alex99
04-08 09:05 AM
Thanks for your response BharatPremi .
wallpaper Medium Length Wavy Hairstyles
GCNaseeb
10-12 09:20 PM
See signature
makemygc
07-05 12:34 PM
Just my $0.02:
I understand the frustration for IV to gather funds when it has so many members. But it's possible that IV has that many members because it is a free site.
If this becomes a paid site, you might see the number of members dwindle, and that's not a good idea because even if members don't financially contribute to IV, they do offer their perspectives/opinions/feedback/critique and help others. Those who want to financially contribute to IV will do so whether IV is a free or a paid site.
IMHO, it would be a mistake to make IV a paid site thinking that this will force members to financially contribute. Sure IV forums helped a lot with finding information about I-485 applications, but people have been filing I-485s on their own even before IV was in existence. Which is not to say, IV has no value, but I hope you see where I am going with this....if members don't want to contribute, then they won't. They will go to other forums like they used to before IV was in existence...which will be a step down, but at least they are holding on to their $20 or howmuchever.
Before replying to this, please read my disclaimer below. I have to add it given the fact how hot-headed/short-tempered members have been in the last few days where they will flame someone just because their opinions differ.
Thanks,
Jayant
Disclaimer: These are my opinions. You don't have to agree with them. If you disagree, just ignore them. I am not interested in justifying myself about anything that you might have to say. I would, however, welcome a civil and a healthy discussion.
I agree with you 100%. We are so much divided community, lets not create another factor to divide this community further in paid and non-paid members.
Core, if you see this thread is not part of yor agenda, please close this immediately. This is just dividing us further. Plzzzzzzzz.
I understand the frustration for IV to gather funds when it has so many members. But it's possible that IV has that many members because it is a free site.
If this becomes a paid site, you might see the number of members dwindle, and that's not a good idea because even if members don't financially contribute to IV, they do offer their perspectives/opinions/feedback/critique and help others. Those who want to financially contribute to IV will do so whether IV is a free or a paid site.
IMHO, it would be a mistake to make IV a paid site thinking that this will force members to financially contribute. Sure IV forums helped a lot with finding information about I-485 applications, but people have been filing I-485s on their own even before IV was in existence. Which is not to say, IV has no value, but I hope you see where I am going with this....if members don't want to contribute, then they won't. They will go to other forums like they used to before IV was in existence...which will be a step down, but at least they are holding on to their $20 or howmuchever.
Before replying to this, please read my disclaimer below. I have to add it given the fact how hot-headed/short-tempered members have been in the last few days where they will flame someone just because their opinions differ.
Thanks,
Jayant
Disclaimer: These are my opinions. You don't have to agree with them. If you disagree, just ignore them. I am not interested in justifying myself about anything that you might have to say. I would, however, welcome a civil and a healthy discussion.
I agree with you 100%. We are so much divided community, lets not create another factor to divide this community further in paid and non-paid members.
Core, if you see this thread is not part of yor agenda, please close this immediately. This is just dividing us further. Plzzzzzzzz.
2011 mid length curly hairstyles
test101
07-05 03:24 PM
what a waste of time.People should be working side by side to make media,congress, sentors aware of the our problem. Instead of fighting about making the website free or not.
more...
priderock
06-22 04:39 PM
And wait for RFE.
USCIS is asking for COLOR copies of DL and passport.
Can you please point me to a link where USCIS asking for a color copy of DL and Passport? My lawyer did not even ask for copy of the DL and B/W copy of the passport was good enough.
USCIS is asking for COLOR copies of DL and passport.
Can you please point me to a link where USCIS asking for a color copy of DL and Passport? My lawyer did not even ask for copy of the DL and B/W copy of the passport was good enough.
deepimpact
09-11 02:41 AM
I understand how overflow gets distributed and Eb3-I is last in line. However , if net reduction is 35-40K each year starting 2010(i.e oct 2009 to oct 2010) and the backlog is 200 K at the beginning of 2010 (Inventory report) , we should work through all the backlog in 5 (40 *5) years.
That means in 2-3 years overflow should get to EB3 I because rest of the category will be current by then .
I agree people who applied in 2003 -2004 are looking at 10 year wait as against someone applying for EB3-I - today . Infact someone applying today will get GC in 5 years from now.
