alterego
08-15 10:08 PM
Doubt that it will go back from here. There will be new visa numbers available in Oct 07. So it should only move forward IMO.
That is because the quota system does not apply as well in the 4th quarter of each year. Thats the explanation previously given. EB India has to hope for the end of each fiscal year for some magic to happen.
EB ROW, please be patient it will be all yours after Oct. 2007 for the next 9 months.:)
Those EB India stuck in 485.................it is either now or next year summer. If you don't see yours by Sep't, unless you have a PD pre go into hibernation and wake up in June or July 2008, you might find better luck at that time.
That is because the quota system does not apply as well in the 4th quarter of each year. Thats the explanation previously given. EB India has to hope for the end of each fiscal year for some magic to happen.
EB ROW, please be patient it will be all yours after Oct. 2007 for the next 9 months.:)
Those EB India stuck in 485.................it is either now or next year summer. If you don't see yours by Sep't, unless you have a PD pre go into hibernation and wake up in June or July 2008, you might find better luck at that time.
wallpaper lebron james heat dunking.
CR1
04-15 10:42 PM
I have been here about a year and am on an L1 with my wife and two children who are on L2s. We are thinking about starting the GC process. While I am sure this topic has been discussed many times before in this forum, what are the pitfalls, and how long does the process usually take? My understanding is it's relatively straightforward for L1s, however I have seen a number of posts talking of converting from L1s to H1s, so I am little confused as to which is the best visa to be on to apply for GCs.
Many thanks.
Many thanks.
ras
07-12 11:38 AM
am still unclear. Does it mean those who have PD prior to Jun 06 will get their GC? I cant believe it.
At the personal end, I have my GC filed with Dec 06 PD. However, I have a previous I140 approved with Sept 05. I was thinking about porting the priority date. If I port it now will I get my GC based on the previous priority date?
Ofcourse I dont intend to port it at this point of time because am planning to get married in another 3-4months. so can you guys let me know what would be the best approach. Is it porting the previous priority date now or wait till getting married and then port it? In such case will the spouse be eligible to file for 485 when it is current. am confused.
At the personal end, I have my GC filed with Dec 06 PD. However, I have a previous I140 approved with Sept 05. I was thinking about porting the priority date. If I port it now will I get my GC based on the previous priority date?
Ofcourse I dont intend to port it at this point of time because am planning to get married in another 3-4months. so can you guys let me know what would be the best approach. Is it porting the previous priority date now or wait till getting married and then port it? In such case will the spouse be eligible to file for 485 when it is current. am confused.
2011 lebron james heat dunk. Miami
alisa
01-25 09:38 PM
I had trouble sifting through all that data and figuring out what that was all about.
Could you give the specific report that you used for these numbers. And, if possible, any hints on how you arrived at the data below. I would appreciate that.
Thanks....
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
Could you give the specific report that you used for these numbers. And, if possible, any hints on how you arrived at the data below. I would appreciate that.
Thanks....
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...
ss777
05-15 02:27 PM
I totally agree with first para..but your client CIO getting promotion out of a Phoenix university degree surprises me..many people discouraged me from going there as they dont require GMAT to start with.
That surprised me also. He may be an exception but the fact that he was tapped for a management post that needs a management degree makes it imperative that his MBA played a good role. I am not saying Pheonix MBA is great. My point is Online MBA is valued in the industry.
That surprised me also. He may be an exception but the fact that he was tapped for a management post that needs a management degree makes it imperative that his MBA played a good role. I am not saying Pheonix MBA is great. My point is Online MBA is valued in the industry.
Cheran
11-11 02:13 PM
I am pasting a reply from my Fragomen Lawyer. Even though he screwed me royally, he was always on the money when it come to any prediction. So he says it will be another couple of years for 2003 EB3 Cases, I am going to take his word....
" Thank you for your e-mail. I regret that I do not have a basis to estimate whether your case will be approved in 2008/2009 as they are currently on October 1, 2001 for EB-3 cases from India. In the meantime I would say that the process could last approximately another two years before an immigrant visa becomes available under EB-3/India."
" Thank you for your e-mail. I regret that I do not have a basis to estimate whether your case will be approved in 2008/2009 as they are currently on October 1, 2001 for EB-3 cases from India. In the meantime I would say that the process could last approximately another two years before an immigrant visa becomes available under EB-3/India."
more...
chanduv23
09-26 12:13 PM
Excellent team work IV - now lets all thank her for changing making the correction.
