment will be included
ramus
07-02 08:20 PM
Just 700 so far.. Don't seem like we will be even close to 5000 by 10...
Members who contributed please ask others to contribute now..
Members who contributed please ask others to contribute now..
more...
ita
02-01 11:33 AM
That's fine ..To show that we are in status form the last non-immigrant visa entry to 485 filing stage should we have our monthly stubs or will W2 be sufficient? I'm afraid I've some misplaced. Again thank you very much for your responses.
>> Thank you very much for the response. I sent you a PM.
I don't respond to Private Messages. If you have questions for me and would like to get my opinion on it, please post in forums here.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
>> Thank you very much for the response. I sent you a PM.
I don't respond to Private Messages. If you have questions for me and would like to get my opinion on it, please post in forums here.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
2010 the World Cup semi-final
chicago60607
09-10 10:53 PM
The above post quoting the Siskind's blog concurs with what I was told.
Hey Yall,
I just called the House Judiciary Committee to inquire about the webcast link not working and the reason sited was that "thats due to the hearing postponed until tomorrow".
So, no more hearing for the day and it resumes tomorrow. I did forget to ask for what time it starts, may be someone else can check on it.
Hey Yall,
I just called the House Judiciary Committee to inquire about the webcast link not working and the reason sited was that "thats due to the hearing postponed until tomorrow".
So, no more hearing for the day and it resumes tomorrow. I did forget to ask for what time it starts, may be someone else can check on it.
more...
johnamit
06-13 10:19 AM
I have seen this same footage months ago and to it don't look real, its cooked. Some facts there are just un-digestible like the gora guy will take job of a waiter immediately after working as senior exec. cmon market is not that bad unless he don't know anything else and don't have ability to get other similar job, then he should be fired anyways. and then that carlos guy, his dress up don't seems convincing that other execs will give me good response after presentation. its all cooked... showing 600k+ numbers are all bogus.
Please check this out...might give you guys some hope and laughter :)
immigration_the_human_cost (http://www.theonion.com/content/video/immigration_the_human_cost)
Please check this out...might give you guys some hope and laughter :)
immigration_the_human_cost (http://www.theonion.com/content/video/immigration_the_human_cost)
hair World Cup Final 2011 at
StuckInTheMuck
07-30 07:39 AM
At the risk of giving someone the idea of starting a new thread on dottiness (all sorts of stuff are popping up these days :)) - you can see your DI (dot index) by clicking "User Profile" at the top right of this page (assuming you are logged on to IV), and then clicking "User Control Panel", which opens the list of your dots w/o comments (I am yet to figure out the point system that comes with it). This does not tell you though who gave what, unless they announce themselves.
And I thank you for your vote of confidence on the relevance issue :)
And I thank you for your vote of confidence on the relevance issue :)
more...
pappu
07-01 10:22 PM
Info on the lawsuit by AILA:
==============
USCIS VISA BULLETIN/
VISA AVAILABILTY LAWSUIT
Frequently Asked Questions about Participating in this Lawsuit
AILF is considering filing a lawsuit in federal district court against the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) over its rejection of otherwise properly filed adjustment of status applications for the alleged reason that a visa was not available, even though the Visa Bulletin from the Department of State (DOS) states that a visa was available at the time of filing.
Any foreign national who is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status and whose adjustment of status application has been or will be returned or rejected solely on this basis may be eligible to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit. If you are considering being a participant in this lawsuit, you may find the following frequently asked questions and answers helpful.
Q: What is AILF?
A: The American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF) is a non-profit organization dedicated to protecting the rights of immigrants and refugees and to securing fair and just application and administration of the U.S. immigration laws. In order to achieve these goals, AILF sometimes files lawsuits involving various aspects of immigration law.
Q: What is this lawsuit about?
A: This lawsuit will be filed by plaintiffs who have been harmed because USCIS rejected or returned or is expected to reject or return a properly submitted adjustment of status application for the alleged reason that no visa was immediately available even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that a visa was available at that time.
