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.
wallpaper Dianna Agron and Lea Michele
abhijitp
07-18 12:37 AM
Continuing on this forum with more generic title
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=10383
Per Greg Siskind -- July 2nd filers might have to file again, as all July 2nd application were rejected. Check out the link below as well as the comment section for the blog
Greg Siskind is reporting the following about July2nd rejection here
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2007/07/faqs-part-1.html
part of above post --
USCIS did not state how cases filed and rejected on the 2nd are to be handled other than to say that properly filed applications would be accepted. This presumably covers the many cases filed after the second that were held, but it doesn�t explain what will happen to the cases received earlier. We hope USCIS will issue special instructions to issue July 2nd receipt dates to those who are able to document they attempted to file. We presume some folks are still waiting on their July 2nd cases to be returned and are debating refiling new cases rather than waiting. Unfortunately, there is a risk of not getting the package back before August 17th and some people will need to refile without proof of the earlier filing. Hopefully, again, USCIS will institute a process for such individuals to avoid being penalized.
USCIS has not announced any details yet on how it will determine which cases get 2007 visa numbers that might still be available. We also don�t know yet how cases will be processed that are not in the batch of cases that get green card numbers this year. For those who will have to get numbers in future years, applications should be worked by the order of the priority date. So applicants with labor certifications approved some time back, for example, should go before people in the same category with later priority dates.
For individuals filing cases not requiring a labor certification (such as Schedule A cases and national interest waivers), the priority date is the date of filing. Because there may be hundreds of thousands of applications received between July 2nd and August 17th with many of these cases not requiring a labor certification, the date during this six week period a case is filed could make a big difference in terms of when a case will complete processing. And, again, getting that July 2nd priority date for those who filed early and were rejected could make a big difference in when their cases are ultimately processed through to completion.
This would be interesting as well as cause for concern for many of us. Do we have to go through the whole process one more time and file again?
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=10383
Per Greg Siskind -- July 2nd filers might have to file again, as all July 2nd application were rejected. Check out the link below as well as the comment section for the blog
Greg Siskind is reporting the following about July2nd rejection here
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2007/07/faqs-part-1.html
part of above post --
USCIS did not state how cases filed and rejected on the 2nd are to be handled other than to say that properly filed applications would be accepted. This presumably covers the many cases filed after the second that were held, but it doesn�t explain what will happen to the cases received earlier. We hope USCIS will issue special instructions to issue July 2nd receipt dates to those who are able to document they attempted to file. We presume some folks are still waiting on their July 2nd cases to be returned and are debating refiling new cases rather than waiting. Unfortunately, there is a risk of not getting the package back before August 17th and some people will need to refile without proof of the earlier filing. Hopefully, again, USCIS will institute a process for such individuals to avoid being penalized.
USCIS has not announced any details yet on how it will determine which cases get 2007 visa numbers that might still be available. We also don�t know yet how cases will be processed that are not in the batch of cases that get green card numbers this year. For those who will have to get numbers in future years, applications should be worked by the order of the priority date. So applicants with labor certifications approved some time back, for example, should go before people in the same category with later priority dates.
For individuals filing cases not requiring a labor certification (such as Schedule A cases and national interest waivers), the priority date is the date of filing. Because there may be hundreds of thousands of applications received between July 2nd and August 17th with many of these cases not requiring a labor certification, the date during this six week period a case is filed could make a big difference in terms of when a case will complete processing. And, again, getting that July 2nd priority date for those who filed early and were rejected could make a big difference in when their cases are ultimately processed through to completion.
This would be interesting as well as cause for concern for many of us. Do we have to go through the whole process one more time and file again?
ambrishmisra
04-10 02:05 PM
My wife is in US since Aug, 2006 on H4.
We missed the H1-B filing last year and it doesn't look good this year too (although her petition got submitted on the first day).
Her last four years job profile (as of now):
- 2.5 years for 'Company A' (one of the top 3 Indian s/w company)
- 10 months for 'Company B'
- 8 months on H4 (in US) - NO work
Can she apply through 'Company A' for an L1 (as she has worked more than a year continuously in the last three years)?
OR its only for an company you are working for currently?
Any help will be greatly appreciated.