2010 Lebron James heat dunk
deepakjain
06-08 06:33 PM
My labour cleared in 2009, i guess i need to wait for 10 yrs more !!!, not good , not good at all :eek:
You might get your GC while you are at the retirement home....
You might get your GC while you are at the retirement home....
more...
mp70
01-18 10:12 AM
I have been visiting this forum for a while now. I appreciate all the efforts being done by the Core team. I just signed for $20/- recurring contribution through paypal.
MP70
MP70
hair heat. lebron james dunking
paulavijit
03-17 09:08 AM
Guy you are forgetting the 7% per country quota for issuing GC. Applicants from a particular country can only get 7% of the total GC available in a year.
Total employment based quota per year is 140,000 and 7% of it is 9800. So at the most only 9800 Indians can get GC per year. This count also includes the dependents.
So even if your PD is current and you have filed your I-485 but there may be more than 9800 Indians with the same status and hence only the first 9800 will get GC that year.
There are more than 100,000 primary Indian applicants who have filed their I-485 and assuming a average Indian family size of 3, there are 300,000 who are waiting for GC. Only 9800 can get in a year. So if the law does not change this backlog will finish in more than 30 years.
Total employment based quota per year is 140,000 and 7% of it is 9800. So at the most only 9800 Indians can get GC per year. This count also includes the dependents.
So even if your PD is current and you have filed your I-485 but there may be more than 9800 Indians with the same status and hence only the first 9800 will get GC that year.
There are more than 100,000 primary Indian applicants who have filed their I-485 and assuming a average Indian family size of 3, there are 300,000 who are waiting for GC. Only 9800 can get in a year. So if the law does not change this backlog will finish in more than 30 years.
more...
softcrowd
03-18 09:37 AM
I am 04/2004 EB2 and I just hope that Ron's prediction comes true.
One thing about his April PD movement "prediction" - Ron Gotcher never predicted that..He just said he passed on what he heard from an official.
But in this case (July one), it looks like his prediction!! So lets see!
One thing about his April PD movement "prediction" - Ron Gotcher never predicted that..He just said he passed on what he heard from an official.
But in this case (July one), it looks like his prediction!! So lets see!
hot lebron-james-dunk-wall-sticker
andy garcia
09-27 12:33 PM
You don't have to struggle in home country. You were born and raised there and I do not see a need to struggle.
And you are not struggling here also, you have come to pursue your dream, everyone here have jobs, we are just trying to fix a broken system here.
I have 2 European co-workers. They both told me, "The only way we will go back to Europe is when we die".
And you are not struggling here also, you have come to pursue your dream, everyone here have jobs, we are just trying to fix a broken system here.
I have 2 European co-workers. They both told me, "The only way we will go back to Europe is when we die".
more...
house LeBron James spin move past
gc4me
03-19 09:20 AM
This makes no sense to me. 300K LC was pending @backlog centers and all of them have PD 2005 and earlier. Non RIR was processed at the end and 90% of them are EB3. Considering 50% ROW, at least 100K EB3 ROW LCs out there with PD 2005 and earlier. And then comes the PERM LCs. At least another 50K EB3 ROW PERM LCs with PD 2005 out there. With limited EB3 ROW available visa each year (140K total, after retrogressed countries and spill over etc, not more than 40K each year), I see no reason for USCIS to move ROW to current.
According to attorney Ron Gotcher Eb2 India will move up in coming months and EB3 ROW (Rest Of the World) will be current very soon. In that case, the excess EB3 ROW numbers will go to heavily retrogressed countries. This attorney's prediction is 100% correct for the April VB.
See the link.http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4285&page=24
According to attorney Ron Gotcher Eb2 India will move up in coming months and EB3 ROW (Rest Of the World) will be current very soon. In that case, the excess EB3 ROW numbers will go to heavily retrogressed countries. This attorney's prediction is 100% correct for the April VB.
See the link.http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4285&page=24
tattoo lebron james heat dunks on
delhiguy
07-04 08:03 PM
Excellent
I agree with you 100 % , I believe having excessive media coverage and lawsuits , would bring the GC number and process in the open , and most americans would oppose the GC as they oppose H1B.
If i was a american i would surely be happy with USCIS/DOS creating so much trouble for the immigrants to my country , who i believe are taking my job.
