pappu
12-25 06:50 PM
If you create groups on yahoo or google make sure you do not miss out on members that come to this thread for updates on state chapter and wish to join.
wallpaper hot pink heels cheap. hot pink
NKR
02-17 09:05 AM
2006 census
Total population of India,china, mexico and Philipines = about 40 % of world population
India - 17% of world Population
China- 20% of world population
Mexico- 1.7
Phillipines-1.3 %
------------
Ttl 40 % of world population.
so theres a reason behind this quota. Its not divide and rule.
Excluding US (4.3) , ICMP Still comprise of 35.7 % of world total
I do not think that quota system is because these countries are most populous. It is because more number of people from those countries come here. I am sure countries like Indonesia and Russia are more populous than Phillipines.
Total population of India,china, mexico and Philipines = about 40 % of world population
India - 17% of world Population
China- 20% of world population
Mexico- 1.7
Phillipines-1.3 %
------------
Ttl 40 % of world population.
so theres a reason behind this quota. Its not divide and rule.
Excluding US (4.3) , ICMP Still comprise of 35.7 % of world total
I do not think that quota system is because these countries are most populous. It is because more number of people from those countries come here. I am sure countries like Indonesia and Russia are more populous than Phillipines.
ganguteli
03-09 11:32 PM
I like your idea.
Let us all blame IV core for not getting our greencard and having a crappy visa bulletin this month. :)
I contributed $5 in the high five campaign and I still do not have my labor cleared. I want to blame IV for that too. :)
Did you not see the FOIA action item by IV core?
Let us all blame IV core for not getting our greencard and having a crappy visa bulletin this month. :)
I contributed $5 in the high five campaign and I still do not have my labor cleared. I want to blame IV for that too. :)
Did you not see the FOIA action item by IV core?
2011 YSL tribute hot pink real
GC_ki_daud
10-16 09:55 AM
At the risk of sounding Naive.....Want to clarify...:confused:
Who and how do we get the letter notarized .
Does the letter need to have any of our personal case details i.e reciept number etc.
Who and how do we get the letter notarized .
Does the letter need to have any of our personal case details i.e reciept number etc.
more...
Jitamitra
06-08 06:04 PM
Same old stuff. I dont see a light at the end of the tunnel till some immigration reform bill gets shoved in or a comprehensive immigration bill is introduced.
The obama administration is not in a mood to touch immigration and we live to be scape goats of policies back from 90's.
The obama administration is not in a mood to touch immigration and we live to be scape goats of policies back from 90's.
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...
paula
03-21 05:44 PM
EB3
Labor PD - 6/2/2004
Labor cleared - February 2007
485 filed - August 17
140 cleared - September 2007
EAD card - November 2007
AP - December 2007
485 pending.
Labor PD - 6/2/2004
Labor cleared - February 2007
485 filed - August 17
140 cleared - September 2007
EAD card - November 2007
AP - December 2007
485 pending.
2010 YSL Tribute hot pink suede
unitednations
12-21 10:48 PM
This is from Murthy chat.
Question: If in the past I have been out of H1B status for 6 months (I-94 not expired), is this going to hurt my GC (or any new petitions to change / extend / adjust status)?
Answer: A person who fails to maintain status for over 180 days may have a problem obtaining the approval of the I-485, which allows a maximum of 180 days for one to be out of status under Section 245(k) of the INA, unless the person is covered under 245(i) of the INA. Sometimes, though, the fault of the employer in not paying the salary while the person is considered an employee may not pose a problem but at other times it may pose a problem. Not having pay stubs will certainly adversely impact the ability to obtain an extension or change of status from the USCIS. Jun-20-2005.
:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:
I had written about this in the past. When I went for local office interview; he had requested all w2's and tax returns from my initial entry shown on g-325( LAST ADDRESS OUTSIDE USA FOR MORE THEN ONE YEAR) which was 1999.
It said prove that you maintained status on each entry.
Now: i didn't have any issues but I was pretty upset that officer was going way outside the law and testing periods that he wasn't supposed to. My date of last entry before filing 485 was December 2002 and he was requesting 1999-2006.
I did inform him that he wasn't supposed to ask for this as it was outside the law. However; what I gathered is that although 245k does have some significant protection for everyone; uscis tries to go other ways in catching/snagging you. Another link was provided in this link where a person listed an employer on his g-325a but he was on bench and never got paid. USCIS was trying to deny his 485 due to fraud. Fraud overrules 24k any time.
Therefore; uscis uses many different avenues to get at other aspects; especially to get you to lie, cover up, mislead in things you don't need to but inadvertently do because you think it is problematic when it really wasn't.
