485InDreams
09-26 10:49 AM
CNN should not take 1000+ peoples effort for granted...These people went all the way to washington for some common cause....and it should not be misleading to the public...
Purpose of the media is to fetch right information at the right time to the public which they are not doing.....
Purpose of the media is to fetch right information at the right time to the public which they are not doing.....
wallpaper quotes for a oyfriend
feedfront
09-20 12:06 PM
Does anyone know, how much attorney gonna charge to reply RFE?
qesehmk
02-11 03:03 PM
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV.pdf
Family based visa used for FY2009 = 215,343
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = 10,567
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2010.
*********
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY08-AR-TableV.pdf
Family based visa used for FY2008 = 226,105
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = ZERO
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2009.
Always go by the facts.
___________________
Not a legal advice.
I agree. I tried to see if there is a way FB category in 2009 might have received a spillover from EB. But thats almost impossible given EB is severely backlogged.
Another way to verify unused 13K in 2009 EB would be to check 2010 FB limit. If there were unused visas from EB in 2009 then they go back to FB in 2010.
Finally, per Ron unused is not same as wasted. Unused is unassigned. Wasted is .... assigned but action is not taken to close the case. If that is the case then wasted visas won't be available .... neither inside or outside category. It is frightening to think that with so many preadjudicated cases USCIS might be wasting visas! I don't believe this .... but if true ... it is outrageous.
Family based visa used for FY2009 = 215,343
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = 10,567
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2010.
*********
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY08-AR-TableV.pdf
Family based visa used for FY2008 = 226,105
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = ZERO
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2009.
Always go by the facts.
___________________
Not a legal advice.
I agree. I tried to see if there is a way FB category in 2009 might have received a spillover from EB. But thats almost impossible given EB is severely backlogged.
Another way to verify unused 13K in 2009 EB would be to check 2010 FB limit. If there were unused visas from EB in 2009 then they go back to FB in 2010.
Finally, per Ron unused is not same as wasted. Unused is unassigned. Wasted is .... assigned but action is not taken to close the case. If that is the case then wasted visas won't be available .... neither inside or outside category. It is frightening to think that with so many preadjudicated cases USCIS might be wasting visas! I don't believe this .... but if true ... it is outrageous.
2011 you poems your oyfriend
rajeev_74
07-05 04:44 PM
Really shameful...we have a thick skin & a weak heart
Update: Thank you everyone who has contributed since July 2 when we announced the drive. Our total contributions from paypal and google are around $2,500 till now (despite having 15 k members). As you can understand this is hardly of any significance for even a small legal effort. A big lawsuit is out of question. Thus IV core will use it for IV activities to further pursue its advocacy efforts. IV encourages its members being a plaintiffs with AILF if they so desire. If you are an IV member and also a plaintiff, you can let us know for any guidance we can provide. IV will be coming up with more direction to its members soon. We will have some plan for everyone and will need participation from everyone. Please stay tuned.
Update: Thank you everyone who has contributed since July 2 when we announced the drive. Our total contributions from paypal and google are around $2,500 till now (despite having 15 k members). As you can understand this is hardly of any significance for even a small legal effort. A big lawsuit is out of question. Thus IV core will use it for IV activities to further pursue its advocacy efforts. IV encourages its members being a plaintiffs with AILF if they so desire. If you are an IV member and also a plaintiff, you can let us know for any guidance we can provide. IV will be coming up with more direction to its members soon. We will have some plan for everyone and will need participation from everyone. Please stay tuned.
more...
new_horizon
10-21 12:03 AM
reasoning with you. I can easily refute all your claims, and also prove my point. but I think it'll be a waste of my time. 'coz I am not trying to convert anybody to vote for the repubs. just can't help it, never heard anybody hiring a CEO just because he has experience organizing the company picnic :D . peace.
dskhabra
03-17 09:46 AM
Guy you are forgetting the 7% per country quota for issuing GC. Applicants from a particular country can only get 7% of the total GC available in a year.
Total employment based quota per year is 140,000 and 7% of it is 9800. So at the most only 9800 Indians can get GC per year. This count also includes the dependents.
So even if your PD is current and you have filed your I-485 but there may be more than 9800 Indians with the same status and hence only the first 9800 will get GC that year.
There are more than 100,000 primary Indian applicants who have filed their I-485 and assuming a average Indian family size of 3, there are 300,000 who are waiting for GC. Only 9800 can get in a year. So if the law does not change this backlog will finish in more than 30 years.
That's true but when unused numbers are used for retrogressed countries then 7% cap is not followed. You can see more than 9800 approvals for India in the last three years. But still it's a looooonnnngggggg wait...........
Total employment based quota per year is 140,000 and 7% of it is 9800. So at the most only 9800 Indians can get GC per year. This count also includes the dependents.