Everyone blaming CIS/DOS needs to understand some basics behind this mess. Before going to conclude anything, first, one should read all the ombudsman reports for last 3 or 4 years. Former INS or current USCIS�s functions and operations were not questionable and not known to public till ombudsman office was established. Ombudsman has helped customers and keep helping to improve efficiency of CIS. Ombudsman main concern (or goal) have been over the 4 years are
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The �documentarily qualified 485 applications� mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made �current� for all EB categories. This is how they determine �current� or �over-subscribed� and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, 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.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories �current� for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories �current� ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of �current� there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making �current� for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as �current� in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
I agree with you 100 % , I believe having excessive media coverage and lawsuits , would bring the GC number and process in the open , and most americans would oppose the GC as they oppose H1B.
If i was a american i would surely be happy with USCIS/DOS creating so much trouble for the immigrants to my country , who i believe are taking my job.
Everyone blaming CIS/DOS needs to understand some basics behind this mess. Before going to conclude anything, first, one should read all the ombudsman reports for last 3 or 4 years. Former INS or current USCIS�s functions and operations were not questionable and not known to public till ombudsman office was established. Ombudsman has helped customers and keep helping to improve efficiency of CIS. Ombudsman main concern (or goal) have been over the 4 years are
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The �documentarily qualified 485 applications� mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made �current� for all EB categories. This is how they determine �current� or �over-subscribed� and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, 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.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories �current� for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories �current� ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of �current� there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making �current� for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as �current� in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
more...
pictures lebron james heat dunk
h1_b_visa_holder
05-23 03:41 PM
What about those who try to speak English but sound like Hinglish (North Indian including Punjabi, Jath et al), or Bonglish (Bengali ) or Inglish (Gujarati -- "In evening I had heavy 'snakes' ).... are all of them (including you) just some "computer operator" ?
You guys are funny..
Here are some more I was enlightened in an accent neuteralization class
SOUTH INDIAN enveee-ron-ment, es (Yes)
NORTH INDIAN UP/BIHARI ishtylye, ishkool
PUNJABI (Waalcome (Welcome))
:D:D:D
You guys are funny..
Here are some more I was enlightened in an accent neuteralization class
SOUTH INDIAN enveee-ron-ment, es (Yes)
NORTH INDIAN UP/BIHARI ishtylye, ishkool
PUNJABI (Waalcome (Welcome))
:D:D:D
dresses lebron james heat dunking.
qesehmk
02-12 12:27 PM
Folks,
lets put the "you said .. I said" aside and just evaluate the definition of "assigned" and "used" visa numbers.
- correct me if I am wrong but I think Ron implies - "some numbers are assigned but then not used. These numbers still show up as used in the data report (since they were assigned)".
We have established that there is no document to support this but can we find out if this assumption can be true?
One can only infer based some facts and some assumptions.
Fact - Fallen new 485 demand (28% or more)
Fact - Law requires quarterly spillover.
Fact (?) - DoS allocated 30% of visas in Q1 (is it a fact?)
Fact - Dates did not move significantly
So all of these things fit together well only if one of the following is true
a) USCIS is utlizing the allocated visas.
b) EB3 to EB2 conversion is substantial enough to not warrant any movement in dates.
Regarding Ron's claim of 13K wasted in 2009. That is where I said I have a hard time accepting that. Because in 2009 EB did not receive any spillover from FB (to my best knowledge) and in 2009 EB did consumer 140K visas.
lets put the "you said .. I said" aside and just evaluate the definition of "assigned" and "used" visa numbers.
- correct me if I am wrong but I think Ron implies - "some numbers are assigned but then not used. These numbers still show up as used in the data report (since they were assigned)".
We have established that there is no document to support this but can we find out if this assumption can be true?
One can only infer based some facts and some assumptions.
Fact - Fallen new 485 demand (28% or more)
Fact - Law requires quarterly spillover.
Fact (?) - DoS allocated 30% of visas in Q1 (is it a fact?)
Fact - Dates did not move significantly
So all of these things fit together well only if one of the following is true
a) USCIS is utlizing the allocated visas.
b) EB3 to EB2 conversion is substantial enough to not warrant any movement in dates.