The feeling i got from my interview is that is what he was exactly trying to do.
Question: If in the past I have been out of H1B status for 6 months (I-94 not expired), is this going to hurt my GC (or any new petitions to change / extend / adjust status)?
Answer: A person who fails to maintain status for over 180 days may have a problem obtaining the approval of the I-485, which allows a maximum of 180 days for one to be out of status under Section 245(k) of the INA, unless the person is covered under 245(i) of the INA. Sometimes, though, the fault of the employer in not paying the salary while the person is considered an employee may not pose a problem but at other times it may pose a problem. Not having pay stubs will certainly adversely impact the ability to obtain an extension or change of status from the USCIS. Jun-20-2005.
:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:
I had written about this in the past. When I went for local office interview; he had requested all w2's and tax returns from my initial entry shown on g-325( LAST ADDRESS OUTSIDE USA FOR MORE THEN ONE YEAR) which was 1999.
It said prove that you maintained status on each entry.
Now: i didn't have any issues but I was pretty upset that officer was going way outside the law and testing periods that he wasn't supposed to. My date of last entry before filing 485 was December 2002 and he was requesting 1999-2006.
I did inform him that he wasn't supposed to ask for this as it was outside the law. However; what I gathered is that although 245k does have some significant protection for everyone; uscis tries to go other ways in catching/snagging you. Another link was provided in this link where a person listed an employer on his g-325a but he was on bench and never got paid. USCIS was trying to deny his 485 due to fraud. Fraud overrules 24k any time.
Therefore; uscis uses many different avenues to get at other aspects; especially to get you to lie, cover up, mislead in things you don't need to but inadvertently do because you think it is problematic when it really wasn't.
The feeling i got from my interview is that is what he was exactly trying to do.
more...
damialok
05-28 03:17 PM
Finally after 6 years, its my turn to report. Online is NOT updated but when I called NSC they informed that it was approved on 05/23/2008. They also informed me that it will take 6 business days to get the card(card ordered on 05/23/2008).
hair hot pink pumps cheap.
greyhair
06-10 12:56 PM
May be we should do some thing dramatic. Like sending letter to Canadian Government, here we are 1000 skilled people with extensive experience and International degrees. Collectively we going to bring in $1 million or more. Can you expedite our Permanent residency!!
All US senators know that EB immigrants are going through Hell hole of USCIS. They are unable to do anything about it.
Although USCIS does not report to Congress, USCIS merely implement the laws created by 100 Senators and 435 House members. Our anger towards USCIS is mis-directed. The anger and focus should be on the Congress to pass the laws that will fix green card wait time.
All Senators are actors. They pretend that they know our problems but they actually do not do anything to fix our issues. Otherwise, why would this amendment have 70 votes as pappu said in his post.
All US senators know that EB immigrants are going through Hell hole of USCIS. They are unable to do anything about it.
Although USCIS does not report to Congress, USCIS merely implement the laws created by 100 Senators and 435 House members. Our anger towards USCIS is mis-directed. The anger and focus should be on the Congress to pass the laws that will fix green card wait time.
All Senators are actors. They pretend that they know our problems but they actually do not do anything to fix our issues. Otherwise, why would this amendment have 70 votes as pappu said in his post.
more...
Jaime
09-10 03:05 PM
You are grossly being taken advantage of - You just met an immigrant from a green card lottery country who applied for a green card over the internet and got it, thanks to the lottery. Good for him or her! But this immigrant has very basic schooling and is just now starting to look for a job in whatever. You, on the other hand, had to go through grueling interview processes at your current company and had to overcome many immigration process hurdles such as Labor certification, to prove that no American was available for your job. Even then, your green card is still many years away. Even with your U.S.-earned PhD or MAsters degree...and you may yet be laid off and forced to immediately leave the United States. If only you had been born in Iceland or Botswana or Kenya and won a green card through the USCIS lottery from an internet cafe in Nairobi!!!! No such luck though!
hot Hot Pink Shimmer Shoe
ramee
06-28 11:29 PM
Thank you Dhundhun.
For some reason I thought the difference between Welcome Email and Card Ordered email is only couple of days.
For some reason I thought the difference between Welcome Email and Card Ordered email is only couple of days.
more...
house Anemone Pumps sale,cheap
Ahimsa
11-08 02:49 PM
Hi
I live in Iselin
My labor filed in Nov 2003 as NY EB3 RIR
Not yet approved -- "In Process"
I live in Iselin
My labor filed in Nov 2003 as NY EB3 RIR
Not yet approved -- "In Process"
tattoo Glam Lace Gel Hot Pink Bra
JazzByTheBay
09-13 02:01 PM
http://morejazzbythebay.files.wordpress.com/2007/09/sanjoserallybnr4-2.jpg
SAN JOSE WAS THE BEGINNING, DC WILL BE A HUGE MILESTONE!