So even if your PD is current and you have filed your I-485 but there may be more than 9800 Indians with the same status and hence only the first 9800 will get GC that year.
There are more than 100,000 primary Indian applicants who have filed their I-485 and assuming a average Indian family size of 3, there are 300,000 who are waiting for GC. Only 9800 can get in a year. So if the law does not change this backlog will finish in more than 30 years.
That's true but when unused numbers are used for retrogressed countries then 7% cap is not followed. You can see more than 9800 approvals for India in the last three years. But still it's a looooonnnngggggg wait...........
more...
NKR
10-15 03:23 PM
Most immigrants and potential immigrants are within Top 20% of US population.
Can you tell us from where you got that information?.
Can you tell us from where you got that information?.
2010 i love you poems
gsc999
04-08 11:02 AM
I think -We have to come to our senses. The law wants to treat us as slaves. Do the work and go back. They do not want to give the opportunity to have the american dream. They do not have problem with mexicans, or arabic country people, or anybody. All they want is - we do not want smart talented ones to take our white collar jobs.
We are screwed by our Desi employers, the law. We do it for $. So it is really upto us to choose from. Money or respect.
When I see fellow indians, at the age of 40, I feel pity. Most of us would see that they are in dilema as what to do. What they are doing is correct. They live a succumbed life.
Choose life !! is the better option !!
-------
yawn. Weak post. Just substitute "I" for wherever you use "We" start with "I have to come to my senses." Don't patronize and don't be condescending.
We are screwed by our Desi employers, the law. We do it for $. So it is really upto us to choose from. Money or respect.
When I see fellow indians, at the age of 40, I feel pity. Most of us would see that they are in dilema as what to do. What they are doing is correct. They live a succumbed life.
Choose life !! is the better option !!
-------
yawn. Weak post. Just substitute "I" for wherever you use "We" start with "I have to come to my senses." Don't patronize and don't be condescending.
more...
bigboy007
06-19 05:11 PM
its illegal to take color photocopies of driver licences, ONLY send b/w
hair love poems for your oyfriend
alterego
03-16 12:44 AM
A few things.
Ignoring folks who are full of themselves is the best way to make them go away.
There are many reasons why people with priority dates before 2004 are stuck in queue. Some I can think of are:
1) Backlog labors that were completed as recently as late last year.
2) Background check stuck applications.
3) Labor Subs which were allowed as recently as last summer.
4) EB3-EB2 cases, where PDs are transferred.
5) Other applications that cannot be approved due to time specific requirements such as physician NIW cases.
6) Some cases that just slipped through the cracks of USCIS inefficiency.
Many of the above causes are being/have been addressed, however their impact will be with us for some time yet, unless there is a visa recapture legislation to make up for the unused visas.
Ignoring folks who are full of themselves is the best way to make them go away.
There are many reasons why people with priority dates before 2004 are stuck in queue. Some I can think of are:
1) Backlog labors that were completed as recently as late last year.
2) Background check stuck applications.
3) Labor Subs which were allowed as recently as last summer.
4) EB3-EB2 cases, where PDs are transferred.
5) Other applications that cannot be approved due to time specific requirements such as physician NIW cases.
6) Some cases that just slipped through the cracks of USCIS inefficiency.
Many of the above causes are being/have been addressed, however their impact will be with us for some time yet, unless there is a visa recapture legislation to make up for the unused visas.
more...
sunnymit
07-12 04:58 PM
Thanks KartiKiran and spicy_guy...
hot love poems to oyfriend love
sc3
10-16 06:05 PM
What happened to your sense of judgment, whoever said that USCIS is doing it maliciously? They reacted for sure but within legal boundaries. I do not understand why you keep twisted people’s answers.
I havent twisted anyone's answers. When you (and others) say "reacted" you mean that they are intentionally shafting you in some way. Do you dispute that? Why is the very first response to this idea something to the tune of "..and see the cutoff go back to ice ages". It clearly shows that people are saying USCIS will "revolt" against you (not necessarily in as many words).
That is exactly I am saying, I am asking why should it be this way, this is totally wrong. They should go by PD. Even if my application was not moved to another centre mine still would not have gotten approved because I applied in Aug and not July. I mentioned that to tell you that I have to wait even more now.
Now if you ask me why I applied in Aug and not in Jul, it is because my family was not in US at that time. If you had told me beforehand about the impending fiasco I wouldn’t have sent them in the first place. I had to call them back and cancel my trip spending hundreds of $s.
Why is it not sustainable, now you are defending something that is wrong, why should I have to wait though my GC was started ages before?
Let's see here; I don't need to know why you did not apply earlier, that is your personal matter. But answer me this.
I have a PD of late 2002 (EB3), and haven't been able to apply due to personal reasons. Now when the PD becomes current. I apply and the following bulletin further advances the PD. Do you think that I should be given preference over someone who had no personal obligations and applied in 2007, that is to say, should the entire system be ground to a halt because I am a late filer?