Regarding Ron's claim of 13K wasted in 2009. That is where I said I have a hard time accepting that. Because in 2009 EB did not receive any spillover from FB (to my best knowledge) and in 2009 EB did consumer 140K visas.
more...
makeup LeBron James Miami Heat Jersey
dummgelauft
08-21 12:51 PM
I did not marry the man I was engaged to. I came here initially for ONE month and was approved at the airport customs terminal to stay that long. When I got here, it was for a visit with my fiance only. Unfortunately, things did not work out and we broke it off. Thank God! However, I was staying with his uncle and aunt, and they had a disabled man in the house. HE turned out to be my sponsor when they asked me to care for him while they were doing long haul trucking. I agreed to do this and we immediately contacted USCIS to get instructions on what needed to be filed first. With that information in hand, we filed everything they requested. All the stuff on the RFE I received has never been mentioned before now and if it had, it would have been filed along with the rest. There are tons of applications, how is one supposed to know what to file and when if there are no specific instructions? I have gone through all the copies we have of all the required applications and I still do not see anything where all these other forms were to be filed along with the I-485.
Nothing was done illegally. He filed the application on my behalf, signed, sealed and delivered it himself. I did not do this on my own, I just signed whatever I was required to sign, he did the rest.
If all of this was illegal, then why was I not informed of this nearly 6 years ago when we filed the first application? Seems a bit odd that if I was illegal and they know where I am and who I live with that they wouldn't be quick to throw me out, but they have not done so.
My former fiance has nothing to do with this, I never intended to stay here when I first came, it was merely a visit but circumstances were such that I was needed at a moment's notice so we filed the necessary paperwork as quickly as possible and thought we were doing the right thing. No one has ever said otherwise until now and I think that is rather unfair to spring it all on me at this point and expect me to get it all done within 30 days. I know I am not the only applicant out there and I realize there is a huge backlog of other applications, I'm not that stupid to think that they will make me a priority, but one measly letter informing me that I was here illegally sometime over a 6 year period is not asking to much is it? Why would they send me all the other Notices of Action if I was here illegally and they knew it?
Something is terribly screwed up and I guess I have no choice but to find an attorney who can deal with this mess.
Okay, It is still a bit fuzzy, but lot clearer than your initial post. Almost all of us here on this forum are professionally qualified Employment Based applicants, with fairly straightforward, albeit extremently slow moving cases. Nearly all of us have been sponsored by our employers and we make sure that we are legal, in this country, every day of the year.
Now, coming to your case.
I am certain this "disabled man" you are caring for, had all good intentions, but he screwed up royally. You can not just "apply for a I-485". There has to be a basis from one of the following
(1) Family based
(2) Employment based
(3) Humanitarian / Refugee
(4) Diversity Based
It is still not clear, what CATEGORY he applied for you under.
(a) Can not be family based (you are not his spouse, child, sibling etc)
(b) You CERTAINLY DO NOT qualify under Employment based application.
(c) You absolutey CAN NOT apply under Refugee or Diversity (Canadians are shut out of diversity visa quota)
So, it is now time to stop pretending that you "were needed here". Nobody is indispensible.
Get your self back in to Cananda and work towards building your life back up.
Bon fin semaine!!
Nothing was done illegally. He filed the application on my behalf, signed, sealed and delivered it himself. I did not do this on my own, I just signed whatever I was required to sign, he did the rest.
If all of this was illegal, then why was I not informed of this nearly 6 years ago when we filed the first application? Seems a bit odd that if I was illegal and they know where I am and who I live with that they wouldn't be quick to throw me out, but they have not done so.
My former fiance has nothing to do with this, I never intended to stay here when I first came, it was merely a visit but circumstances were such that I was needed at a moment's notice so we filed the necessary paperwork as quickly as possible and thought we were doing the right thing. No one has ever said otherwise until now and I think that is rather unfair to spring it all on me at this point and expect me to get it all done within 30 days. I know I am not the only applicant out there and I realize there is a huge backlog of other applications, I'm not that stupid to think that they will make me a priority, but one measly letter informing me that I was here illegally sometime over a 6 year period is not asking to much is it? Why would they send me all the other Notices of Action if I was here illegally and they knew it?
Something is terribly screwed up and I guess I have no choice but to find an attorney who can deal with this mess.
Okay, It is still a bit fuzzy, but lot clearer than your initial post. Almost all of us here on this forum are professionally qualified Employment Based applicants, with fairly straightforward, albeit extremently slow moving cases. Nearly all of us have been sponsored by our employers and we make sure that we are legal, in this country, every day of the year.
