crystal
07-11 12:07 PM
^^^^
greyhair
06-21 09:31 AM
In 2001, Congress passed a bill called American Competitiveness for 21st Century. This bill recaptured all unused/wasted green cards between 1992 to 2000. These recaptured green card numbers were suppose to be applied for EB by distributing them from 2001 to 2005. As the result starting 2001 you see higher than 140K green cards numbers allocated. However, those additional green cards which were suppose to be applied starting 2001 were wasted, in addition to the green card numbers in 2006 and 2007. Also, my understanding of the law is that if in an year, green number is not utilized in FB, in the last quarter of the year that green card visa number could flow to EB . Likewise, if a green card number is not utilized in EB, in the last quarter the unused green card could flow to FB.
I read on this forum that starting 2001 (after the unused visa numbers were captured the last time) the total of these unused/wasted green card numbers from EB + FB is around 316K. Hope this clarifies your question.
But don't count on any new law to recapture green card visas outside of CIR. It is not going to happen. IV core team said that the administration, and both Republican and Democratic lawmakers are opposed to do anything outside of CIR.
Here is today's news in Politico indicating the same thing -
Jon Kyl: Obama holding border 'hostage' - Andy Barr - POLITICO.com (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0610/38789.html)
If Administration can tie high profile subject such as border security with CIR, is there any chance that lawmakers will let Recapture through (outside of CIR)? I don't think so.
I have often heard about visa recapture in these forums, and always that there were lost visa numbers. I came across a DHS site yesterday with statstics on GCs issued, and must admit I am a bit confused about what visa recapture means. The site is DHS | Yearbook of Immigration Statistics: 2009 (http://www.dhs.gov/files/statistics/publications/LPR09.shtm) . Looking at table 6 (Persons Obtaining Legal Permanent Resident Status by Type and Major Class of Admission: Fiscal Years 2000 to 2009), we get the following data on EB and FB issuances.
Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total
FB 235,092 231,699 186,880 158,796 214,355 212,970 222,229 194,900 227,761 211,859 2,096,541
EB 106,642 178,702 173,814 81,727 155,330 246,877 159,081 162,176 166,511 144,034 1,574,894
Total 341,734 410,401 360,694 240,523 369,685 459,847 381,310 357,076 394,272 355,893 3,671,435
if we we were to take deltas from the fb cap of 226k and eb cap of 140k, the scenario looks as follows, where a -ive number indicates over allocation.
Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total
FB -9,092 -5,699 39,120 67,204 11,645 13,030 3,771 31,100 -1,761 14,141 163,459
EB 33,358 -38,702 -33,814 58,273 -15,330 -106,877 -19,081 -22,176 -26,511 -4,034 -174,894
Total 24,266 -44,401 5,306 125,477 -3,685 -93,847 -15,310 8,924 -28,272 10,107 -11,435
As we can see, cumulatively from 2000-09, 11,435 more visas have been given than actually permitted. Particularly in EB 174k excess visas were given.
I'm curious to know, what recapture means, when it seems visas have not been lost.
The only case for recapture is if we only count the years visas were under allocated, and ignore the years it was overallocated. The scenario would look as follows
Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total
FB 0 0 39,120 67,204 11,645 13,030 3,771 31,100 0 14,141 180,011
EB 33,358 0 0 58,273 0 0 0 0 0 0 91,631
Total 33,358 0 39,120 125,477 11,645 13,030 3,771 31,100 0 14,141 271,642
So are we trying to recapture 271k visas from this calculation?
If the experts could shed some light on this, that would be great.
I read on this forum that starting 2001 (after the unused visa numbers were captured the last time) the total of these unused/wasted green card numbers from EB + FB is around 316K. Hope this clarifies your question.
But don't count on any new law to recapture green card visas outside of CIR. It is not going to happen. IV core team said that the administration, and both Republican and Democratic lawmakers are opposed to do anything outside of CIR.
Here is today's news in Politico indicating the same thing -
Jon Kyl: Obama holding border 'hostage' - Andy Barr - POLITICO.com (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0610/38789.html)
If Administration can tie high profile subject such as border security with CIR, is there any chance that lawmakers will let Recapture through (outside of CIR)? I don't think so.
I have often heard about visa recapture in these forums, and always that there were lost visa numbers. I came across a DHS site yesterday with statstics on GCs issued, and must admit I am a bit confused about what visa recapture means. The site is DHS | Yearbook of Immigration Statistics: 2009 (http://www.dhs.gov/files/statistics/publications/LPR09.shtm) . Looking at table 6 (Persons Obtaining Legal Permanent Resident Status by Type and Major Class of Admission: Fiscal Years 2000 to 2009), we get the following data on EB and FB issuances.
Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total
FB 235,092 231,699 186,880 158,796 214,355 212,970 222,229 194,900 227,761 211,859 2,096,541
EB 106,642 178,702 173,814 81,727 155,330 246,877 159,081 162,176 166,511 144,034 1,574,894
Total 341,734 410,401 360,694 240,523 369,685 459,847 381,310 357,076 394,272 355,893 3,671,435
if we we were to take deltas from the fb cap of 226k and eb cap of 140k, the scenario looks as follows, where a -ive number indicates over allocation.
Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total
FB -9,092 -5,699 39,120 67,204 11,645 13,030 3,771 31,100 -1,761 14,141 163,459
EB 33,358 -38,702 -33,814 58,273 -15,330 -106,877 -19,081 -22,176 -26,511 -4,034 -174,894
Total 24,266 -44,401 5,306 125,477 -3,685 -93,847 -15,310 8,924 -28,272 10,107 -11,435
As we can see, cumulatively from 2000-09, 11,435 more visas have been given than actually permitted. Particularly in EB 174k excess visas were given.
I'm curious to know, what recapture means, when it seems visas have not been lost.
The only case for recapture is if we only count the years visas were under allocated, and ignore the years it was overallocated. The scenario would look as follows
Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total
FB 0 0 39,120 67,204 11,645 13,030 3,771 31,100 0 14,141 180,011
EB 33,358 0 0 58,273 0 0 0 0 0 0 91,631
Total 33,358 0 39,120 125,477 11,645 13,030 3,771 31,100 0 14,141 271,642
So are we trying to recapture 271k visas from this calculation?
If the experts could shed some light on this, that would be great.
gc_kaavaali
11-21 10:01 PM
Happy Thanksgiving to all IV members.
redelite
08-20 01:33 PM
Okay so here is my first draft of the YA RLY owl..
http://www.kirupa.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=47604&stc=1&d=1219253829
I think I tried to be a little too detailed though :-/
http://www.kirupa.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=47604&stc=1&d=1219253829
I think I tried to be a little too detailed though :-/
more...
shana04
02-06 09:50 AM
I just wanted to bump this and get people's opinion on what paper work and other things we should be aware of by not changing the employers who sponsered our green card, but have applied for 485, have I-140 approved (180 days passed since I-140 approval and I-485 receipt dates) and received EAD/AP.
I guess lot of people are in this category. So far, the only advise I have seen is: Extend H1 instead of using EAD.
You have understand the pros and cons for H1 vs EAD
H1:
1. Expensive
2. If for some reason there is an RFE or for that matter any thing, you can always fall back on h1 and then fight for your case
3. if employer revokes I 140 in your case (it would not affect) but you know uscsis. so be careful and H1 helps
EAD:
1. Flexibility
2. more options
3. you can be out of status
4. no employer problems
5. if you have gap, when you extend. then you will be out of job
6. you cannot fall back on H1
so you need to decide.
good luck
I guess lot of people are in this category. So far, the only advise I have seen is: Extend H1 instead of using EAD.
You have understand the pros and cons for H1 vs EAD
H1:
1. Expensive
2. If for some reason there is an RFE or for that matter any thing, you can always fall back on h1 and then fight for your case
3. if employer revokes I 140 in your case (it would not affect) but you know uscsis. so be careful and H1 helps
EAD:
1. Flexibility
2. more options
3. you can be out of status
4. no employer problems
5. if you have gap, when you extend. then you will be out of job
6. you cannot fall back on H1
so you need to decide.
good luck
hobbyaddict
December 3rd, 2008, 04:22 PM
It's here! On time, and as described in ad. This weekend it will get it's first workout... Reading up on new features. I am going to set a few test "banks" (pre-sets) based on last years experience at that facility. Hoping that only minor tweaks are necessary once there.
Fun...
-Ed
Fun...
-Ed
more...
BMS1
09-25 12:39 PM
I had a similar issue for my son (I attached the check and it appeared that they lost the check) and it can be re-submitted again as long as the receipt date stamped on the rejected application is before retrogression which must be the case for you. But you need to wait for the rejected App.
absaarkhan
06-12 05:54 PM
What is "Letter of Acquirement’
Can you please tell me what is "Letter of Acquirement’'
My company is Acquired too, the New Employer just gave me a Letter Copy
explaining the Merger, NO Official docs were shared with me.
From whom did u get this letter.