The actual backlog at beginning of 2010 is 200K (pending I-485) + all EB2 I/C and EB3 waiting to file I-485 from 2007-2010. The no of folks in EB2I/C and EB3 ROW from 2007-2010 will be about 80-100K. So instead of 2-3 years , overflow will start reaching EB3 in ~ 5 years.
That means in 2-3 years overflow should get to EB3 I because rest of the category will be current by then .
I agree people who applied in 2003 -2004 are looking at 10 year wait as against someone applying for EB3-I - today . Infact someone applying today will get GC in 5 years from now.
The actual backlog at beginning of 2010 is 200K (pending I-485) + all EB2 I/C and EB3 waiting to file I-485 from 2007-2010. The no of folks in EB2I/C and EB3 ROW from 2007-2010 will be about 80-100K. So instead of 2-3 years , overflow will start reaching EB3 in ~ 5 years.
more...
Pineapple
07-28 12:04 PM
In the media, there is a term called the "silly season", where all kinds of "news" crop up to make up for lack of any really interesting or important news during the summer time.
(See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silly_season )
It seems IV has its own silly season, when nothing else is going on - notice the one-a-day threads on "I-got-a-red-dot", "i-am-depressed" etc. This thread is one more on the list.. take it easy.. :)
(See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silly_season )
It seems IV has its own silly season, when nothing else is going on - notice the one-a-day threads on "I-got-a-red-dot", "i-am-depressed" etc. This thread is one more on the list.. take it easy.. :)
2010 Curly hair can sometimes be
andy garcia
01-25 10:39 AM
And hoping that some more data, some more pointers, and some more information comes out of this thread, before it dies.
Data and estimates and links to websites needed for estimating when a PD would become current.
Can you re-estimate the new dates. Using this data
******* EB Pref*******EB3
FY**|*Total*|INDIA | *Total* |India
2000|107,024| 15888| 049,736| 05567
2001|179,195| 41720| 086,058| 16405
2002|174,968| 41919| 088,555| 17428
2003|082,137| 20818| 046,613| 10680
2004|155,330| 39496| 085,969| 19962
2005|246,877| 47160| 129,070| 23399
2006|?????????TBP in the near future ???????
THis are the number of visas issued for each fiscal year since FY 2000 for the EB preference.
They are under this link:DOS Visa Statistics (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/statistics/statistics_1476.html)
andy
Data and estimates and links to websites needed for estimating when a PD would become current.
Can you re-estimate the new dates. Using this data
******* EB Pref*******EB3
FY**|*Total*|INDIA | *Total* |India
2000|107,024| 15888| 049,736| 05567
2001|179,195| 41720| 086,058| 16405
2002|174,968| 41919| 088,555| 17428
2003|082,137| 20818| 046,613| 10680
2004|155,330| 39496| 085,969| 19962
2005|246,877| 47160| 129,070| 23399
2006|?????????TBP in the near future ???????
THis are the number of visas issued for each fiscal year since FY 2000 for the EB preference.
They are under this link:DOS Visa Statistics (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/statistics/statistics_1476.html)
andy
more...
drirshad
06-30 08:38 PM
It has never happened in the history that they revised any visa bulletin, just hope for the best & pray .......
hair Medium length hair cuts.
RNGC
09-19 01:37 PM
I am in a IDEA mood today!
In our website there is space for 5-6 lines where we have the picture of a cloud now...
We should pick top 10 best slogans and display it there.....like each slogan should appear for 10 seconds and change it to next.....
We should put a poll to select the top 10 slogans
I personally like these ones....forgot the exact words..
1."we keep your systems up and running...please help us keep our lives up and running...
2. "we rollover cell phone minutes...why not visa numbers"
3. "waiting for so long my hair is turning grey ....
4. "GC delay....keeps doctors away"
In our website there is space for 5-6 lines where we have the picture of a cloud now...
We should pick top 10 best slogans and display it there.....like each slogan should appear for 10 seconds and change it to next.....
We should put a poll to select the top 10 slogans
I personally like these ones....forgot the exact words..
1."we keep your systems up and running...please help us keep our lives up and running...
2. "we rollover cell phone minutes...why not visa numbers"
3. "waiting for so long my hair is turning grey ....
4. "GC delay....keeps doctors away"
more...
GCard_Dream
12-12 05:48 PM
nomi,
I am very surprised that there is not as much interest in this thread as I had expected but you are doing great in trying to explore this avenue. I wish I had some of the answers. Keep up the good work.
