qvadis
12-29 04:03 PM
No one analysed the statue of the language used in 202 5 a.
If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5).
You might have to define what the word "is" is ;-)
Anyway, that paragraph also states: "If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) [...] exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise issued such visas,." but then continues on with: "the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation"
One could interpret this distinction such that the actual number of visas available is not necessarily the same number of visas made available, which is fixed to 28.6% + spill-over. It might, as well, comprise only those unused visas that haven't been passed down to a lower category. 203 (b) (2) / (3) and 202(5) seem to compete over the unused numbers. Not sure which one has preference.
This is the very direct, simple interpretation of 202 5 A.
Therefore one cannot (EB3-ROW) interpret, for their convenience.
Well, that's according to your interpretation. You seem to suggest that USCIS disagrees with your interpretation. We probably have to wait for the next immigration statistics to see what rule USCIS has been following.
Thats why I suggest the IV to discuss with experinced attorney and make a enquiry with law makers or DOS, if required. Otherwise (if it is wrong it is a big blow to India and China). We will get only 2800 per year.
I'd hope IV would focus on increasing the number of GCs available to all of us, instead of fighting for allocation. ACT-21 increased the number of H1B visas without increasing the number of GCs.
If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5).
You might have to define what the word "is" is ;-)
Anyway, that paragraph also states: "If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) [...] exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise issued such visas,." but then continues on with: "the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation"
One could interpret this distinction such that the actual number of visas available is not necessarily the same number of visas made available, which is fixed to 28.6% + spill-over. It might, as well, comprise only those unused visas that haven't been passed down to a lower category. 203 (b) (2) / (3) and 202(5) seem to compete over the unused numbers. Not sure which one has preference.
This is the very direct, simple interpretation of 202 5 A.
Therefore one cannot (EB3-ROW) interpret, for their convenience.
Well, that's according to your interpretation. You seem to suggest that USCIS disagrees with your interpretation. We probably have to wait for the next immigration statistics to see what rule USCIS has been following.
Thats why I suggest the IV to discuss with experinced attorney and make a enquiry with law makers or DOS, if required. Otherwise (if it is wrong it is a big blow to India and China). We will get only 2800 per year.
I'd hope IV would focus on increasing the number of GCs available to all of us, instead of fighting for allocation. ACT-21 increased the number of H1B visas without increasing the number of GCs.
wallpaper Anime Girl 98 320X480 iPhone
indyanguy
12-19 12:10 PM
wish life were simple huh?
Attorney_11"The appeal of an I-485 denial can take several months, or even a year or more. "
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=1474093861&m=934109056
I thought so. Life's never simple with USCIS in it :) If at that time my spouse (my beneficiary) has not used EAD and is still on a non immigrant visa (H1 or L1), can I switch to dependent status?
Attorney_11"The appeal of an I-485 denial can take several months, or even a year or more. "
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=1474093861&m=934109056
I thought so. Life's never simple with USCIS in it :) If at that time my spouse (my beneficiary) has not used EAD and is still on a non immigrant visa (H1 or L1), can I switch to dependent status?
lifestrikes
06-17 05:22 PM
Here is link to an article from American Public Media
http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2009/05/07/pm_h1b_limbo/
You can also listen to the audio version of the story.
Since they have listed the name of affected person, it should be fairly easy to find them and request them to post their experience here.
http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2009/05/07/pm_h1b_limbo/
You can also listen to the audio version of the story.
Since they have listed the name of affected person, it should be fairly easy to find them and request them to post their experience here.
2011 Barbie Girl; wallpaper girl x.
Drifter
04-06 04:14 PM
One way of thanking IV is by making a donation, so that IV can continue to help others like you.
just a thought.
Good luck with your situation.
Ofcourse, that goes without saying... I will be contributing to IV and will continue supporting the efforts in fact we all need to support IV.
just a thought.
Good luck with your situation.