No need of new H1 if company 'B's' HR has agreed to continue with 'A''s employees.
1. Get a EVL letter from company 'B'. (This is assuming name of 'A' will change to 'B' or new name.
2. You need to get a "Letter of Acquirement" from HR of new company (I am assuming that the name of the company is changing as well). If name does not change then you should be fine. If you have to travel out of US, you need to carry latest copy of EVL(of new company) and "Letter of Acquirement" along with you. (I went thru these few years back, PwCC bought over by IBM, immediately after the takeover I travelled out of US and came back without any problems(on H1)) this was quite a while back though, you may want to check with your company attorney though.
Note:
"Letter of Acquirement’ would state that your 'A' company was bought over by 'B' company on Date and name has now changed to 'B'.
Good luck.
GCCovet
Can you please tell me what is "Letter of Acquirement’'
My company is Acquired too, the New Employer just gave me a Letter Copy
explaining the Merger, NO Official docs were shared with me.
From whom did u get this letter.
No need of new H1 if company 'B's' HR has agreed to continue with 'A''s employees.
1. Get a EVL letter from company 'B'. (This is assuming name of 'A' will change to 'B' or new name.
2. You need to get a "Letter of Acquirement" from HR of new company (I am assuming that the name of the company is changing as well). If name does not change then you should be fine. If you have to travel out of US, you need to carry latest copy of EVL(of new company) and "Letter of Acquirement" along with you. (I went thru these few years back, PwCC bought over by IBM, immediately after the takeover I travelled out of US and came back without any problems(on H1)) this was quite a while back though, you may want to check with your company attorney though.
Note:
"Letter of Acquirement’ would state that your 'A' company was bought over by 'B' company on Date and name has now changed to 'B'.
Good luck.
GCCovet
more...
sriwaitingforgc
06-05 10:17 AM
"Unless you *are* a US citizen, you must choose the second option."
I think you have not read my question clearly. I suggest you read it before answering. I have not seen where the USCIS website asks for pending case numbers if we choose second option. I hope someone who has done this online can shed some light on this.
SK.
.
I think you have not read my question clearly. I suggest you read it before answering. I have not seen where the USCIS website asks for pending case numbers if we choose second option. I hope someone who has done this online can shed some light on this.
SK.
.
anilsal
07-22 06:16 PM
Can you please tell us why you need PCC from India? Is this for the 485?.
more...
priderock
05-02 12:46 AM
Link : (http://judiciary.house.gov/media/pdfs/Kaplan070501.pdf)
Very interesting read.
Very interesting read.
lj_rr
08-02 06:54 PM
Same day - never?
It takes 1 or 2 days depending on the rush.
Can people share their experience with same day counter passport collection from the vfs courier center at Chennai.
Reason I ask is, I and my wife have a 9AM appointment on 14th August. And Aug 15th being a holiday on account of India's Independence Day. Since we have to be in US on the 16th August to file for I485, getting the visa on the 16th would be too late. Therefore, it's critical that we collect the passport the same day.
Is anyone else in a similar situation? Should I inform the consular of our same night travel plans or is that ill-advised?
thanks
It takes 1 or 2 days depending on the rush.
Can people share their experience with same day counter passport collection from the vfs courier center at Chennai.
Reason I ask is, I and my wife have a 9AM appointment on 14th August. And Aug 15th being a holiday on account of India's Independence Day. Since we have to be in US on the 16th August to file for I485, getting the visa on the 16th would be too late. Therefore, it's critical that we collect the passport the same day.
Is anyone else in a similar situation? Should I inform the consular of our same night travel plans or is that ill-advised?
thanks
more...
sanju
04-19 10:59 PM
can someone tell me (PM if you dont want it on a pubic board) what went wrong with SKIL Bill last year? Where did it fail (senate/house?) did it just get dropped, or went up for vote and did not make it?
Googling around, and am not able to find anything...
Nothing went wrong with SKIL bill. Neither did SKIL bill fail. We computer programmers think that the world is built around Boolean logic 1/0, true/false, pass/fail, right/wrong. In politics most of the stuff is "in-between".
Every year many bills get introduced and only a small faction (less than 2%) are taken up for discussion/vote in the congress. Some bills pass in one house and are not taken up in the second house of the congress. Some bill pass both houses but they do not go to conference committee. A bill could be termed as “failed” if it has been voted down a majority vote in at least one house of the congress.