We missed the H1-B filing last year and it doesn't look good this year too (although her petition got submitted on the first day).
Her last four years job profile (as of now):
- 2.5 years for 'Company A' (one of the top 3 Indian s/w company)
- 10 months for 'Company B'
- 8 months on H4 (in US) - NO work
Can she apply through 'Company A' for an L1 (as she has worked more than a year continuously in the last three years)?
OR its only for an company you are working for currently?
Any help will be greatly appreciated.
2011 -Dianna Agron Interview AE
alterego
07-18 05:30 PM
Looking at these figures and trying to read the tea leaves for the upcoming year is what this thread is really about. A noble if useless pursuit.
There are some visas left for this year and most will go to EB2 India and China.
The USCIS has decided to give EB2I better attention that it has got for the last year or two. About time to be honest.
However that attention will not be at the expense of EB3I. If anything it will be EB3ROW that may feel some impact. EB3ROW is oversubscribed too. Clearly not as bad as EB3I but oversubscribed nevertheless, the VB in Oct. will reflect this. If any EB3ROW feel aggrieved by all this, he/she is free to jump above EB2I in the pecking order by merely stepping up to EB2ROW. Fair is fair and Eb2I should accept that.
EB1 and EB2ROW are the real red herring in all this. Those numbers have fluctuated quite wildly in the last 5-6 yrs as one can see from the charts in this thread. The number of applicants in those categories more than anything else will be the determining factor in the progress of Eb2I in the upcoming year. Given the slowing economy, the free access EB1 and Eb2ROW have had of late and the slowdown of 140 processing etc. I think that EB2I movement prospects look fair, but not bankable given the above issues. However the number of EB2 approvals seem set to be higher next year than for the last 2-3 yrs.
There are some visas left for this year and most will go to EB2 India and China.
The USCIS has decided to give EB2I better attention that it has got for the last year or two. About time to be honest.
However that attention will not be at the expense of EB3I. If anything it will be EB3ROW that may feel some impact. EB3ROW is oversubscribed too. Clearly not as bad as EB3I but oversubscribed nevertheless, the VB in Oct. will reflect this. If any EB3ROW feel aggrieved by all this, he/she is free to jump above EB2I in the pecking order by merely stepping up to EB2ROW. Fair is fair and Eb2I should accept that.
EB1 and EB2ROW are the real red herring in all this. Those numbers have fluctuated quite wildly in the last 5-6 yrs as one can see from the charts in this thread. The number of applicants in those categories more than anything else will be the determining factor in the progress of Eb2I in the upcoming year. Given the slowing economy, the free access EB1 and Eb2ROW have had of late and the slowdown of 140 processing etc. I think that EB2I movement prospects look fair, but not bankable given the above issues. However the number of EB2 approvals seem set to be higher next year than for the last 2-3 yrs.
more...
nixstor
07-04 09:44 PM
Please stop posting this on every thread. In one line you are just spamming. We all visit Attorney Oh's website often. He does not need any publicity
immigration-law.com
07/04/2007: Status and Issues Involving July 2007 485 Fiasco
* The AILF work on the lawsuit appears to be in progress without any hurdles. It has reported that enough candidates have come forward to participate in the lawsuit as the plaintiffs and it does not need any more candidates to move forward for the lawsuit. Some of other people are likely to be covered as members of the class action regardless of their actual participation in the lawsuit. People should send "THANK YOU" to the AILF Legal Action Center leaders and the attorneys who are actually working on this case. Some contribution to the AILF may be more than appropriate. Please visit the AILF site to learn how they can send in contribution.
#
# We have been asked by the readers to report the alleged conspiracy theory. We declined to do it. However, people may want to know potential issues that should be answered and explored. We will discuss these issues on following hypotehtical premises:
* Presumption of Facts: (1) The I-485 applications have been experiencing a tremendous backlog lately. (2) The causes for the backlog have been known to be delays in the security checks. Some of these applicants have sought a relief in federal courts in the form of mandamus actions. (3) Allegedly, the USCIS pull together local and Service Center employees and pull out pending I-485 cases which were older than six months in backlog, working overtime and during the weekend right before July 1, 2007. This is an assumption at this point. (4) As evidenced by the revised Visa Bulletin, apparently these employees contacted "en mass" the DOS to request the visa numbers for these pending I-485 cases, which the DOS reported in the release of the revised VB turned out exceeding 60,000. (5) The rule requires that the USCIS approves I-485 cases "prior to" to contacting and requesting a visa number. (6) The current USCIS policy and procedure also require that I-485 applications be adjudicated and approved "only after" the completion of clearance of the security checks.