I am very surprised that there is not as much interest in this thread as I had expected but you are doing great in trying to explore this avenue. I wish I had some of the answers. Keep up the good work.
hot medium length. Hairstyle
vbkris77
06-11 01:42 PM
I just want to Thank you for your passion on this subject. Can we think of this from another angle where we approach politicians from our respective countries for a counter trade restrictive bills to make things apples to apples? Just a thought!!!
Look I don't want to say this to you but I am left with no choice. When CEOs such as Steve Ballmer and John Chambers are personally calling the Senators because they think this amendment a real threat, it will be least of our worries what opponents would think about us getting scared. We are not scared, we are simply making our voices heard. If we were scared we won't be doing this.
Now, you have no freaking clue of what is going on behind the scenes, this is your third post in this forum and all these posts in opposition to our action item which we are coordinating with other coalition partners. Why do you think you know more than the folks who are right now speaking with the Senators?
Look I don't want to say this to you but I am left with no choice. When CEOs such as Steve Ballmer and John Chambers are personally calling the Senators because they think this amendment a real threat, it will be least of our worries what opponents would think about us getting scared. We are not scared, we are simply making our voices heard. If we were scared we won't be doing this.
Now, you have no freaking clue of what is going on behind the scenes, this is your third post in this forum and all these posts in opposition to our action item which we are coordinating with other coalition partners. Why do you think you know more than the folks who are right now speaking with the Senators?
more...
house Many women desire curly hair
pappu
06-10 12:28 PM
WAKE UP CALL FOR THOSE STILL SITTING ON THE SIDELINES
On Tuesday, when we were on the Hill doing meetings during Advocacy days, we were informed by the senior Senate office that an amendment to prevent H1 and work authorizations is in the works in the Tax bill. We immediately requested this office to oppose this amendment. Senator office expressed full support for us and shared with us that the Senator's office has already expressed opposition to such an amendment.
We would like everyone to know that just because someone has EAD, it does not mean we are in safe haven. There is no safe haven till we have approved green cards. And for those who think that they don't need to participate actively, this is a wake up call.
We have also learned that this is degree 1 amendment. This means it will be voted on on the Senate floor even when it is non-germane to the bill. We have also learned that if such an amendment comes up for vote during this difficult political climate, it appears that such an amendment will have 70 votes in the senate which makes each one of us extremely vulnerable to be forced out. Everyone on H1, L1, J1 or EAD will risk the renewal of their current application status.
IV is working on defeating this amendment. Please stay tuned for further updates.
On Tuesday, Mr. Sanders sponsored an amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213
AMENDMENT PURPOSE: Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.
TEXT OF AMENDMENT AS SUBMITTED: CR S4754
COSPONSORS(2):
Sen Grassley, Chuck [IA] - 6/9/2010
Sen Harkin, Tom [IA] - 6/9/2010
Source: Congressional Record - 111th Congress (2009-2010) - THOMAS (Library of Congress) (http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r111:1:./temp/~r1119eE0Na:e98:)
SA 4319. Mr. SANDERS (for himself, Mr. Grassley, and Mr. Harkin) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill H.R. 4213, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend certain expiring provisions, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. __. CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.
(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Employ America Act''.
(b) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security may not approve a petition by an employer for any visa authorizing employment in the United States unless the employer has provided written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that--
(1) the employer has not provided a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101 et seq.) during the 12-month period immediately preceding the date on which the alien is scheduled to be hired; and
(2) the employer does not intend to provide a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to such Act.
(c) Effect of Mass Layoff.--If an employer provides a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act after the approval of a visa described in subsection (b), any visas approved during the most recent 12-month period for such employer shall expire on the date that is 60 days after the date on which such notice is provided. The expiration of a visa under this subsection shall not be subject to judicial review.
(d) Notice Requirement.--Upon receiving notification of a mass layoff from an employer, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall inform each employee whose visa is scheduled to expire under subsection (c)--
(1) the date on which such individual will no longer be authorized to work in the United States; and
(2) the date on which such individual will be required to leave the United States unless the individual is otherwise authorized to remain in the United States.
(e) Exemption.--An employer shall be exempt from the requirements under this section if the employer provides written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that the total number of the employer's workers who are United States citizens and are working in the United States have not been, and will not be, reduced as a result of a mass layoff described in subsection (c).
(f) Rulemaking.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Labor shall promulgate regulations to carry out this section, including a requirement that employers provide notice to the Secretary of Homeland Security of a mass layoff (as defined in section 2 of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101)).