Last year (just like this year) key lawmakers wanted to pass a comprehensive immigration reform bill which means, everything related to immigration subject will be done in one bill. So SKIL bill was introduced but it could not be scheduled for discussion and vote in the congress. ‘Introducing” a bill simply means that a bill was registered with the one house of the congress and a bill number was allocated to that bill, that’s it. It is then the job of the majority leader in the Senate and Speaker of the House to put the bill in the calendar/schedule for discussions and, up or down vote. SKIL bill was never put on the schedule of either of the two chambers of the congress. Most articles suggested that if the SKIL bill was put on schedule all by itself, this bill would have easily passed with the majority vote. But key lawmakers did not want a separate bill for each category. They want a comprehensive bill which includes reforming employment based, nurses, family based, diversity lottery, refuges, undocumented and anything “immigration” under the sun. That is why SKIL was never discussed and voted on the floor of the congress. SKIL bill was made of the comprehensive immigration bill S.2611 that passed the Senate last year. So SKIL bill was passed by the Senate. Then there were drastic differences between the House and Senate version of the immigration bill. House version of the immigration bill border wall and enforcement only bill and House majority leadership was not ready to do any negotiations on the bill passed by the Senate. By July-August of 2006, Republican leadership decided to use “immigration” as an election platform to energize their base. So they did not want to take up a bill to fix the problem. Republican leadership in the House wanted the issue to be there so that they would go back to their base and scare voters with the “illegal alien” election platform. So in the end nothing happened. After the elections, after Republicans lost the majority in the House and the Senate, Republicans lost the need/leadership to address the immigration issue and Democrats announced to address this in the 110th Congress so that they could take up the credit for solving the problem. So for all practical purposes, nothing actually happened on immigration issue or SKIL bill.
This year too, SKIL bill is very unlikely to go anywhere all by itself. We all have to wait for the compressive immigration reform bill to pass or die. No one knows by when comprehensive bill could be considered as dead this year. Several times I have talked with my congressman’s office and they have told me that SKIL could be considered by itself only if key lawmakers know that comprehensive immigration bill is no longer possible. They never fail to add that this is a pure speculation and no one can predict how it will all unroll and we just have to wait for the things to happen in next few months. Sometimes they have also said that if comprehensive bill fails, there may not be any bill till 2009. My congressman’s office did say that we should continue to talk to other lawmakers to tell them about our problems and a need for an immigration bill.
Hope this answers your question.
Googling around, and am not able to find anything...
Nothing went wrong with SKIL bill. Neither did SKIL bill fail. We computer programmers think that the world is built around Boolean logic 1/0, true/false, pass/fail, right/wrong. In politics most of the stuff is "in-between".
Every year many bills get introduced and only a small faction (less than 2%) are taken up for discussion/vote in the congress. Some bills pass in one house and are not taken up in the second house of the congress. Some bill pass both houses but they do not go to conference committee. A bill could be termed as “failed” if it has been voted down a majority vote in at least one house of the congress.
Last year (just like this year) key lawmakers wanted to pass a comprehensive immigration reform bill which means, everything related to immigration subject will be done in one bill. So SKIL bill was introduced but it could not be scheduled for discussion and vote in the congress. ‘Introducing” a bill simply means that a bill was registered with the one house of the congress and a bill number was allocated to that bill, that’s it. It is then the job of the majority leader in the Senate and Speaker of the House to put the bill in the calendar/schedule for discussions and, up or down vote. SKIL bill was never put on the schedule of either of the two chambers of the congress. Most articles suggested that if the SKIL bill was put on schedule all by itself, this bill would have easily passed with the majority vote. But key lawmakers did not want a separate bill for each category. They want a comprehensive bill which includes reforming employment based, nurses, family based, diversity lottery, refuges, undocumented and anything “immigration” under the sun. That is why SKIL was never discussed and voted on the floor of the congress. SKIL bill was made of the comprehensive immigration bill S.2611 that passed the Senate last year. So SKIL bill was passed by the Senate. Then there were drastic differences between the House and Senate version of the immigration bill. House version of the immigration bill border wall and enforcement only bill and House majority leadership was not ready to do any negotiations on the bill passed by the Senate. By July-August of 2006, Republican leadership decided to use “immigration” as an election platform to energize their base. So they did not want to take up a bill to fix the problem. Republican leadership in the House wanted the issue to be there so that they would go back to their base and scare voters with the “illegal alien” election platform. So in the end nothing happened. After the elections, after Republicans lost the majority in the House and the Senate, Republicans lost the need/leadership to address the immigration issue and Democrats announced to address this in the 110th Congress so that they could take up the credit for solving the problem. So for all practical purposes, nothing actually happened on immigration issue or SKIL bill.