Now, coming to your case.
I am certain this "disabled man" you are caring for, had all good intentions, but he screwed up royally. You can not just "apply for a I-485". There has to be a basis from one of the following
(1) Family based
(2) Employment based
(3) Humanitarian / Refugee
(4) Diversity Based
It is still not clear, what CATEGORY he applied for you under.
(a) Can not be family based (you are not his spouse, child, sibling etc)
(b) You CERTAINLY DO NOT qualify under Employment based application.
(c) You absolutey CAN NOT apply under Refugee or Diversity (Canadians are shut out of diversity visa quota)
So, it is now time to stop pretending that you "were needed here". Nobody is indispensible.
Get your self back in to Cananda and work towards building your life back up.
Bon fin semaine!!
girlfriend lebron james dunk wallpaper
GCKaIntezar
01-30 10:51 AM
Waiting for the finalized copy of the flyer. Please post it today, I'll review and re-post for others to comment.
Ajay,
Let me know when do you want to do it? How about this Friday?
Cheers!
I will send the flyer statements that I think we can put tonight. Like I said, I am not very creative, but I will put my ideas out there. Thanks Sanjay for finding out the EBC details. I like the 30 mins 500 dollars. We can pool in some money from our side and do a 30 mins program. I think it will be still worth it.
Did you guys distribute flyers at Metropark?
Thanks,
Varsha
Ajay,
Let me know when do you want to do it? How about this Friday?
Cheers!
I will send the flyer statements that I think we can put tonight. Like I said, I am not very creative, but I will put my ideas out there. Thanks Sanjay for finding out the EBC details. I like the 30 mins 500 dollars. We can pool in some money from our side and do a 30 mins program. I think it will be still worth it.
Did you guys distribute flyers at Metropark?
Thanks,
Varsha
hairstyles Miami Heat forward LeBron
ak77
09-10 02:06 PM
I found another link. Not sure if its the right one ?
http://www.c-span.org/Watch/C-SPAN_wm.aspx
Yes this one is working for me...but iam also not sure its the right one or not.
http://www.c-span.org/Watch/C-SPAN_wm.aspx
Yes this one is working for me...but iam also not sure its the right one or not.
wahwah
02-21 02:17 PM
i disagree. EB2 India is not more crowded than EB3 India. EB2 India currently went U because DOS made a dumb mistake of releasing the EB2 PD to April 2004 back during the October 2007 VB. That is why the visas for EB2 got exhausted so quickly. The problem is that there are still lot of candidates from 2002 and 2003 that are unapproved so it didn't make sense to release the October VB with April 2004 PD.
I doubt if in April 2008, the EB2 India PD would move to Dec.2003 as there are still alot of people waiting in 2002 and all of 2003.
As per my lawer this is not a right time to port your date to EB2 as at this moment nobody knows anything and there are very least chance for eb2 to move forward.:cool: as per her now eb2 is more crowded than EB3 that's why it became UNavailable. It's just a suggestion keep yourself with same EB3 or EB2 whatever you have otherwise I know one frined he ported his July2001 to EB2 and at this time EB3 is current for this date although eb2 unavailable
I doubt if in April 2008, the EB2 India PD would move to Dec.2003 as there are still alot of people waiting in 2002 and all of 2003.
As per my lawer this is not a right time to port your date to EB2 as at this moment nobody knows anything and there are very least chance for eb2 to move forward.:cool: as per her now eb2 is more crowded than EB3 that's why it became UNavailable. It's just a suggestion keep yourself with same EB3 or EB2 whatever you have otherwise I know one frined he ported his July2001 to EB2 and at this time EB3 is current for this date although eb2 unavailable
danu2007
11-20 10:54 PM
Today I got the second letter from USCIS regarding this request. The letter says they accepted the request and put in the pending que.
Also the letter says, "your request is deemed to constitute an agreement to pay any fees that may be chargeable up to $25.00" and continues and finally it says "most requests do not require any fees and if fees in excess of $25.00 are required, we will notify you beforehand"
Jusy wondering any one got this reply..
Also the letter says, "your request is deemed to constitute an agreement to pay any fees that may be chargeable up to $25.00" and continues and finally it says "most requests do not require any fees and if fees in excess of $25.00 are required, we will notify you beforehand"
Jusy wondering any one got this reply..
No comments:
Post a Comment