Ofcourse, that goes without saying... I will be contributing to IV and will continue supporting the efforts in fact we all need to support IV.
more...
guy03062
07-02 04:21 PM
Medical (for me and my spouse) - $700
EAD / AP attorney's fees + filing fees (for my spouse) - $1140
Photographs - $55
Affidavit - $40
Upgraded I-140 to PP - $1500
==============
TOTAL = $3435
==============
EAD / AP attorney's fees + filing fees (for my spouse) - $1140
Photographs - $55
Affidavit - $40
Upgraded I-140 to PP - $1500
==============
TOTAL = $3435
==============
h1techSlave
11-30 01:15 PM
Mallu, I think the opposite would be the case.
Right now the PD is kept at an artificially low range, since neither the USCIS nor the DOS has a clue about how many GCs they are processing. So for the last several years, they were ultimately issuing only around 80,000 GCs even though the quota is 140,000 + 80,000 (from family quota). A wastage of around 140,000 visas per year.
If USCIS can approve a GC after waiting for 120 days (with our with out a response from the FBI), then the GC approval would become much more predictable. Then the PD cut off will be much more realistic, resulting in a much lower wastage of visa numbers.
The end result, the PD would move upward quickly.
If this turns out true, that will be great !!!
One minor side effect is that India EB dates might further retrogress because still there a lot of folks with PD 2001,2002 etc pending namecheck clearance.
Right now the PD is kept at an artificially low range, since neither the USCIS nor the DOS has a clue about how many GCs they are processing. So for the last several years, they were ultimately issuing only around 80,000 GCs even though the quota is 140,000 + 80,000 (from family quota). A wastage of around 140,000 visas per year.
If USCIS can approve a GC after waiting for 120 days (with our with out a response from the FBI), then the GC approval would become much more predictable. Then the PD cut off will be much more realistic, resulting in a much lower wastage of visa numbers.
The end result, the PD would move upward quickly.
If this turns out true, that will be great !!!
One minor side effect is that India EB dates might further retrogress because still there a lot of folks with PD 2001,2002 etc pending namecheck clearance.
more...
ilwaiting
12-12 01:03 PM
Here's your answer in the bulletin
EMPLOYMENT: Demand for numbers in the Employment Third �Other Workers� category, as well as the China and India Employment Second preference categories, has been escalating. No movement in those cut-off dates will be possible until the current level of demand subsides.
I hope it doesn't retrogress in future.
I still don't understand why is EB-2 not moving forward especially that EB-1 is current.
EMPLOYMENT: Demand for numbers in the Employment Third �Other Workers� category, as well as the China and India Employment Second preference categories, has been escalating. No movement in those cut-off dates will be possible until the current level of demand subsides.
I hope it doesn't retrogress in future.
I still don't understand why is EB-2 not moving forward especially that EB-1 is current.
2010 Jenny gossip girl wallpaper
chanduv23
08-31 04:26 PM
No lies, salary cannot be raised and people on H-4 cannot work. The article is right.
What I don't get is where they got that the Sept 18 rally will see 5000 of us attending? That's way too little guys, we need at least double that!
They probably phishing IV website and figured out that lot of members are are jot coming forward so they analyzed and came up with a 5K figure :D:D:D:D
What I don't get is where they got that the Sept 18 rally will see 5000 of us attending? That's way too little guys, we need at least double that!
They probably phishing IV website and figured out that lot of members are are jot coming forward so they analyzed and came up with a 5K figure :D:D:D:D
more...
pvganesh
01-05 02:58 PM
Hi Sheila Danzig,
I have an ICWA degree from India. Do you think this can support my 3+2 years education to support a EB2 case.
I have an ICWA degree from India. Do you think this can support my 3+2 years education to support a EB2 case.
hair romance girl bi668 wallpaper
smuggymba
04-22 12:40 PM
If this "clothes" thing is used by the cops, the illegal immigrants will start wearing "legal types" clothes and then there will be chaos...ROFL.