Now put yourself in the earlier RD's applicant? What will be your answer? Do you think someone who delays for personal reason be given a free pass just because he has an earlier PD??
I know you dont want to hear it, but the current system of RD based processing is a good system. Your grouse probably is that they advanced the PDs so much further when there was enough demand from earlier PDs. If you argue on that premise, I will be very supportive. But I am insensitive to "I have an earlier PD, so I should get my GC first".
PD has its place in the system, however it does not play a role in processing order.
Just because I said USCIS is doing something wrong (not following processing order..) doesn’t mean I said that DOS did something right.. you keep assuming things..
You were blaming USCIS for the Perm/BEC debacle, I did not assume anything you haven't already said.
Again you are running your imagination wild, who blamed all the other things on USCIS?..
I guess your computer has a bug, it is not showing the winkies and the smiles properly. Get a technician to look at it.
Dude, show me one post of mine which said anything against the idea. I even gave a green for what he is trying to do, at least he is doing something while the rest of us are watching….
I was responding to "bec", and you ended up debating the issue by supporting the idea that USCIS retaliated because of the July 07. I guess that makes it fair play for people to assume that you are against the original idea. I you consider it to be overreaching to make such connection, I apologize for that.
I havent twisted anyone's answers. When you (and others) say "reacted" you mean that they are intentionally shafting you in some way. Do you dispute that? Why is the very first response to this idea something to the tune of "..and see the cutoff go back to ice ages". It clearly shows that people are saying USCIS will "revolt" against you (not necessarily in as many words).
That is exactly I am saying, I am asking why should it be this way, this is totally wrong. They should go by PD. Even if my application was not moved to another centre mine still would not have gotten approved because I applied in Aug and not July. I mentioned that to tell you that I have to wait even more now.
Now if you ask me why I applied in Aug and not in Jul, it is because my family was not in US at that time. If you had told me beforehand about the impending fiasco I wouldn’t have sent them in the first place. I had to call them back and cancel my trip spending hundreds of $s.
Why is it not sustainable, now you are defending something that is wrong, why should I have to wait though my GC was started ages before?
Let's see here; I don't need to know why you did not apply earlier, that is your personal matter. But answer me this.
I have a PD of late 2002 (EB3), and haven't been able to apply due to personal reasons. Now when the PD becomes current. I apply and the following bulletin further advances the PD. Do you think that I should be given preference over someone who had no personal obligations and applied in 2007, that is to say, should the entire system be ground to a halt because I am a late filer?
Now put yourself in the earlier RD's applicant? What will be your answer? Do you think someone who delays for personal reason be given a free pass just because he has an earlier PD??
I know you dont want to hear it, but the current system of RD based processing is a good system. Your grouse probably is that they advanced the PDs so much further when there was enough demand from earlier PDs. If you argue on that premise, I will be very supportive. But I am insensitive to "I have an earlier PD, so I should get my GC first".
PD has its place in the system, however it does not play a role in processing order.
Just because I said USCIS is doing something wrong (not following processing order..) doesn’t mean I said that DOS did something right.. you keep assuming things..
You were blaming USCIS for the Perm/BEC debacle, I did not assume anything you haven't already said.
Again you are running your imagination wild, who blamed all the other things on USCIS?..
I guess your computer has a bug, it is not showing the winkies and the smiles properly. Get a technician to look at it.
Dude, show me one post of mine which said anything against the idea. I even gave a green for what he is trying to do, at least he is doing something while the rest of us are watching….
I was responding to "bec", and you ended up debating the issue by supporting the idea that USCIS retaliated because of the July 07. I guess that makes it fair play for people to assume that you are against the original idea. I you consider it to be overreaching to make such connection, I apologize for that.
more...
house emo love poems for a oyfriend
ajthakur
07-14 07:14 PM
I left a message for my previous employer. I am not sure whether they will provide this information to me.
That is the reason I was asking you to try to find from your ex-employer if you could get any news.General procedure from what I have read is to issue a NOID but they have given you a RFE which keeps you alive for now.Maybe your ex-emplyer cancelled your 140 after 180 days but again all this is a shot in the dark and only your ex-employer has the answer for this.
That is the reason I was asking you to try to find from your ex-employer if you could get any news.General procedure from what I have read is to issue a NOID but they have given you a RFE which keeps you alive for now.Maybe your ex-emplyer cancelled your 140 after 180 days but again all this is a shot in the dark and only your ex-employer has the answer for this.
tattoo poems for your oyfriend,
User00
06-22 12:54 PM
And wait for RFE.
USCIS is asking for COLOR copies of DL and passport.
Can you please provide the link ?
I refered to USCIS website but did not find a mention of copies of DL.
PLease advise.
Thanks
USCIS is asking for COLOR copies of DL and passport.
