HV000
03-18 06:18 PM
Please see the last sentece which says "Thus, the same cut-off date for each country since the extra numbers must be made available in priority date order without regard to country".
When they use this spill over, only PD is imp not the country.
This will make prediction difficult since we do not know how many PDs are eligible in either country. Am i right?
When they use this spill over, only PD is imp not the country.
This will make prediction difficult since we do not know how many PDs are eligible in either country. Am i right?
wallpaper queen elizabeth ii coronation
gimme_GC2006
03-09 12:25 PM
and then june....then july....and so on and so forth visa bullietins......:D
I dont see anything good happening this year..duh :confused::confused:
I dont see anything good happening this year..duh :confused::confused:
new_horizon
01-18 02:33 PM
Once while visiting Niagara falls, I took a wrong turn towards the bridge to Canada, and the officer wouldn't allow me to turn back, but told me to go to Canada. Since I did not have my passport or visa with me the CA people wouldn't let me inside their country. I told I took a wrong turn when looking for a gas station, and they finally let me turn back to US. But since I did not have the passport the US guys wouldn't let me in here. I told them the same story I took a wrong turn. I was taken in for questioning by the main guy there. The officer finally took my drivers licence (and my employee id which luckily I had) and I think he checked it in his system. After a long while he came back, and told that I can get in, but told me to carry the passport & visa at all times. When this all happened I had my 15 mo daughter with me, 'coz she was in the car (wife and others were going up in the hot air baloon:)). I think my little girl helped somewhat 'coz she's a US citizen :). Above all praise God for that day!!
2011 Unknown portrait of Queen
abcdefgh
01-17 02:25 PM
Just on a positive note of contribution thread and efforts, I just wanted to raise a voice whether we have put enough effort in reaching and notifying members about contribution and retrogression awareness. Not from any side, I see IV's efforts are less but question still arise is "Have we put enough effort in reaching to members about contribution?" Pardon me if I am being too pushy on our contribution initiative. But as I understand to sell an idea, we need to be real pushy. Please post any idea which require volunteer work to reach the members and ask them contribute. I am open to work on it.
more...
GCOP
07-11 01:07 PM
Thanks for your post. Is there any chance for any or Significant movement like this in EB-3. Now it's about time for EB-3 to move ahead. We have been trying for Bills every year, without any luck. Why is it so difficult for any movement in EB-3, which is stuck in 2001 and not moving ahead. It is really frustrating. EB-3 I is really suffering the most. Is there any solution for that ?
____________________
Phone calls to CHC Members
Written Letters to President & IV
Attended DC Rally
Contributed to IV
PD: October 2003, EB-3
source: www.immigration-law.com
07/11/2008: Indian EB-2 Visa Number in Visa Bulletin August 2008 and Anticipated Expedited Adjudication of Their I-485 Applications to Prevent EB 2008 Visa Number Waste
The movement of the EB-2 visa numbers for Indians is indeed a very good news in that it sounds that the USCIS intends to take out the visa numbers for them before the end of September 2008 as best as they can and attempt to adjudicate the applications before the new fiscal year starts on October 1, 2008. Obviously, there must be a large number of EB-2 cases which were filed during the July 2007 Visa Bulletin fiasco whose priority date is June 1, 2006 or earlier date. It appears that the USCIS has been working hard to get these cases ready for adjudication while their visa numbers are availalbe so that the agency prevents the visa number for FY 2008 from being wasted. Please stay tuned to this web site for this remarkable turn of the events.
____________________
Phone calls to CHC Members
Written Letters to President & IV
Attended DC Rally
Contributed to IV
PD: October 2003, EB-3
source: www.immigration-law.com
07/11/2008: Indian EB-2 Visa Number in Visa Bulletin August 2008 and Anticipated Expedited Adjudication of Their I-485 Applications to Prevent EB 2008 Visa Number Waste
The movement of the EB-2 visa numbers for Indians is indeed a very good news in that it sounds that the USCIS intends to take out the visa numbers for them before the end of September 2008 as best as they can and attempt to adjudicate the applications before the new fiscal year starts on October 1, 2008. Obviously, there must be a large number of EB-2 cases which were filed during the July 2007 Visa Bulletin fiasco whose priority date is June 1, 2006 or earlier date. It appears that the USCIS has been working hard to get these cases ready for adjudication while their visa numbers are availalbe so that the agency prevents the visa number for FY 2008 from being wasted. Please stay tuned to this web site for this remarkable turn of the events.
k3GC
11-11 01:01 PM
I think this letter looks good, let us send it. There is no hassle in doing that.