Check this out: Brian Bilbray, GOP Rep., Claims Clothes Identify Illegal Immigrants (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/22/brian-bilbray-gop-rep-cla_n_547710.html)
"trained professionals" can identify undocumented workers just by looking at their clothes......"They will look at the kind of dress you wear, there is different type of attire, there is different type of -- right down to the shoes, right down to the clothes," Bilbray replied.
How long before we are targeted based on this rationale (our traditional dresses are easily recognizable!!) ....... These policies will only spiral in the wrong direction, making every immigrant's life miserable - be it legal or illegal!!!
Check this out: Brian Bilbray, GOP Rep., Claims Clothes Identify Illegal Immigrants (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/22/brian-bilbray-gop-rep-cla_n_547710.html)
"trained professionals" can identify undocumented workers just by looking at their clothes......"They will look at the kind of dress you wear, there is different type of attire, there is different type of -- right down to the shoes, right down to the clothes," Bilbray replied.
How long before we are targeted based on this rationale (our traditional dresses are easily recognizable!!) ....... These policies will only spiral in the wrong direction, making every immigrant's life miserable - be it legal or illegal!!!
more...
GCaspirations
10-02 12:57 PM
I applied in NSC 485/EAD/AP on July 27th. The case was transfered to CSC. 485 Application was then transfered to TSC from CSC but EAD and AP are being processed in CSC.
I am intrested in knowing if you have received FP notice.
I am intrested in knowing if you have received FP notice.
hot 1024 x 640
h1techSlave
11-30 03:54 PM
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/CISOMB_Annual_Report_2007.pdf
Look at page 52. Page 53 explains, why USCIS is wasting visa numbers even though there is huge demand for the same.
The 7% country limit does not exist for the last quarter. But it does exist during the first 3 quarters. Since USCIS is moving the PD drastically only in the last quarter, they are unable to process all the applications in the last quarter resulting in wastage of EB visas.
Where did you get this number 80,000 FB numbers given to EB immigrants? Please show me the source !
Also, you are forgetting about 7% country quota and the demand from ROW (which itself is retrogressed!).
So no matter what you may think, without IV it's going to be a long wait
Look at page 52. Page 53 explains, why USCIS is wasting visa numbers even though there is huge demand for the same.
The 7% country limit does not exist for the last quarter. But it does exist during the first 3 quarters. Since USCIS is moving the PD drastically only in the last quarter, they are unable to process all the applications in the last quarter resulting in wastage of EB visas.
Where did you get this number 80,000 FB numbers given to EB immigrants? Please show me the source !
Also, you are forgetting about 7% country quota and the demand from ROW (which itself is retrogressed!).
So no matter what you may think, without IV it's going to be a long wait
more...
house Car And Girls Wallpaper
raydon
10-12 03:03 AM
Looking at the movement of dates for EB3, esp India and China, it's hard to be optimistic of any changes. It's a very wretched position to be in for Indian and Chinese nationality, if they're in EB3. All those who are eligible to port will definitely try to port to EB2 as long as it's available and cut their waiting time. It might be risky and unpredictable, but it's a risk worth taking considering the endless torture in the form of a long wait and zero or little forward movement of dates.
There've been times when I've felt like attempting porting, but am not sure of the reaction of my employer - a big "reputed" company. If they revoke the I-140 in retaliation for using AC-21, then no chance of porting and back to square one. So it's the seemingly endless wait for me just like all others suffering from 2001 onwards. If only I'd not hesitated to take a bold step back in 2003. Too late to lament about that though.
There've been times when I've felt like attempting porting, but am not sure of the reaction of my employer - a big "reputed" company. If they revoke the I-140 in retaliation for using AC-21, then no chance of porting and back to square one. So it's the seemingly endless wait for me just like all others suffering from 2001 onwards. If only I'd not hesitated to take a bold step back in 2003. Too late to lament about that though.
tattoo wallpaper girl x. torbjoern
pkak
11-18 01:58 AM
As we all know, the Housing crisis in US is getting worse day by day, with the inventory of houses available for sale increasing, and buyers not willing/able to buy those houses.