Can you please provide the link ?
I refered to USCIS website but did not find a mention of copies of DL.
PLease advise.
Thanks
more...
pictures poems for my oyfriend.
Legal
07-04 09:10 PM
[QUOTE=nixstor]Excellent analysis but it does have flaws
I am sure you might have read this from murthy's website (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_dosebn.html) or not, but DOS/CA/VO officials shared this piece with them. As per the above article, final quarter quota should not open until Jul 2nd. I understand that agencies can implement and interpret certain stuff, but you cannot interpret and implement one thing on Jun 13th and another on Jul 2nd. If its written into law, that the quarterly allocation is a must, USCIS is in violation and DOS/CA/VO as well for not policing them of visa number usage.
"Essentially, the numbers are spread out during the first three quarters and whatever is left is available during the last quarter"
On reading the Murthy article it appears that the biggest mistake USCIS committed was using up the visa numbers before the 4th qtr began on 7/2/07.
USCIS did it other way around...desparately rushed to use up the numbers before the 4th qtr began....only explanation is to avoid doing additional paperwork for the July filers...
I am sure you might have read this from murthy's website (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_dosebn.html) or not, but DOS/CA/VO officials shared this piece with them. As per the above article, final quarter quota should not open until Jul 2nd. I understand that agencies can implement and interpret certain stuff, but you cannot interpret and implement one thing on Jun 13th and another on Jul 2nd. If its written into law, that the quarterly allocation is a must, USCIS is in violation and DOS/CA/VO as well for not policing them of visa number usage.
"Essentially, the numbers are spread out during the first three quarters and whatever is left is available during the last quarter"
On reading the Murthy article it appears that the biggest mistake USCIS committed was using up the visa numbers before the 4th qtr began on 7/2/07.
USCIS did it other way around...desparately rushed to use up the numbers before the 4th qtr began....only explanation is to avoid doing additional paperwork for the July filers...
dresses 2011 poem for your oyfriend,
pbojja
12-11 10:17 AM
Stop the non-sense . As if USCIS-DOL knows exactly how many portings are going on ..do you think all the movement of this dates make sense ? just check last year movements .. they have no theory no logic or no numbers they just move with no logic ... At the end of year they move to 2006 or 2007and back to 2003 next year ..
I m EB2 2006 and I have no problems with portings ..go for it EB3 folks ..I know it will be a year or more process but worth it , I think EB3 early 2000 folks deserve GC than a 2006-2007 EB2 folks(Dont think you are genious just because you are EB2 ..we know we all do same jobs).
I m ready for reds and dont care a bit .
Some one left a nasty message for this post with a red. I m not even worried about red but your comment made me sick and here is the message for you .
Looks like you are grown up wrong ? either you lived in a environment like the one in your message or completely out of your mind after you grow up .
I m surprsied you are educated and made it to US and waiting for GC ..wow what a sick idiot ..
I m EB2 2006 and I have no problems with portings ..go for it EB3 folks ..I know it will be a year or more process but worth it , I think EB3 early 2000 folks deserve GC than a 2006-2007 EB2 folks(Dont think you are genious just because you are EB2 ..we know we all do same jobs).
I m ready for reds and dont care a bit .
Some one left a nasty message for this post with a red. I m not even worried about red but your comment made me sick and here is the message for you .
Looks like you are grown up wrong ? either you lived in a environment like the one in your message or completely out of your mind after you grow up .
I m surprsied you are educated and made it to US and waiting for GC ..wow what a sick idiot ..
more...
makeup i love you poems and quotes
msgrewal81
02-18 04:16 PM
1 - It will grant GC to people with > 5 years in US
2 - For EB skilled immigration for people with <5 years in US, it makes LC process more difficult.
Please add your views about this bill, how it might be improved and its chances of becoming a law.
P.S. I previously misread the text somewhere. This bill just eliminate H1B classification for fashion models.
2 - For EB skilled immigration for people with <5 years in US, it makes LC process more difficult.
Please add your views about this bill, how it might be improved and its chances of becoming a law.
P.S. I previously misread the text somewhere. This bill just eliminate H1B classification for fashion models.
girlfriend love you poems your oyfriend.
snathan
06-10 04:11 PM
Done...
hairstyles poems for ur oyfriend.
quizzer
08-15 03:59 PM
Sep visa bulletin better than expected for EB2
alex99
07-11 01:50 PM
Request More Eb3 Guys To Participate......
Please....
Please....
zuhail
03-11 09:23 PM
I have emailed the IV administrators seeking the opinion of the IV team and
about prioritizing the recapturing of visa numbers on the IV agenda.
May be I would be able to speak with one of the IV administrators about this issue soon.
about prioritizing the recapturing of visa numbers on the IV agenda.
May be I would be able to speak with one of the IV administrators about this issue soon.
No comments:
Post a Comment