* Issue I: Hypothetically, what happens if the USCIS takes out the visa number before they obtain the security clearace?
o Answer I: Obviously it would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: It will constitue a serious security lapse, compromising the homeland security.
* Issue II: Hypothetically, what hppens if the USCIS requests and takes out the visa numbers prior to adjudication and approval of the pending I-485 applications?
o Answer I: It is evident that the USCIS would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: There could be two probable consequences affecting the backlog I-485 applicants and the new July Visa Bulletin eligible I-485 applicants, shoud the hypothetical facts develop. (1) The backlog I-485 applicants who have been issued I-485 approval notices should not be affected by the fiasco, albeit the potential revocation of the I-485 approvals. In most cases, revocation of the approved I-485 requires the time-consuming immigration court proceedings, assuming that the USCIS has a sufficient cause of action which may be questionable in this case. (2) The backlog I-485 applicants who have yet to receive the approval notice and the USCIS has yet to adjudicate and approve the application might be vulnerable in that the USCIS might be required to return the visa numbers for these cases as there was an error. Hypothetically, these numbers could be returned to the State Department and based on these returned number, the State Department might be required to revise the July Visa Bulletin again.
immigration-law.com
07/04/2007: Status and Issues Involving July 2007 485 Fiasco
* The AILF work on the lawsuit appears to be in progress without any hurdles. It has reported that enough candidates have come forward to participate in the lawsuit as the plaintiffs and it does not need any more candidates to move forward for the lawsuit. Some of other people are likely to be covered as members of the class action regardless of their actual participation in the lawsuit. People should send "THANK YOU" to the AILF Legal Action Center leaders and the attorneys who are actually working on this case. Some contribution to the AILF may be more than appropriate. Please visit the AILF site to learn how they can send in contribution.
#
# We have been asked by the readers to report the alleged conspiracy theory. We declined to do it. However, people may want to know potential issues that should be answered and explored. We will discuss these issues on following hypotehtical premises:
* Presumption of Facts: (1) The I-485 applications have been experiencing a tremendous backlog lately. (2) The causes for the backlog have been known to be delays in the security checks. Some of these applicants have sought a relief in federal courts in the form of mandamus actions. (3) Allegedly, the USCIS pull together local and Service Center employees and pull out pending I-485 cases which were older than six months in backlog, working overtime and during the weekend right before July 1, 2007. This is an assumption at this point. (4) As evidenced by the revised Visa Bulletin, apparently these employees contacted "en mass" the DOS to request the visa numbers for these pending I-485 cases, which the DOS reported in the release of the revised VB turned out exceeding 60,000. (5) The rule requires that the USCIS approves I-485 cases "prior to" to contacting and requesting a visa number. (6) The current USCIS policy and procedure also require that I-485 applications be adjudicated and approved "only after" the completion of clearance of the security checks.
* Issue I: Hypothetically, what happens if the USCIS takes out the visa number before they obtain the security clearace?
o Answer I: Obviously it would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: It will constitue a serious security lapse, compromising the homeland security.
* Issue II: Hypothetically, what hppens if the USCIS requests and takes out the visa numbers prior to adjudication and approval of the pending I-485 applications?
o Answer I: It is evident that the USCIS would violate the rules and the laws.
o Answer II: There could be two probable consequences affecting the backlog I-485 applicants and the new July Visa Bulletin eligible I-485 applicants, shoud the hypothetical facts develop. (1) The backlog I-485 applicants who have been issued I-485 approval notices should not be affected by the fiasco, albeit the potential revocation of the I-485 approvals. In most cases, revocation of the approved I-485 requires the time-consuming immigration court proceedings, assuming that the USCIS has a sufficient cause of action which may be questionable in this case. (2) The backlog I-485 applicants who have yet to receive the approval notice and the USCIS has yet to adjudicate and approve the application might be vulnerable in that the USCIS might be required to return the visa numbers for these cases as there was an error. Hypothetically, these numbers could be returned to the State Department and based on these returned number, the State Department might be required to revise the July Visa Bulletin again.
same_old_guy
07-09 04:47 PM
And we are not in deep shit right now ???? Where have you been all the time ?