To be eligible for adjustment to lawful permanent resident status, a foreign national must show that a visa number is “immediately available.” USCIS regulations state that the DOS Visa Bulletin is used to determine whether a visa number is immediately available. This Bulletin is published once a month and lists the visa availability dates for all categories of immigrants for the following month. Thus, for example, the July 2007 bulletin, listing visa availability dates for the entire month of July, was published in June 2007.
AILF has learned that USCIS has refused to allow certain adjustment of status applications to be filed even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that visa numbers are available for the immigrant category at that time. USCIS rejected these applications because DOS informed it in an internal communication that no visa numbers remained for that category of immigrants. To date, this has happened only in the employment-based “other worker” category. We anticipate that it may happen in a number of other types of employment-based immigrant categories beginning in July 2007.
We believe USCIS violated the law when it failed to apply the visa availability dates listed in the Visa Bulletin, as required by a federal regulation, and instead rejected properly filed adjustment applications. Through this lawsuit, we will challenge the rejection of adjustment of status applications on this basis. We will ask the court to order USCIS to accept the rejected adjustment applications and treat them as being filed as of the date they originally would have been filed had USCIS not rejected them.
Q: What is a “plaintiff” and how do I know if I am eligible to be a “plaintiff” in this lawsuit?
A: A plaintiff is a person who files a lawsuit against someone else. We are still determining the categories of plaintiffs but an eligible plaintiff for this lawsuit may include:
[other worker category]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in the “other worker” category for receipt by USCIS in June 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
[other employment-based categories]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in any employment-based category other than “other worker” for receipt by USCIS in July 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
Q: Why should I be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
2
A: If the lawsuit is successful, USCIS should accept your adjustment application and treat it as if it had been filed as of the date that you originally tried to file it. Because your adjustment application will then be considered to be pending before the agency, you may be eligible for interim benefits, including an employment authorization document, advance parole, and others.
What the lawsuit will not do is make a visa number immediately available to you if none is available. If the visa numbers have in fact been used for the current fiscal year, the court does not have the authority under the law to make a new number available to you. However, if the court orders that USCIS accept your adjustment application as of the date that you originally tried to file it, you will be at an earlier place in line when visa numbers become available again in the next fiscal year, October 1, 2007. Additionally, as mentioned, you may be eligible for interim benefits while you are waiting.
Q: What is likely to happen because of the suit?
A: Lawsuits are uncertain by nature. We cannot predict the exact outcome. However, other efforts to resolve these problems with USCIS have not succeeded. For this reason, we believe that a lawsuit is the only remaining possible way to resolve these problems.
Q: Will being a plaintiff in this lawsuit hurt my chances for permanent residence?
A: If an individual is otherwise legally entitled to have an application granted, the government cannot lawfully deny that application on the basis that the person is participating or participated in a lawsuit. If we believed the government was taking such action, we would complain to the lawyers representing the government and to the judge handling the case. In our experience, this retaliation has not happened.
Please be aware, though, that USCIS is likely to examine plaintiffs’ adjustment of status applications more closely than it otherwise might. It may ask the plaintiffs questions and ask for additional information about their adjustment applications or immigration status. See below regarding “discovery.”
Q: How much time must plaintiffs spend on this lawsuit?
A: Plaintiffs will have to provide us with the information and documentation we need in order to prepare the lawsuit. AILF will do most of the work in the lawsuit on paper. Depending on how the case proceeds, the government and its attorneys may want to ask the plaintiffs some questions about their case, either through written questions and answers or in person. This is called “discovery.” One type of discovery is a “deposition,” which is an interview where parties are asked questions about their cases.
Depositions are possible but not common in this type of case. In the event that discovery and/or depositions were required, an AILF attorney or an attorney working with us would assist plaintiffs to comply with any discovery requests, and would appear with plaintiffs at any deposition at no charge (see below). At a later stage, a plaintiff may be required to be present at
3
a hearing or a trial and possibly be asked to testify about their particular case, but this is quite rare.