(San Jose rally pictures and videos, and Aman's messages from Milpitas, CA meeting can be found at http://morejazzbythebay.wordpress.com (http://morejazzbythebay.wordpress.com/))
http://images.jupiterimages.com/common/detail/20/99/22609920.jpg
cheers, and see ya'll in DC!
jazz
Easy decision: JUST COME GUYS!!!!
SAN JOSE WAS THE BEGINNING, DC WILL BE A HUGE MILESTONE!
(San Jose rally pictures and videos, and Aman's messages from Milpitas, CA meeting can be found at http://morejazzbythebay.wordpress.com (http://morejazzbythebay.wordpress.com/))
http://images.jupiterimages.com/common/detail/20/99/22609920.jpg
cheers, and see ya'll in DC!
jazz
Easy decision: JUST COME GUYS!!!!
more...
pictures Christian Louboutin Pumps Hot
ajay
11-10 05:20 PM
I will send.
dresses Yves hot pink heels cheap.
johnmcdonald98
07-05 12:19 PM
I go against this idea, because this doesn't work out logistically.
First as others pointed out traffic will be way less as soon as IV charges,
second, what would be the cut-off? $5 or $100? So if person who paid $5 might get the same privileges as guys who paid $1000? Is it fair, then you need to come up with normal, premium membership etc..
Third, as soon as you make people pay, they become more demanding as they need to know where their each cents have been spent. I guess then IV core member needs to answer questions related to this more than actual issues
by the way who and where do they keep the accounting in IV?
First as others pointed out traffic will be way less as soon as IV charges,
second, what would be the cut-off? $5 or $100? So if person who paid $5 might get the same privileges as guys who paid $1000? Is it fair, then you need to come up with normal, premium membership etc..
Third, as soon as you make people pay, they become more demanding as they need to know where their each cents have been spent. I guess then IV core member needs to answer questions related to this more than actual issues
by the way who and where do they keep the accounting in IV?
more...
makeup Hot pink nike sb dunk high
mbawa2574
02-16 12:28 PM
I have contributed $200 to IV, during (or a bit after) the July-August gold rush. I just don't feel like showing it off to everyone. And you calling me a loser (and not looser you moron), a planted and a racist punk is really funny, since *I* am the minority here. Without your own knowledge, you are a better supporter of status quo than I am as you show your true side to everyone here.
Yes you have in your posts supported what IV stands against. You have appreciated policies of US government not letting Indians and Chinese here.So I am not sure what you stand for. IV has opposing country caps on agenda from last three years and suddenly you are telling folks that there are too many Indians and Chinese here and you support caps and less Indians and Chinese here. Yes you are minority and you can say your voice but cannot be racist and cannot offend the majority.
Yes you have in your posts supported what IV stands against. You have appreciated policies of US government not letting Indians and Chinese here.So I am not sure what you stand for. IV has opposing country caps on agenda from last three years and suddenly you are telling folks that there are too many Indians and Chinese here and you support caps and less Indians and Chinese here. Yes you are minority and you can say your voice but cannot be racist and cannot offend the majority.
girlfriend hot pink heels cheap.
DDD
03-15 12:17 PM
hhmmm.....architecture would be cool. But I think that would focus to much on the rendering than the modelling. I really would like to do a character contest. SOmething robotic that leaves the modeller to make it as detailed or as not detailed. But it is up to you. I need to add more 3d pieces to my folio, so I am really going to do it the this time lol. Since the time frame will be so long. We should try to have intermediate deadlines or WIP posts to keep interest in the contest.
hairstyles WOMENS HOT PINK GLITTER
nomi
12-12 04:15 PM
USCIS is not a legislative body, they cannot pass a law. The Congress does. In order to change any existing laws Congress has to pass it and USCIS just implements it. So I do not think meeting USCIS will help. BTW what is DOS ?
DOS is Department of State who controls all visa numbers.
DOS is Department of State who controls all visa numbers.
ramus
07-03 03:00 PM
Thanks.
Contributed $100.
Order Details - Jul 3, 2007 10:34 AM PDT
Google Order #222021463879830
Contributed $100.
Order Details - Jul 3, 2007 10:34 AM PDT
Google Order #222021463879830
greencardfever2007
04-04 06:51 AM
I think this Bill will die like 2006 SKIL bill.
No comments:
Post a Comment