Why are you so scared ? Is it because you think USCIS wil do harm to you and others ? Well, what the hell it was doing while allocating all the quota in 15 days to avoid the rush ?
I wish USCIS would get down on it's knee and issue an apologies to all those people it's screwed over !
Why are you so scared ? Is it because you think USCIS wil do harm to you and others ? Well, what the hell it was doing while allocating all the quota in 15 days to avoid the rush ?
I wish USCIS would get down on it's knee and issue an apologies to all those people it's screwed over !
more...
abd
09-20 12:39 PM
Yes was similar to yours. The status did change to Review. They just got it yesterday and I saw hard lud yesterday and a soft lud today. I did not know how my Attorney responded or worded it, I just sent him the EVL from current employer.
Mine also should have reached yesterday. Didn't see any LUD. I am really nervous.
Mine also should have reached yesterday. Didn't see any LUD. I am really nervous.
2010 dianna agron and lea michele
Jaime
09-10 12:04 PM
Are you saying that whoever is happy in their job without a GC is in a closet or jail?Only if you plan to remain in the U.S. permanently and you don't like the fact that you'll have to wait for many years without the ability to get a salary raise or promotion, without your spouse being able to work (if you have one) and being forced to leave the U.S. immediately if you get laid off.
If you are perfectly happy with your H1-B job and planning to stay in the U.S. only temporarily, then no, you are not in a jail or closet. But 99% of us are.
If you are perfectly happy with your H1-B job and planning to stay in the U.S. only temporarily, then no, you are not in a jail or closet. But 99% of us are.
more...
gcma08
06-14 04:07 PM
We received our plastic cards today.
hair Lea Michele, Cory Monteith
biomd
10-12 02:26 PM
PD Aug 2006
I 140 Filed in June 2007. Pending @ TSC
I 485 Filed on 10th Aug 2007
FP Notice received.
I 140 Filed in June 2007. Pending @ TSC
I 485 Filed on 10th Aug 2007
FP Notice received.
more...
gcobsessed
07-11 08:40 PM
I consider this movement of dates a ticket to enter a lucky draw. Whatever visa numbers remain to be used in last two months of the fiscal year is going to be allocated at random to people who have their PD current in this period. So, congratulations to whoever gets lucky.
Well, your luck might be influenced by a variety of reasons like when you sent your application, whether your 140 is already approved, is it a complicated case, pending RFEs, etc. Nevertheless, it still is good news that so many people are now eligible to participate in the draw...
Well, your luck might be influenced by a variety of reasons like when you sent your application, whether your 140 is already approved, is it a complicated case, pending RFEs, etc. Nevertheless, it still is good news that so many people are now eligible to participate in the draw...
hot They were roommates when they
Kodi
04-01 06:24 PM
Thank you so much.
So is it correct if I take the annual salary and divide by 52 and then by 40 to get the hourly basis?
So is it correct if I take the annual salary and divide by 52 and then by 40 to get the hourly basis?
more...
house Dianna Agron and Lea Michele
gconmymind
07-14 06:36 PM
Is it possible they are trying to adjudicate my 485. I am EB2 India PD: JAN 2006.
The reason there is an RFE and not a NOID means USCIS is trying to adjudicate your application. Depends what action they take on your response..my 2 cents
The reason there is an RFE and not a NOID means USCIS is trying to adjudicate your application. Depends what action they take on your response..my 2 cents
tattoo i live with dianna
ita
02-02 03:25 PM
desi3933,
Thanks for your response. I did little digging on the H1 LCA front.Here's what I found out and I have one question too.
Now I've a LCA for my H1.But I also found out that each time I (employee) changes location there will be a new LCA and it's not one LCA per H1, at least in case of consulting.
I guess if there is a RFE we have to attach all the W2 and all the H1 LCA's. LCA has a start date and end date. Now my company says they don't have previous LCA.