On Tuesday, when we were on the Hill doing meetings during Advocacy days, we were informed by the senior Senate office that an amendment to prevent H1 and work authorizations is in the works in the Tax bill. We immediately requested this office to oppose this amendment. Senator office expressed full support for us and shared with us that the Senator's office has already expressed opposition to such an amendment.
We would like everyone to know that just because someone has EAD, it does not mean we are in safe haven. There is no safe haven till we have approved green cards. And for those who think that they don't need to participate actively, this is a wake up call.
We have also learned that this is degree 1 amendment. This means it will be voted on on the Senate floor even when it is non-germane to the bill. We have also learned that if such an amendment comes up for vote during this difficult political climate, it appears that such an amendment will have 70 votes in the senate which makes each one of us extremely vulnerable to be forced out. Everyone on H1, L1, J1 or EAD will risk the renewal of their current application status.
IV is working on defeating this amendment. Please stay tuned for further updates.
On Tuesday, Mr. Sanders sponsored an amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213
AMENDMENT PURPOSE: Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.
TEXT OF AMENDMENT AS SUBMITTED: CR S4754
COSPONSORS(2):
Sen Grassley, Chuck [IA] - 6/9/2010
Sen Harkin, Tom [IA] - 6/9/2010
Source: Congressional Record - 111th Congress (2009-2010) - THOMAS (Library of Congress) (http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r111:1:./temp/~r1119eE0Na:e98:)
SA 4319. Mr. SANDERS (for himself, Mr. Grassley, and Mr. Harkin) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill H.R. 4213, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend certain expiring provisions, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. __. CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.
(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Employ America Act''.
(b) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security may not approve a petition by an employer for any visa authorizing employment in the United States unless the employer has provided written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that--
(1) the employer has not provided a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101 et seq.) during the 12-month period immediately preceding the date on which the alien is scheduled to be hired; and
(2) the employer does not intend to provide a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to such Act.
(c) Effect of Mass Layoff.--If an employer provides a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act after the approval of a visa described in subsection (b), any visas approved during the most recent 12-month period for such employer shall expire on the date that is 60 days after the date on which such notice is provided. The expiration of a visa under this subsection shall not be subject to judicial review.
(d) Notice Requirement.--Upon receiving notification of a mass layoff from an employer, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall inform each employee whose visa is scheduled to expire under subsection (c)--
(1) the date on which such individual will no longer be authorized to work in the United States; and
(2) the date on which such individual will be required to leave the United States unless the individual is otherwise authorized to remain in the United States.
(e) Exemption.--An employer shall be exempt from the requirements under this section if the employer provides written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that the total number of the employer's workers who are United States citizens and are working in the United States have not been, and will not be, reduced as a result of a mass layoff described in subsection (c).
(f) Rulemaking.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Labor shall promulgate regulations to carry out this section, including a requirement that employers provide notice to the Secretary of Homeland Security of a mass layoff (as defined in section 2 of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101)).
tattoo be more difficult for. If
GCapplicant
08-17 04:56 PM
When will EB3 get its quota then How long we have to wait?I hope we dont get stranded in all this mess..
more...
pictures 14-inches Shoulder length and
crazyghoda
01-30 02:20 PM
Ok now I am confused. I was laid off while in India. Since I could not then use my H1 to reenter, I used the AP. So my I-94 is stamped as AOS. Are you saying this was not a lawful admission? Are you implying that from the time I entered the US on AP (Dec till date) is unlawful?
Since 245(k) allow status check since last lawful admission, only details that matters is, since last admission. Please note that entry into US on AP does NOT count as lawful admission. It has to be non-immigrant visa.
245(k) allows a waiver of 180 cumulative days for out-of-status since last lawful admssion (i.e. on H1/H4/L1/L2/F1 etc).
Please have all AC-21 related documents for latest job (or job offer).
Since 245(k) allow status check since last lawful admission, only details that matters is, since last admission. Please note that entry into US on AP does NOT count as lawful admission. It has to be non-immigrant visa.
245(k) allows a waiver of 180 cumulative days for out-of-status since last lawful admssion (i.e. on H1/H4/L1/L2/F1 etc).
Please have all AC-21 related documents for latest job (or job offer).
dresses short to medium length in
nosightofgc
01-19 07:29 AM
Very interesting. When we applied for 485/EAD/AP, our lawyer specifically asked for color passport copies of the first few pages. I went ahead and made copies of all pages. Am I in trouble?