Questions
1. Do we all need to send a copy? Is this like a campaign we are doing?
2. Do we need to send this as IV? Is that possible? Who should we talk to about that?
3. Has somebody sent such letters before the the DOS Visa Office etc. and got anything - may be they can shed some light. I know of folks who have done the the 7001 form DHS | CIS Ombudsman - Case Problems (http://www.dhs.gov/files/programs/editorial_0497.shtm). I dont think this falls under that.
My 2 cents is - this is not a campaign, we are asking for a formal answer / clarification and if we can send this as from IV may be we will get an answer.
Questions
1. Do we all need to send a copy? Is this like a campaign we are doing?
2. Do we need to send this as IV? Is that possible? Who should we talk to about that?
3. Has somebody sent such letters before the the DOS Visa Office etc. and got anything - may be they can shed some light. I know of folks who have done the the 7001 form DHS | CIS Ombudsman - Case Problems (http://www.dhs.gov/files/programs/editorial_0497.shtm). I dont think this falls under that.
My 2 cents is - this is not a campaign, we are asking for a formal answer / clarification and if we can send this as from IV may be we will get an answer.
more...
breddy2000
01-17 03:02 PM
Started to contribute $20 monthly.
Already contributed $200 earlier
Already contributed $200 earlier
2010 Portrait of Queen Elizabeth I
ashshef
11-11 02:31 PM
Kindly Summarize and then Start Any Campaign.
Step 1) Talk to CORE and Take Suggestion
Step 2) Do we want to include members from other Forums?
Step 3) Decide on Fax/Email/Snail mail campaign and Distribute Fax#, Email address and SnailMail Address.
Step 4) Action.. :)
Thanks for the effort behind this GCperm and Vin13.
I agree with Step 1. Step 3 has proven to be useless based on what we have seen before. I am hoping Pappu can advise us as to get this letter in the right hands. I understand IV doesn't want to spend too much time on this, and it is fair on their part as they already have limited resources. But if they can help us out with advice, as Pappu did already with the critique of the letter, it will help.
Step 1) Talk to CORE and Take Suggestion
Step 2) Do we want to include members from other Forums?
Step 3) Decide on Fax/Email/Snail mail campaign and Distribute Fax#, Email address and SnailMail Address.
Step 4) Action.. :)
Thanks for the effort behind this GCperm and Vin13.
I agree with Step 1. Step 3 has proven to be useless based on what we have seen before. I am hoping Pappu can advise us as to get this letter in the right hands. I understand IV doesn't want to spend too much time on this, and it is fair on their part as they already have limited resources. But if they can help us out with advice, as Pappu did already with the critique of the letter, it will help.
more...
newbie09
08-05 07:57 PM
Need help!!!
I'm in US on L1 with company A, company B filed for H1B in Apr'09, H1 is not yet approved, and my L1 is also expiring in Nov'09. Since I'm not sure if I will get H1 approved, I have applied for L1 extension with company A.
My question is:
1. What will happen if I get H1 approved before Oct'09? Will I have to leave Company A and start working for compay B (H1) from 1st Oct even when L1 extension is in process?
2. If L1 extension is approved before 1st Oct, will I be able to continue working for comapny A, even if my H1 is approved?
Basically I don't want to be out of status or do anything against visa rules.
Please guide me on this situation.
I'm in US on L1 with company A, company B filed for H1B in Apr'09, H1 is not yet approved, and my L1 is also expiring in Nov'09. Since I'm not sure if I will get H1 approved, I have applied for L1 extension with company A.
My question is:
1. What will happen if I get H1 approved before Oct'09? Will I have to leave Company A and start working for compay B (H1) from 1st Oct even when L1 extension is in process?
2. If L1 extension is approved before 1st Oct, will I be able to continue working for comapny A, even if my H1 is approved?
Basically I don't want to be out of status or do anything against visa rules.