If they say they don't have it then I don't know if they will be able to give me LCA if I leave the company and if there is RFE later.
All my W2 amount(s) are in good shape compared to the latest LCA which is for one of major metro areas in NorthEast.
Do you have any idea ,in case of RFE, what happens if we just send W2 without LCA/ with latest LCA?
Thank you.
W2 should be fine in most cases. Additionally, employment letter stating job duties, salary offered, dates is very useful. Please note that this salary could be different from GC Salary, however, it must be within the salary range mentioned in H1 LCA.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
Thanks for your response. I did little digging on the H1 LCA front.Here's what I found out and I have one question too.
Now I've a LCA for my H1.But I also found out that each time I (employee) changes location there will be a new LCA and it's not one LCA per H1, at least in case of consulting.
I guess if there is a RFE we have to attach all the W2 and all the H1 LCA's. LCA has a start date and end date. Now my company says they don't have previous LCA.
If they say they don't have it then I don't know if they will be able to give me LCA if I leave the company and if there is RFE later.
All my W2 amount(s) are in good shape compared to the latest LCA which is for one of major metro areas in NorthEast.
Do you have any idea ,in case of RFE, what happens if we just send W2 without LCA/ with latest LCA?
Thank you.
W2 should be fine in most cases. Additionally, employment letter stating job duties, salary offered, dates is very useful. Please note that this salary could be different from GC Salary, however, it must be within the salary range mentioned in H1 LCA.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
more...
pictures Dianna+agron+hot Gq cover, lea
walker15
09-10 03:28 PM
Still HR5882 not yet tabled, please stay tuned I will update whatever is happening.
Still they are discussing HR6020(Illegal Alien left over at Iraq while on duty :)) and it looks like this will drag a bit. So Rep. Zoe Lofgren is fighting for that family.
Hope there will be sufficient time to discuss HR5882.
Still they are discussing HR6020(Illegal Alien left over at Iraq while on duty :)) and it looks like this will drag a bit. So Rep. Zoe Lofgren is fighting for that family.
Hope there will be sufficient time to discuss HR5882.
dresses Dianna Agron and Lea Michele
jetflyer
08-10 12:28 PM
http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/LPR07.shtm
see table 6 in that link
Thanks VDLRAO.
I looked at 2008 data from same source and surprised to see 70046 approvals for 2008-EB2.
Does that means there are not many old cases in line ahead of us?
Source link: DHS | Yearbook of Immigration Statistics: 2008 (http://www.dhs.gov/files/statistics/publications/LPR08.shtm)
check for table 6
see table 6 in that link
Thanks VDLRAO.
I looked at 2008 data from same source and surprised to see 70046 approvals for 2008-EB2.
Does that means there are not many old cases in line ahead of us?
Source link: DHS | Yearbook of Immigration Statistics: 2008 (http://www.dhs.gov/files/statistics/publications/LPR08.shtm)
check for table 6
more...
makeup and Lea Michele (Rachel).
Lasantha
03-07 10:26 AM
Is it true that in some cases after you file for AC21, CIS would send a RFE for the financial details of the new company (to stablish that the new company can pay you - company tax details).
I think I heard this on the last IV attorney conference call with Attorney Prashanti. So if that's is true, what if the company does not want to send this kind of confidential information to a third party attorney (your attorney)?
Or if the company is a big one they may not want to help you with these details at all. You know, they may not want to be bothered with that sort of hassle.
Have any of you heard of a case where CIS asked for ability to pay supporting information for AC21?
I think I heard this on the last IV attorney conference call with Attorney Prashanti. So if that's is true, what if the company does not want to send this kind of confidential information to a third party attorney (your attorney)?
Or if the company is a big one they may not want to help you with these details at all. You know, they may not want to be bothered with that sort of hassle.
Have any of you heard of a case where CIS asked for ability to pay supporting information for AC21?
girlfriend glee dianna agron tattoo. glee
pappu
04-09 03:31 PM
Visa Bulletin for May 2010 (http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4805.html)
hairstyles lea michele dianna agron
inskrish
03-11 03:03 AM
You are calling me anti-immigrant! Just because someone is spreading rumor and half-cooked information and I don't agree with him, I am called anti-immigrant.