Giving speedy Green Cards to July Visa bulletin cases will ease the Housing Crisis in US.
Most of the people affected by the July Visa bulletin are highly skilled people who have the capacity to buy houses, but are not investing in houses, since their future in US is not secure until they get Green Cards.
Instead they end up investing in real estate in Bangalore/Hyderabad etc, thereby helping in housing boom in those places.
If Congress passes a law to give speedy Green Cards to these highly skilled people ASAP; these highly skilled people, who have good jobs and capacity to buy houses inspite of the difficult situation regarding getting loans etc, will help US tide over the current difficult housing situation.
This is something for the US law makers to ponder.
Giving speedy Green Cards to July Visa bulletin cases will ease the Housing Crisis in US.
Most of the people affected by the July Visa bulletin are highly skilled people who have the capacity to buy houses, but are not investing in houses, since their future in US is not secure until they get Green Cards.
Instead they end up investing in real estate in Bangalore/Hyderabad etc, thereby helping in housing boom in those places.
If Congress passes a law to give speedy Green Cards to these highly skilled people ASAP; these highly skilled people, who have good jobs and capacity to buy houses inspite of the difficult situation regarding getting loans etc, will help US tide over the current difficult housing situation.
This is something for the US law makers to ponder.
more...
pictures bikini girl wallpaper. view οf
Radhika
07-02 04:00 PM
Medical $350
copies $50
photos $36
Attorney Fee $1000
Parents paid for BC and Affidsvits $60
postal charges $45
Cancled home country visit
copies $50
photos $36
Attorney Fee $1000
Parents paid for BC and Affidsvits $60
postal charges $45
Cancled home country visit
dresses sexy girl wallpaper
isantem
07-28 10:07 PM
That was a very illogical reply to the per-country limit question. How come a large number of people from certain countries automatically eliminate people from smaller countries from getting green cards? That's an extremely dumb way of looking at it.
will go to people from India and China,
If you remove the limits, yes most of the cards THAT'S BECAUSE THEY'RE #$@!$ING BACKLOGGED FOR DECADES DUE TO THE LIMITS!!
Is not DUE the limits, is due many aplications from India.
The reality is pending ROW 2005 - 12,815 India 2004 - 14,191 :eek:
will go to people from India and China,
If you remove the limits, yes most of the cards THAT'S BECAUSE THEY'RE #$@!$ING BACKLOGGED FOR DECADES DUE TO THE LIMITS!!
Is not DUE the limits, is due many aplications from India.
The reality is pending ROW 2005 - 12,815 India 2004 - 14,191 :eek:
more...
makeup 3D Girl Wallpaper, 3D Woman
pray
08-23 03:26 PM
Just Thought
There is 200k application without 140 approval, this is including july filers.
there is lot of chnace for those who got their I-140 approved, even their PD '2006.
you can see people getting approved PD'2005 EB2 cases, even then VB says now 2004'apr for EB2.They are not processing based on PD now and in future also i gues.Since we have already filed.PD will restrict only to File I-485 in future.
I think EB2-jan2007 and EB3-Aprl2005 in October VB
- satish
That is wishful thinking.I know people with more recent priority dates got cleared in june but it will go back to PD system from now on again,how else can they do it.The reason why (to eveyone's surprise) they made everything current was to clear some of these cases which were filed long ago(I-485) but were stuck due to the retrogression.This is obviously not going to happen again for sometime since they now have hundreds of thousands of more cases.
There is 200k application without 140 approval, this is including july filers.
there is lot of chnace for those who got their I-140 approved, even their PD '2006.
you can see people getting approved PD'2005 EB2 cases, even then VB says now 2004'apr for EB2.They are not processing based on PD now and in future also i gues.Since we have already filed.PD will restrict only to File I-485 in future.