Please guide me on this situation.
hair queen elizabeth 1 portrait.
andycool
07-12 04:56 PM
E. APPLICABILITY OF INA SECTION 202(a)(5)(A)AS IT RELATES TO THE ALLOCATION OF �OTHERWISE UNUSED� NUMBERS
INA Section 202(a)(5)(A), added by the American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act (AC21), provides that if total demand will be insufficient to use all available numbers in a particular Employment preference category in a calendar quarter, then the otherwise unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limits. This provision helps to assure that all available Employment preference numbers may be used. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5)(A) has occasionally allowed oversubscribed countries such as China-mainland born and India to utilize large quantities of Employment First and Second preference numbers that would have otherwise gone unused.
For example, let us assume that 11,600 Employment Second preference numbers are available in a calendar quarter. There is heavy Employment Second preference demand by China-mainland born and India applicants; however, each country is oversubscribed and would ordinarily be limited to about 800 of the available numbers due to the prorating provisions of INA Section 202(e). Applicants from other countries that have not yet reached their per-country limit have reported a total demand of 6,500 numbers. After taking the worldwide demand into account, it is determined that as a result of the China-mainland born and India per-country limits only 8,100 of the total available Employment Second preference numbers would be used in that quarter. In this instance, the otherwise unused 3,500 numbers could then be made available to China-mainland born and India regardless of their per-country limits. Should that occur, the same cut-off date would be applied to each country, since numbers must be provided strictly in priority date order regardless of chargeability. In this instance, greater number use by one country would indicate a higher rate of demand by applicants from that country with earlier priority dates.
According to this there should be a quarterly spillover ...:confused: but it looks like spillover is happening only in last quarter :D
INA Section 202(a)(5)(A), added by the American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act (AC21), provides that if total demand will be insufficient to use all available numbers in a particular Employment preference category in a calendar quarter, then the otherwise unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limits. This provision helps to assure that all available Employment preference numbers may be used. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5)(A) has occasionally allowed oversubscribed countries such as China-mainland born and India to utilize large quantities of Employment First and Second preference numbers that would have otherwise gone unused.
For example, let us assume that 11,600 Employment Second preference numbers are available in a calendar quarter. There is heavy Employment Second preference demand by China-mainland born and India applicants; however, each country is oversubscribed and would ordinarily be limited to about 800 of the available numbers due to the prorating provisions of INA Section 202(e). Applicants from other countries that have not yet reached their per-country limit have reported a total demand of 6,500 numbers. After taking the worldwide demand into account, it is determined that as a result of the China-mainland born and India per-country limits only 8,100 of the total available Employment Second preference numbers would be used in that quarter. In this instance, the otherwise unused 3,500 numbers could then be made available to China-mainland born and India regardless of their per-country limits. Should that occur, the same cut-off date would be applied to each country, since numbers must be provided strictly in priority date order regardless of chargeability. In this instance, greater number use by one country would indicate a higher rate of demand by applicants from that country with earlier priority dates.
According to this there should be a quarterly spillover ...:confused: but it looks like spillover is happening only in last quarter :D
more...
va_jan_03
12-13 09:44 AM
I am sure the IV core would have thought about this option of contacting USCIS and let them know the problems because of retrogression.
But I like the idea of collecting 10$ for the fax and creating awareness. Lets move.
But I like the idea of collecting 10$ for the fax and creating awareness. Lets move.
hot elizabeth 1
diptam
09-28 10:09 AM
We have given some our most energetic and productive years of life in this country. We paid taxes,we spent money here,we got set with the way of life and peoples here.
There is no question of running away. We got the skills,qualifications , attitude - we can settle anywhere we want - That's not an issue. Ther issue is that we should not run away from Problems. Otherwise where ever we go - we will have to moveout from there too in couple of years - who knows !!
At the end of the day, its comes to ones preferences.
The way i look at, after spending so many years in states, its just hard to pack and move. Over the period of time, we make friends, we have familes and above all we invest the best years of our lives.
Pros and cons will be everywhere.
India no doubt has changed a lot. One can debate about the pros and cons the whole day. I dont think money is a problem in india any more. The economy is growing like anything and will keep on growing. No doubt about it.
I am sure folks who have spent 7-8 years in this country and are still trying to settle down, will love every oppurtunity to settle down here. Because this country is like our home now. We have given it everything. We have made sincere efforts in helping the American economy grow.