I suggest that you look at my past posts.
I do NOT agree with the complaint that desi3933 is an anti-immigrant. He has been very helpful to the immigrant community, and has good knowledge in the immigration matters, so to speak; however, his tone of the question about "they vs they" and "spill over" is not good, in my opinion.
I suggest that you look at my past posts.
I do NOT agree with the complaint that desi3933 is an anti-immigrant. He has been very helpful to the immigrant community, and has good knowledge in the immigration matters, so to speak; however, his tone of the question about "they vs they" and "spill over" is not good, in my opinion.
piyu7444
01-31 04:57 AM
On H1 Status, one must be working full time and should be paid salary even if s/he is on benching. Three month maternity leave should be ok, but 6 months of unpaid leave will be very difficult to explain.
You should seriously consider changing status to H4, if that is an option.
In Nov, she can re-enter on H1 visa to come back to H1 status.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
So does this mean that pending AOS has no meaning?
How about EAD.......if she switches to EAD in Feb with same employer and does not work from Mrach onward then?
My (mis)understanding was that as long as one has a pending AOS one can be in US without a job and paystub as long as one has a pending AOS.
Thanks for your help.
You should seriously consider changing status to H4, if that is an option.
In Nov, she can re-enter on H1 visa to come back to H1 status.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
So does this mean that pending AOS has no meaning?
How about EAD.......if she switches to EAD in Feb with same employer and does not work from Mrach onward then?
My (mis)understanding was that as long as one has a pending AOS one can be in US without a job and paystub as long as one has a pending AOS.
Thanks for your help.
justAnotherFile
07-01 09:59 PM
in 2005 visa bulletin...
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_2712.html
they are clearly violating their own stated policy.
it also proves that the USCIS rate of adjudication was very slow until june 13, and they have been doing extraordinary efforts to approve petitions since then to avoid the predicament of recieving 200K applications on july 2.
I guess they have 40 K approvable/approved petitions by today. And are going to use up those tomorrow to make numbers unavailable and force DoS hand.
But question is how long does it take for the USCIS to request and recieve those numbers on MOnday.
WHAT CAUSES THE ESTABLISHMENT OF CUT-OFF DATES?
The Visa Office subdivides the annual preference and foreign state limitations specified in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) into twelve monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily qualified applicants that have been reported to VO are compared each month with the numbers available for the next regular allotment and numbers are allocated to reported applicants in order of their priority dates, the oldest dates first.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered “Current.” For example, if the Employment Third preference monthly target is 5,000 and there are only 3,000 applicants, the category is considered “Current”.
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be “oversubscribed” and a visa availability cut-off date is established. The cut-off date is the priority date of the first documentarily qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a visa number. For example, if the Employment Third preference monthly target is 5,000 and there are 15,000 applicants, a cut-off date would be established so that only 5,000 numbers would be used, and the cut-off date would be the priority date of the 5,001st applicant.
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_2712.html
they are clearly violating their own stated policy.
it also proves that the USCIS rate of adjudication was very slow until june 13, and they have been doing extraordinary efforts to approve petitions since then to avoid the predicament of recieving 200K applications on july 2.
I guess they have 40 K approvable/approved petitions by today. And are going to use up those tomorrow to make numbers unavailable and force DoS hand.
But question is how long does it take for the USCIS to request and recieve those numbers on MOnday.
WHAT CAUSES THE ESTABLISHMENT OF CUT-OFF DATES?
The Visa Office subdivides the annual preference and foreign state limitations specified in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) into twelve monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily qualified applicants that have been reported to VO are compared each month with the numbers available for the next regular allotment and numbers are allocated to reported applicants in order of their priority dates, the oldest dates first.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered “Current.” For example, if the Employment Third preference monthly target is 5,000 and there are only 3,000 applicants, the category is considered “Current”.
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be “oversubscribed” and a visa availability cut-off date is established. The cut-off date is the priority date of the first documentarily qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a visa number. For example, if the Employment Third preference monthly target is 5,000 and there are 15,000 applicants, a cut-off date would be established so that only 5,000 numbers would be used, and the cut-off date would be the priority date of the 5,001st applicant.
No comments:
Post a Comment