Q: Will it cost me anything to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: AILF and any co-counsel will not charge any attorney’s fees for representing individuals in this lawsuit. AILF and any co-counsel also will pay the costs and expenses associated with the lawsuit, such as filing fees, copying, long distance calls, travel expenses for AILF attorneys and staff, depositions, transcripts, etc. In the unlikely event that an individual should be required to be present at a deposition, hearing or a trial, we may ask that he/she pay their own travel and lodging expenses, if any. Those expenses would be reimbursed if the lawsuit is successful and we recover costs.
Q: Will anyone know that I am a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: Lawsuits are public information, and are available as a public court document. Many courts now have lawsuits and other documents available electronically, accessible via the internet. Also, USCIS will, of course, know the identity of the plaintiffs. We also will discuss plaintiffs’ cases with any other lawyers working with us on the lawsuit. It also is possible that the media – newspapers, radio, or TV reporters – will see the court documents and decide to do a story on the lawsuit.
Q: What should I do if I am eligible and interested in being a plaintiff in the lawsuit?
A: Please quickly submit the Questionnaire for Potential Plaintiffs and send us the documents requested. If you do not have the Questionnaire, please send an email to visabulletin@ailf.org, and we will send it to you. You may also fax a request to AILF LAC at (202) 742-5619. Please indicate this is a question about the visa bulletin litigation.
If you have any questions that are not answered by this FAQ or the questionnaire, please send them to visabulletin@ailf.org or fax to (202) 742-65619, and we will respond. Thank you!
===============
==============
USCIS VISA BULLETIN/
VISA AVAILABILTY LAWSUIT
Frequently Asked Questions about Participating in this Lawsuit
AILF is considering filing a lawsuit in federal district court against the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) over its rejection of otherwise properly filed adjustment of status applications for the alleged reason that a visa was not available, even though the Visa Bulletin from the Department of State (DOS) states that a visa was available at the time of filing.
Any foreign national who is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status and whose adjustment of status application has been or will be returned or rejected solely on this basis may be eligible to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit. If you are considering being a participant in this lawsuit, you may find the following frequently asked questions and answers helpful.
Q: What is AILF?
A: The American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF) is a non-profit organization dedicated to protecting the rights of immigrants and refugees and to securing fair and just application and administration of the U.S. immigration laws. In order to achieve these goals, AILF sometimes files lawsuits involving various aspects of immigration law.
Q: What is this lawsuit about?
A: This lawsuit will be filed by plaintiffs who have been harmed because USCIS rejected or returned or is expected to reject or return a properly submitted adjustment of status application for the alleged reason that no visa was immediately available even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that a visa was available at that time.
To be eligible for adjustment to lawful permanent resident status, a foreign national must show that a visa number is “immediately available.” USCIS regulations state that the DOS Visa Bulletin is used to determine whether a visa number is immediately available. This Bulletin is published once a month and lists the visa availability dates for all categories of immigrants for the following month. Thus, for example, the July 2007 bulletin, listing visa availability dates for the entire month of July, was published in June 2007.
AILF has learned that USCIS has refused to allow certain adjustment of status applications to be filed even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that visa numbers are available for the immigrant category at that time. USCIS rejected these applications because DOS informed it in an internal communication that no visa numbers remained for that category of immigrants. To date, this has happened only in the employment-based “other worker” category. We anticipate that it may happen in a number of other types of employment-based immigrant categories beginning in July 2007.
We believe USCIS violated the law when it failed to apply the visa availability dates listed in the Visa Bulletin, as required by a federal regulation, and instead rejected properly filed adjustment applications. Through this lawsuit, we will challenge the rejection of adjustment of status applications on this basis. We will ask the court to order USCIS to accept the rejected adjustment applications and treat them as being filed as of the date they originally would have been filed had USCIS not rejected them.