Even if we move to other countries, there is no gurantee we will be treated good. We have to start from scratch, make friends, earn peoples respect and trust.
Sometimes i feel sad when people talk about leaving the country, to whom they have given everything.
I will like to ask everyone one question.
Why not give one good shot at trying to fix the broken Employement-Based green card system? What are we all scared off? We never did anything wrong, so why do we need to leave the country?
Folks think about it.
I am sorry if i offended anyone, but this is what i feel.
I believe in fixing things then running away from them. Thats my take.
GO IV GO
TOGETHER WE CAN
There is no question of running away. We got the skills,qualifications , attitude - we can settle anywhere we want - That's not an issue. Ther issue is that we should not run away from Problems. Otherwise where ever we go - we will have to moveout from there too in couple of years - who knows !!
At the end of the day, its comes to ones preferences.
The way i look at, after spending so many years in states, its just hard to pack and move. Over the period of time, we make friends, we have familes and above all we invest the best years of our lives.
Pros and cons will be everywhere.
India no doubt has changed a lot. One can debate about the pros and cons the whole day. I dont think money is a problem in india any more. The economy is growing like anything and will keep on growing. No doubt about it.
I am sure folks who have spent 7-8 years in this country and are still trying to settle down, will love every oppurtunity to settle down here. Because this country is like our home now. We have given it everything. We have made sincere efforts in helping the American economy grow.
Even if we move to other countries, there is no gurantee we will be treated good. We have to start from scratch, make friends, earn peoples respect and trust.
Sometimes i feel sad when people talk about leaving the country, to whom they have given everything.
I will like to ask everyone one question.
Why not give one good shot at trying to fix the broken Employement-Based green card system? What are we all scared off? We never did anything wrong, so why do we need to leave the country?
Folks think about it.
I am sorry if i offended anyone, but this is what i feel.
I believe in fixing things then running away from them. Thats my take.
GO IV GO
TOGETHER WE CAN
more...
house Elizabeth 1 Portraits Queen
immigrant2007
02-19 12:20 PM
in case someone has already raised tis point then please pardon my ignorance.
Not sure if anyone came across this in the same bill, for all those who will benefit by 5 year cluse they will be beneift but at the same time they will be excluded from the annual numerical limitation quota that means PD dates moving rapidly for as early as all who were here on 20-FEB-2004 (if the bill is passed today which we all know wont happen). So I guess not bad in giving it a shot for raising support for it
BTW did anyone also looked at the exact text
"It is 5 year of continuous physical presence"
My question and doubt is how different is it from "5 year of legal presence v/s physical presence". People who didnt go to homeland for vacation are less than 10%.
Not sure if anyone came across this in the same bill, for all those who will benefit by 5 year cluse they will be beneift but at the same time they will be excluded from the annual numerical limitation quota that means PD dates moving rapidly for as early as all who were here on 20-FEB-2004 (if the bill is passed today which we all know wont happen). So I guess not bad in giving it a shot for raising support for it
BTW did anyone also looked at the exact text
"It is 5 year of continuous physical presence"
My question and doubt is how different is it from "5 year of legal presence v/s physical presence". People who didnt go to homeland for vacation are less than 10%.
tattoo of Queen Elizabeth 1
feedfront
10-21 01:27 PM
Hi Guys
At last today is my day.. online status changed to "Card Production Order" :)
Hope every one will get soon.
Thanks
onemorecame
Can you please post your timeline here?
At last today is my day.. online status changed to "Card Production Order" :)
Hope every one will get soon.
Thanks
onemorecame
Can you please post your timeline here?
more...
pictures queen elizabeth i portrait.
slowwin
06-16 01:06 PM
what happened with this amdt. Did it fail or pass ?:confused:
dresses Subjects: Elizabeth I, Queen
mbartosik
11-27 07:50 PM
Nrc2008065862
more...
makeup of Queen Elizabeth I The
kaarmaa
11-13 10:05 AM
If you do not have the time to meet the lawmakers or their aides, call them over the phone explain the situation and email the letter.
If 100s' of us try and 1 succeeds, we all succeed.
Good effort.
I will do my part. If you want to plan a conf call, I'm in.
If 100s' of us try and 1 succeeds, we all succeed.
Good effort.