Color photocopy of passport, immigration documents, currency notes, etc. (a list of 8-10 items) are totally illegal in USA. You may face legal consequences. I have color copiers both photo and laser. User manual clearly states that.
I am not sure why B/W copy could be illegal. Most of univerisities recommend students to keep a photocopy of immigration documents safely. See these sites
http://www.beloit.edu/~oie/int_students/f-1_maintain_status.html.
http://www.isso.cornell.edu/immigration/f1/f1.php
http://www.beloit.edu/~oie/int_students/f-1_maintain_status.html
http://iso.truman.edu/index.php?type=current&id=f1
These photocopies are supposed to be kept safely and seperately from originals and supposed be used for requesting replacement while originals are lost. These photocopies are not supposed to be shown to anybody else otherwise. Trying showing photocopies to govt. officials such as police, dmv, immigration officers, etc. - there will be questions on this. But when requesting replacement of a lost I20 or a lost passport by providing a photocopy of original, question related to photocopy (B/W) will not be asked.
Color photocopy of passport, immigration documents, currency notes, etc. (a list of 8-10 items) are totally illegal in USA. You may face legal consequences. I have color copiers both photo and laser. User manual clearly states that.
I am not sure why B/W copy could be illegal. Most of univerisities recommend students to keep a photocopy of immigration documents safely. See these sites
http://www.beloit.edu/~oie/int_students/f-1_maintain_status.html.
http://www.isso.cornell.edu/immigration/f1/f1.php
http://www.beloit.edu/~oie/int_students/f-1_maintain_status.html
http://iso.truman.edu/index.php?type=current&id=f1
These photocopies are supposed to be kept safely and seperately from originals and supposed be used for requesting replacement while originals are lost. These photocopies are not supposed to be shown to anybody else otherwise. Trying showing photocopies to govt. officials such as police, dmv, immigration officers, etc. - there will be questions on this. But when requesting replacement of a lost I20 or a lost passport by providing a photocopy of original, question related to photocopy (B/W) will not be asked.
more...
makeup The hair is cut to shoulder
srikondoji
07-16 05:19 PM
Iam really not worried about NUMBERSUSA. More than that iam worried about senators who believed such a propaganda and opposed the bill.
Iam sure now that america is not safe in the hands of such senators who don't do their due dilligence and just believe into lobbysts.
Shame on such senators.
they are shameless liars and racists
Iam sure now that america is not safe in the hands of such senators who don't do their due dilligence and just believe into lobbysts.
Shame on such senators.
they are shameless liars and racists
girlfriend wavy medium length hairstyles.
boreal
12-28 02:35 PM
I just got my I140 approved. Waiting for 485 visa number to become avaiable. Have an offer of a better paying job in a bigger company. Can I switch Company and still carry the PD from the LC/I140 of the previous employer?
If I can port the PD date then how much time am I losing in temrs of filing for new LC and I140?
Thanks for quick response. I need to let the new employer know of my decision.
Saeed:confused:
You can only carry the PD, provided that the current I140 is not revoked. (provided it is not cancelled either due to mis-representation). You would have to restart from scratch with the LC though. You would be losing the time that has already been spent on LC/140 obviously.
If I can port the PD date then how much time am I losing in temrs of filing for new LC and I140?
Thanks for quick response. I need to let the new employer know of my decision.
Saeed:confused:
You can only carry the PD, provided that the current I140 is not revoked. (provided it is not cancelled either due to mis-representation). You would have to restart from scratch with the LC though. You would be losing the time that has already been spent on LC/140 obviously.
hairstyles wavy hair. Medium length
shiankuraaf
04-10 10:07 PM
Employment-based immigrants visa issued in last 10 Years from 1998 to 2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 1998----1999----2000-----2001------2002-----2003----2004-----2005-----2006-----2007
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quota 140,000-140,000-140,000--140,000--140,000--140,000-140,000--140,000--140,000--140,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issued 77,413--56,678--106,642--178,702--173,814--81,727--155,330--246,877--159,081--162,176
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unused 62,587--83,322---33,358----------------------58,273-------------------------------------------------- 237,540
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Excess -------------------------------38,702---33,814------------15,330--106,877---19,,081--22,176 ----- 235,980
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note:
-------
The number of unused employment visa numbers from the previous fiscal year is computed by
determining the difference between 1) the worldwide level of employment-based visas established
for the previous fiscal year and 2) the number of employment-based visas actually issued during the
previous fiscal year.