Q: What is a “plaintiff” and how do I know if I am eligible to be a “plaintiff” in this lawsuit?
A: A plaintiff is a person who files a lawsuit against someone else. We are still determining the categories of plaintiffs but an eligible plaintiff for this lawsuit may include:
[other worker category]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in the “other worker” category for receipt by USCIS in June 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
[other employment-based categories]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in any employment-based category other than “other worker” for receipt by USCIS in July 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
Q: Why should I be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
2
A: If the lawsuit is successful, USCIS should accept your adjustment application and treat it as if it had been filed as of the date that you originally tried to file it. Because your adjustment application will then be considered to be pending before the agency, you may be eligible for interim benefits, including an employment authorization document, advance parole, and others.
What the lawsuit will not do is make a visa number immediately available to you if none is available. If the visa numbers have in fact been used for the current fiscal year, the court does not have the authority under the law to make a new number available to you. However, if the court orders that USCIS accept your adjustment application as of the date that you originally tried to file it, you will be at an earlier place in line when visa numbers become available again in the next fiscal year, October 1, 2007. Additionally, as mentioned, you may be eligible for interim benefits while you are waiting.
Q: What is likely to happen because of the suit?
A: Lawsuits are uncertain by nature. We cannot predict the exact outcome. However, other efforts to resolve these problems with USCIS have not succeeded. For this reason, we believe that a lawsuit is the only remaining possible way to resolve these problems.
Q: Will being a plaintiff in this lawsuit hurt my chances for permanent residence?
A: If an individual is otherwise legally entitled to have an application granted, the government cannot lawfully deny that application on the basis that the person is participating or participated in a lawsuit. If we believed the government was taking such action, we would complain to the lawyers representing the government and to the judge handling the case. In our experience, this retaliation has not happened.
Please be aware, though, that USCIS is likely to examine plaintiffs’ adjustment of status applications more closely than it otherwise might. It may ask the plaintiffs questions and ask for additional information about their adjustment applications or immigration status. See below regarding “discovery.”
Q: How much time must plaintiffs spend on this lawsuit?
A: Plaintiffs will have to provide us with the information and documentation we need in order to prepare the lawsuit. AILF will do most of the work in the lawsuit on paper. Depending on how the case proceeds, the government and its attorneys may want to ask the plaintiffs some questions about their case, either through written questions and answers or in person. This is called “discovery.” One type of discovery is a “deposition,” which is an interview where parties are asked questions about their cases.
Depositions are possible but not common in this type of case. In the event that discovery and/or depositions were required, an AILF attorney or an attorney working with us would assist plaintiffs to comply with any discovery requests, and would appear with plaintiffs at any deposition at no charge (see below). At a later stage, a plaintiff may be required to be present at
3
a hearing or a trial and possibly be asked to testify about their particular case, but this is quite rare.
Q: Will it cost me anything to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: AILF and any co-counsel will not charge any attorney’s fees for representing individuals in this lawsuit. AILF and any co-counsel also will pay the costs and expenses associated with the lawsuit, such as filing fees, copying, long distance calls, travel expenses for AILF attorneys and staff, depositions, transcripts, etc. In the unlikely event that an individual should be required to be present at a deposition, hearing or a trial, we may ask that he/she pay their own travel and lodging expenses, if any. Those expenses would be reimbursed if the lawsuit is successful and we recover costs.
Q: Will anyone know that I am a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: Lawsuits are public information, and are available as a public court document. Many courts now have lawsuits and other documents available electronically, accessible via the internet. Also, USCIS will, of course, know the identity of the plaintiffs. We also will discuss plaintiffs’ cases with any other lawyers working with us on the lawsuit. It also is possible that the media – newspapers, radio, or TV reporters – will see the court documents and decide to do a story on the lawsuit.
Q: What should I do if I am eligible and interested in being a plaintiff in the lawsuit?