I think EB2-jan2007 and EB3-Aprl2005 in October VB
- satish
That is wishful thinking.I know people with more recent priority dates got cleared in june but it will go back to PD system from now on again,how else can they do it.The reason why (to eveyone's surprise) they made everything current was to clear some of these cases which were filed long ago(I-485) but were stuck due to the retrogression.This is obviously not going to happen again for sometime since they now have hundreds of thousands of more cases.
girlfriend wallpaper girl x. wallpaper
alisa
03-29 01:31 AM
^^^^
This is the most important thing right now.
Members needed in Wisconsin. Please PM me.
This is the most important thing right now.
Members needed in Wisconsin. Please PM me.
hairstyles wallpaper girl x. Beautiful
for_gc
08-01 10:31 PM
Very helpful info about AC21 on Murthy's website:
http://www.murthy.com/news/UDac21qa.html#1
I just googled and this came as the first link.
http://www.murthy.com/news/UDac21qa.html#1
I just googled and this came as the first link.
wahwah
06-05 10:28 AM
you are correct. the new memo requires the adjudicator to approve the old i-140 first and then determine eligibility for porting. it doesn't mean that you can't port if i140 has not been approved.
actually that is not what i understand...though we should wait for
1. some lawyer to come up with clarifications.
2. updates to the adjudicator field manual.
i think this still upholds the memorandum with regards to porting off on unapproved i-140. if you notice the case they have cited "Matter of Al Wazzan" is date Oct, 2005 where as the favourable Yates memo came out in Dec 2005.
what i understand is that they are just reiterating that porting off on unapproved i-140 is not automatic and requires that the adjudicator decide on the pending i-140 first before deciding wether the porting off is protected under AC21 or not.
but again...i myself am waiting for clarifications from immigration law websites like murthy.com and immigration-law.com etc.
actually that is not what i understand...though we should wait for
1. some lawyer to come up with clarifications.
2. updates to the adjudicator field manual.
i think this still upholds the memorandum with regards to porting off on unapproved i-140. if you notice the case they have cited "Matter of Al Wazzan" is date Oct, 2005 where as the favourable Yates memo came out in Dec 2005.
what i understand is that they are just reiterating that porting off on unapproved i-140 is not automatic and requires that the adjudicator decide on the pending i-140 first before deciding wether the porting off is protected under AC21 or not.
but again...i myself am waiting for clarifications from immigration law websites like murthy.com and immigration-law.com etc.
CADude
07-17 12:24 PM
You has incorrect infomation. Your Receive Date is a factor but PD is also a big factor, if limited number available.
If two person has submitted their application. One has PD 2001 and RD June 10 2007 and other had PD Jan 2006 with RD May 1 2006.
USCIS 485 Processing Date: June 15th 2007 and Visa Bullitin has "C"
Still PD with 2001 will get the the number first before PD 2006 case.
So
485 RD < USCIS 485 Processing date and PD < Visa Bulletin date
Order by PD desc
hope this help
I am not sure of this but from studying data, I get the impression that the GC are given out on a FIFO system based on when USCIS receives your I-485 (assuming it clears NC) and NOT PD date
jasquil
If two person has submitted their application. One has PD 2001 and RD June 10 2007 and other had PD Jan 2006 with RD May 1 2006.
USCIS 485 Processing Date: June 15th 2007 and Visa Bullitin has "C"
Still PD with 2001 will get the the number first before PD 2006 case.
So
485 RD < USCIS 485 Processing date and PD < Visa Bulletin date
Order by PD desc
hope this help
I am not sure of this but from studying data, I get the impression that the GC are given out on a FIFO system based on when USCIS receives your I-485 (assuming it clears NC) and NOT PD date
jasquil
0 comments:
Post a Comment