Source for the statistics:
http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publicatio...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 1998----1999----2000-----2001------2002-----2003----2004-----2005-----2006-----2007
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quota 140,000-140,000-140,000--140,000--140,000--140,000-140,000--140,000--140,000--140,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issued 77,413--56,678--106,642--178,702--173,814--81,727--155,330--246,877--159,081--162,176
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unused 62,587--83,322---33,358----------------------58,273-------------------------------------------------- 237,540
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Excess -------------------------------38,702---33,814------------15,330--106,877---19,,081--22,176 ----- 235,980
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note:
-------
The number of unused employment visa numbers from the previous fiscal year is computed by
determining the difference between 1) the worldwide level of employment-based visas established
for the previous fiscal year and 2) the number of employment-based visas actually issued during the
previous fiscal year.
Source for the statistics:
http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publicatio...
TeddyKoochu
09-10 02:01 PM
They can make a category current when Demand < Supply. So once all I-485s prior to 2007 are approved the monthly demand data they publish will show demand Prior to CY2011 = 200. So unless they use approved I-140 to determine demand , DOS will make the dates current(even if for 1 month). As long as USCIS uses pending I-485 data to determine demand, the July 2007 fiasco will keep on repeating every 3-4 years. The key here is to have USCIS provide the actual demand (people with approved I-140s). It was mentioned somewhere that the current USCIS database is not capable of sorting the I-140s by country of chargebility and hence the I-140 data can't be used to determine per country demand.
Agreed that the I140 data may not be exact due to system limitations but approximation can still work, they take up more people, EB2 ROW was current the whole of last year, FB2 is at Apr 2010. Even I140 statistics are shown on the volumes chart so I believe that the approximate numbers per country can be very easily derived or they can test the waters in small steps if they like. Since there is no guideline on this the agencies are legal in using judicious discretion.
Agreed that the I140 data may not be exact due to system limitations but approximation can still work, they take up more people, EB2 ROW was current the whole of last year, FB2 is at Apr 2010. Even I140 statistics are shown on the volumes chart so I believe that the approximate numbers per country can be very easily derived or they can test the waters in small steps if they like. Since there is no guideline on this the agencies are legal in using judicious discretion.
somegchuh
03-15 08:51 PM
I have been waiting for my GC on purpose. I really wanted it to take 6 years.
I really wanted to get my Labor to rot in PBEC and then I intentionally wanted to get stuck in Namecheck.
On a serious note, do you have any idea about how this systems works? Do you have any idea what BEC's were or what namecheck is.
We will talk about "what the hell have you have been doing for so long" in 4 years when you are moaning about how retrogression has affected you for the last 5 years.
C'mon guys, what the hell have you been doing for so long?
I mean look at the archived Visa Bulletins, you observe the following:
1. EB2 was current for India ALL THROUGH 2003
2. EB2 was current for India ALL THROUGH 2004
3. EB2 was current for India till August 2005
4. After the retrogression in 2005, EB2 India moved up quickly through 2003-2004 to April 2004 by the beginning of 2007
5. Even after the summer 2007 fiasco (EB2 Current fro July, August 2007), the priority date for EB2 India moved to April 2004 and stayed there for 3 months
What more do you wish for?
I don't understand how there any can be anyone from 2004-2005 India still left in the EB2 category.
This is pathetic. What the hell have you been waiting for?
I really wanted to get my Labor to rot in PBEC and then I intentionally wanted to get stuck in Namecheck.
On a serious note, do you have any idea about how this systems works? Do you have any idea what BEC's were or what namecheck is.
We will talk about "what the hell have you have been doing for so long" in 4 years when you are moaning about how retrogression has affected you for the last 5 years.
C'mon guys, what the hell have you been doing for so long?
I mean look at the archived Visa Bulletins, you observe the following:
1. EB2 was current for India ALL THROUGH 2003
2. EB2 was current for India ALL THROUGH 2004
3. EB2 was current for India till August 2005
4. After the retrogression in 2005, EB2 India moved up quickly through 2003-2004 to April 2004 by the beginning of 2007
5. Even after the summer 2007 fiasco (EB2 Current fro July, August 2007), the priority date for EB2 India moved to April 2004 and stayed there for 3 months
What more do you wish for?
I don't understand how there any can be anyone from 2004-2005 India still left in the EB2 category.
This is pathetic. What the hell have you been waiting for?
0 comments:
Post a Comment