A: Please quickly submit the Questionnaire for Potential Plaintiffs and send us the documents requested. If you do not have the Questionnaire, please send an email to visabulletin@ailf.org, and we will send it to you. You may also fax a request to AILF LAC at (202) 742-5619. Please indicate this is a question about the visa bulletin litigation.
If you have any questions that are not answered by this FAQ or the questionnaire, please send them to visabulletin@ailf.org or fax to (202) 742-65619, and we will respond. Thank you!
===============
hot world cup final 2011 cricket.
sabudanawada
03-20 09:34 AM
Tens of thousands? :eek:you kidding me? where did you get that number from? Please explain your logic/source or refrain from making unwarranted assumptions.
If they have made the priority date to 2003 now, what that should tell us is that they suspect only a few thousand applications pending before that deadline.
NO, no way.
There are tens of thousands of EB2 India applicants from 2000 to 2002. Add labor substituters, EB2 converters, and you'll be lucky to see EB-2 India at even Dec 2002. Most likely within a few weeks of Apr, all EB-2 India visas will get used up. Keep in mind the new EB-2 numbers are from EB-1 India flowover. So it's going to last even less time than Oct-Nov last year.
If they have made the priority date to 2003 now, what that should tell us is that they suspect only a few thousand applications pending before that deadline.
NO, no way.
There are tens of thousands of EB2 India applicants from 2000 to 2002. Add labor substituters, EB2 converters, and you'll be lucky to see EB-2 India at even Dec 2002. Most likely within a few weeks of Apr, all EB-2 India visas will get used up. Keep in mind the new EB-2 numbers are from EB-1 India flowover. So it's going to last even less time than Oct-Nov last year.
more...
house icc world cup final 2011
pappu
01-11 01:21 PM
Hi:
I just joined the chapter.
Would love to be able to volnteer my services to this cause. How can I help? Also it may be a good idea to start a local support group for those of us in line waiting for this immigration hell to be over...may be a get together of some sort....
Wishin' for a better future ahead for all us immigration victims
PD for self: August 03
Labor Cert: pending
PD for husband: Dec 03
Labor Cert & I-140: appoved.
welcome.
pls contact varsha and others to start chapter activities.
varsha, pls plan some action items for the chapter.
I just joined the chapter.
Would love to be able to volnteer my services to this cause. How can I help? Also it may be a good idea to start a local support group for those of us in line waiting for this immigration hell to be over...may be a get together of some sort....
Wishin' for a better future ahead for all us immigration victims
PD for self: August 03
Labor Cert: pending
PD for husband: Dec 03
Labor Cert & I-140: appoved.
welcome.
pls contact varsha and others to start chapter activities.
varsha, pls plan some action items for the chapter.
tattoo 2011 cricket world cup final
actaccord
02-14 08:50 AM
ppl...don't wait till last minute...
more...
pictures icc world cup final 2011 pics.
chmur
09-11 03:04 PM
EB3-ROW Pending per Aug 2009 I-485 Inventory ~ 63K
The EB3-ROW Demand for October 2010 ~ 45K.
So actually backlog reduction for EB3 ROW has just been 18 K (much less than the 30K they should get). I don't see where you are seeing the overflow.
The total Pending in Aug 2009 was
EB2 ALL- 75K. EB3 all -151K . So total ~ 225K
The demand data today is EB2 = 34K(this is only I/C, no ROW demand)
Demand for EB3 = 136K.
So even though reduction in backlog is significant (225K- 170K =55K). It is not going to all categories evenly.
And unless USCIS comes up with a smarter way to determine demand data other than counting pending I-485, once this demand goes to zero they will have to advance EB2 I/C dates. Now they can be smart and advance it by 6 months to not open up floodgates and test the post 2007 demand, or just follow the rule blindly that supply > demand and the category is current. Either way, the law prevents any spillover from a category unless it is current and EB2 I/C is not getting current in 2-3 years.