I will do my part. If you want to plan a conf call, I'm in.
girlfriend Portrait Of Queen Elizabeth I
snathan
08-10 12:50 PM
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
That means EB2 India/China will see drastic movement this year....may be to end or 2007 or 2008?
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
That means EB2 India/China will see drastic movement this year....may be to end or 2007 or 2008?
hairstyles Next image. Vamp;A No.
GCBy3000
01-16 10:14 AM
I visited this site three times this morning and this thread subject did not attact me at all. Fourth time since I ran out of all issues, I thought to open this up to see what it is.
Surprised to see it is created by IV core for an important issue. I would suggest to change the subject to a catchy one to prompt the users to open it or put this in home page somewhere eye catching.
Surprised to see it is created by IV core for an important issue. I would suggest to change the subject to a catchy one to prompt the users to open it or put this in home page somewhere eye catching.
ita
09-10 12:33 PM
You can post. Just type the messages on the left hand side panel.
Got it. Thank you.
Got it. Thank you.
neelu
12-13 01:01 PM
All , this subject has been raised very often and every time new members join in they start a thread and start questioning it.
- IV has indepth explored and studied this option and have found that this change is not possible administratively.
- we have not just met a lawyer. we have met few lawyers. we also have communicated with USCIS in the past.
- In the past some administrative changes have been done by USCIS, but this change cannot be done by them. All, we already had this idea long long ago and we also thought that why dont we do it if it so simple and then we dont have to go through all the legislative hurdles. But NO it cannot be done by USCIS.
- Faxing USCIS will not work. USCIS does not take policy decisions. We need to approach policy makers to get it done and that is what we are doing. By coming up with ideas, endlessly discussing despite explaination by IV and not working with IV action items we will all go in divergent directions and lose focus on the main action items we want each every member should focus. If you really feel for some idea and want to help, instead of asking IV to give explanation to every question on the forum, contact any of the active IV core members on the forum and bounce ideas. We need people with ideas and also same people willing to work on them too.
- If it was possible to get it done administratively, then in the current Skil bill push we would have/ and lawmakers would also have just asked USCIS to implement it.
Hope this explains this topic. Thanks
Our dear Pappu,
I understand how difficult it must be to respond to so many questions directed towards core members, and can understand how frustrating it can be to answer repetitive questions.
So thanks for clarifying this again for many of us who thought an easy route was available (but half knew that it was there, it would have been taken).
But can I please add that if this question has been asked repetitively, I think it warrants to be added to the "The Employment-Based Green Card: Process and Problems" section on the home page, so people can find the answer easily that searching our huge forum database. I understand that each of you are very busy and feel bad that I am adding additional work.
Thank you.
Neelu
- IV has indepth explored and studied this option and have found that this change is not possible administratively.
- we have not just met a lawyer. we have met few lawyers. we also have communicated with USCIS in the past.
- In the past some administrative changes have been done by USCIS, but this change cannot be done by them. All, we already had this idea long long ago and we also thought that why dont we do it if it so simple and then we dont have to go through all the legislative hurdles. But NO it cannot be done by USCIS.
- Faxing USCIS will not work. USCIS does not take policy decisions. We need to approach policy makers to get it done and that is what we are doing. By coming up with ideas, endlessly discussing despite explaination by IV and not working with IV action items we will all go in divergent directions and lose focus on the main action items we want each every member should focus. If you really feel for some idea and want to help, instead of asking IV to give explanation to every question on the forum, contact any of the active IV core members on the forum and bounce ideas. We need people with ideas and also same people willing to work on them too.
- If it was possible to get it done administratively, then in the current Skil bill push we would have/ and lawmakers would also have just asked USCIS to implement it.
Hope this explains this topic. Thanks
Our dear Pappu,
I understand how difficult it must be to respond to so many questions directed towards core members, and can understand how frustrating it can be to answer repetitive questions.
So thanks for clarifying this again for many of us who thought an easy route was available (but half knew that it was there, it would have been taken).
But can I please add that if this question has been asked repetitively, I think it warrants to be added to the "The Employment-Based Green Card: Process and Problems" section on the home page, so people can find the answer easily that searching our huge forum database. I understand that each of you are very busy and feel bad that I am adding additional work.
Thank you.
Neelu
No comments:
Post a Comment