I also want to believe like you that the hidden demand post 2007 for EB2I/C + EB3 ROW is as low as possible. And we won't know about the exact number till USCIS does a better job of reporting approved I-140 by country.
Check with latest Inventory data - 05/2010
Also - where can i get the demand data you are referring to ??
The EB3-ROW Demand for October 2010 ~ 45K.
So actually backlog reduction for EB3 ROW has just been 18 K (much less than the 30K they should get). I don't see where you are seeing the overflow.
The total Pending in Aug 2009 was
EB2 ALL- 75K. EB3 all -151K . So total ~ 225K
The demand data today is EB2 = 34K(this is only I/C, no ROW demand)
Demand for EB3 = 136K.
So even though reduction in backlog is significant (225K- 170K =55K). It is not going to all categories evenly.
And unless USCIS comes up with a smarter way to determine demand data other than counting pending I-485, once this demand goes to zero they will have to advance EB2 I/C dates. Now they can be smart and advance it by 6 months to not open up floodgates and test the post 2007 demand, or just follow the rule blindly that supply > demand and the category is current. Either way, the law prevents any spillover from a category unless it is current and EB2 I/C is not getting current in 2-3 years.
I also want to believe like you that the hidden demand post 2007 for EB2I/C + EB3 ROW is as low as possible. And we won't know about the exact number till USCIS does a better job of reporting approved I-140 by country.
Check with latest Inventory data - 05/2010
Also - where can i get the demand data you are referring to ??
dresses 2011 world cup final images.
studmvr
12-13 09:25 AM
PD-Nov03 EB2 here in Central-NJ.
Iam in the process of letting everyone in my friends community know about IV here. Please contact me @ studmvr@yahoo.com for any help for IV.
Iam in the process of letting everyone in my friends community know about IV here. Please contact me @ studmvr@yahoo.com for any help for IV.
more...
makeup icc world cup final 2011
pitha
06-12 02:37 PM
house is 100 times more conservative than senate (does not matter if it is democratic controlled house and republican controlled house). If you think house is going to give us EB immigrants a break then you are completely off base. For every kyl, durbin and Kennedy in senate you will have three times more kyl, durbin and Kennedy in the house. House will take the senate bill and make some adjustments to it and not modifications. This bill cannot be repaired by amendments it is fundamentally flawed for us.whatever passes from the senate is the final bill, house will either reject it or rubber stamp it.
It looks like without H1b restrictions you may not get anything. That is mood in the Senate. If CIR is not coming what is your idea? Skill bill seperately is difficult if not impossible. Last minute they may increase H1b for a few years(But last minute increase of GC is impossible. You might have learned lesson on last lame duck session and February 2007) that will further screw up Gc waiting persons.If CIR comes you can have a chance of some favorable amendment in House if not happens in Senate. Also if you oppose CIR you are joining with your enemy and you have risk of losing crediblity. Compete America does not oppose CIR and they are opposing some portions and trying Amendments and they did not advice to any Senator to oppose the bill
It looks like without H1b restrictions you may not get anything. That is mood in the Senate. If CIR is not coming what is your idea? Skill bill seperately is difficult if not impossible. Last minute they may increase H1b for a few years(But last minute increase of GC is impossible. You might have learned lesson on last lame duck session and February 2007) that will further screw up Gc waiting persons.If CIR comes you can have a chance of some favorable amendment in House if not happens in Senate. Also if you oppose CIR you are joining with your enemy and you have risk of losing crediblity. Compete America does not oppose CIR and they are opposing some portions and trying Amendments and they did not advice to any Senator to oppose the bill
girlfriend Lanka World Cup Final 2011
Daisy
10-25 02:15 PM
My EB3 India PD: March 2003
June filer
June filer
hairstyles world cup final 2011 winning
dvb123
02-19 12:12 AM
This radical idea will end retrogression radically. This concept is little tough for people who have no knowledge of country quota to understand.
1. There is a bill in the house now
HR 264 Introduced to Congress
Section A - It will grant GC to people with > 5 years in US
Section B - For EB skilled immigration for people with <5 years in US, it makes LC process more difficult.
2. We must encourage this bill with some amendments. Section A which automatically gives green card to people > 5 years in US should be ELIMINATED. Section B should remain.
3. This causes a reduction in I-485's and CP's because you need to be resident in United States for a minimum of 5 years to apply for Labor. Then ROW people would be able to apply for I-140 and I-485 automatically.
4. In the last quarter of every year the leftover visas(EB1 and EB2 ROW people will not be able to apply for labor->I-140+I-485 until they stayed in US for 5 years) will be spilled to EB 2 and EB 3 India and China. EB3 ROW, India and China visa retrogression issue will be solved because we will have spillovers for atleast 5 years. This bill is not against ROW people. EB3 ROW people will benefit immensely.
5. The restrictionists will be happy because nobody can start the green card process without staying in US for atleast 5 years (F1 + h1, j1 + h1, f1 only, j1 only, h1 only statuses)
So, we should support HR 264 bill with a few amendments if possible.
1. There is a bill in the house now
HR 264 Introduced to Congress
Section A - It will grant GC to people with > 5 years in US
Section B - For EB skilled immigration for people with <5 years in US, it makes LC process more difficult.
2. We must encourage this bill with some amendments. Section A which automatically gives green card to people > 5 years in US should be ELIMINATED. Section B should remain.
3. This causes a reduction in I-485's and CP's because you need to be resident in United States for a minimum of 5 years to apply for Labor. Then ROW people would be able to apply for I-140 and I-485 automatically.
4. In the last quarter of every year the leftover visas(EB1 and EB2 ROW people will not be able to apply for labor->I-140+I-485 until they stayed in US for 5 years) will be spilled to EB 2 and EB 3 India and China. EB3 ROW, India and China visa retrogression issue will be solved because we will have spillovers for atleast 5 years. This bill is not against ROW people. EB3 ROW people will benefit immensely.
5. The restrictionists will be happy because nobody can start the green card process without staying in US for atleast 5 years (F1 + h1, j1 + h1, f1 only, j1 only, h1 only statuses)
So, we should support HR 264 bill with a few amendments if possible.
sagar_nyc
06-10 02:07 PM
This is correct. EAD is based on pending 485 in most of our case. that's it.
what the heck r u talking. i just renewed my EAD myself, no employment letter, no pay slip, no crap. Don't blabber if you dont know the details.
what the heck r u talking. i just renewed my EAD myself, no employment letter, no pay slip, no crap. Don't blabber if you dont know the details.
immigrationsri
06-26 06:25 PM
Hi,
I am on H1B visa for the past 2.5 years and my current visa expires on 30th Sept 2010. When i approached my company for visa extension, i was told that based on management decision they are changing my visa from H1 to L1. I have a question on this one. If i proceed with this process and in the mean time i get a job offer from different company in US that is ready for H1 transfer and extension, Is it valid? Can i continue to work on my H1 for remaining years? If this is not a valid case and i need to continue with L1 only (with current employer), Will my number of years to work in US be reduced?
Please treat these questions as urgent ones and kindly reply.
Thanks in Advance.
Regards,
Sri
I am on H1B visa for the past 2.5 years and my current visa expires on 30th Sept 2010. When i approached my company for visa extension, i was told that based on management decision they are changing my visa from H1 to L1. I have a question on this one. If i proceed with this process and in the mean time i get a job offer from different company in US that is ready for H1 transfer and extension, Is it valid? Can i continue to work on my H1 for remaining years? If this is not a valid case and i need to continue with L1 only (with current employer), Will my number of years to work in US be reduced?
Please treat these questions as urgent ones and kindly reply.
Thanks in Advance.
Regards,
Sri