This year too, SKIL bill is very unlikely to go anywhere all by itself. We all have to wait for the compressive immigration reform bill to pass or die. No one knows by when comprehensive bill could be considered as dead this year. Several times I have talked with my congressman’s office and they have told me that SKIL could be considered by itself only if key lawmakers know that comprehensive immigration bill is no longer possible. They never fail to add that this is a pure speculation and no one can predict how it will all unroll and we just have to wait for the things to happen in next few months. Sometimes they have also said that if comprehensive bill fails, there may not be any bill till 2009. My congressman’s office did say that we should continue to talk to other lawmakers to tell them about our problems and a need for an immigration bill.
Hope this answers your question.
mbawa2574
07-07 07:56 PM
IV core leadership has to change and so is the stratergy. Current Lobbying efforts have clearly not worked out. I call for elections to elect the new core team. All these conference calls and inaction is just wastage of time and things are getting worse. We need an aggressive stratergy and may need to take names and hit people openly to get our agenda pushed. IV leadership clearly lacks these skills.
more...
bheemi
07-27 12:20 PM
[QUOTE=desi485]I forgot it initially and later realized that. fortunately my lawyer was still reviewing my papers (almost 4 weeks). so I sent him new copies. He included new copies and discarded old one. .Also some one told me that it should match what you specified in DS-156 at the time of visa interview. IS THIS TRUE?[/QUOTE
Donot even worry about it man..You are unnecessarily owrried about it and worry others also..
Enjoy...
Donot even worry about it man..You are unnecessarily owrried about it and worry others also..
Enjoy...
godspeed
10-09 01:33 PM
Hopefully you have a attorney, sometimes they have more access or just clout more than what we have, so my suggestion would be to get in touch with an attorney.
Do not take this lightly...
This was big surprize to me. Mine and my spuse had hard LUD on our I485 with the current status as :Notice Returned as Undeliverable. There wer no other updates or status change or approval or denial or soft LUD etc.
The most surpising to me that both of us received the Finger Printing notices on our new address just a month ago.
This is really frustrating.
When I called up the 800 number the lady said just ignore this status as this is some computer glitch.
Dont know what to do just believe her or try to do something else?
Need help ! any one out there in same situation???
Do not take this lightly...
This was big surprize to me. Mine and my spuse had hard LUD on our I485 with the current status as :Notice Returned as Undeliverable. There wer no other updates or status change or approval or denial or soft LUD etc.
The most surpising to me that both of us received the Finger Printing notices on our new address just a month ago.
This is really frustrating.
When I called up the 800 number the lady said just ignore this status as this is some computer glitch.
Dont know what to do just believe her or try to do something else?
Need help ! any one out there in same situation???
more...
arnet
10-24 01:16 PM
thanks janilsal for letting us know abt this program and please let us know if you receive any reply.
IV members should follow this program and ask lawmakers abt this retrogression issue if yahoo brings more lawmakers to this program.
Yahoo has a program to basically field questions to various congressmen and senators (most of them are prominent).
On Oct 26th, Rep. Tom Davis is going to answer questions.
I have comment #170 at:
http://news.yahoo.com/b/judy_woodruff/j_woodruff11183?rf=166#comments
In the future, there will be more law makers.
IV members should follow this program and ask lawmakers abt this retrogression issue if yahoo brings more lawmakers to this program.
Yahoo has a program to basically field questions to various congressmen and senators (most of them are prominent).
On Oct 26th, Rep. Tom Davis is going to answer questions.
I have comment #170 at:
http://news.yahoo.com/b/judy_woodruff/j_woodruff11183?rf=166#comments
In the future, there will be more law makers.
jsb
09-17 01:42 PM
I saw those guys in the situation room. I will look like their grandfather.:mad:
You have company Andy. How old are you?
You have company Andy. How old are you?
like_watching_paint_dry
09-07 12:56 AM
aiyo.. caal centers een india do butterr job of trraining weeth amreekan aaxent. that too een one month yonly at one tent the caast. they shud outsorce and use voip and doo enter-acteev training over yenternet. now heer is a phree busy-ness idea farr you. phorget new jerseey kaastly training.
admin
04-03 07:11 AM
jinger,
If we ask for everything, we will end up with nothing. If we do not focus on a certain set of issues, we're just setting ourselves for failure. It is not that we're misleading others either. We've always been very open about our goals. We never claimed that we're going to represent every immigrant's wishes.
While what GCwaitforever, has asked is for a very good reason, we're right now focussed on bringing the maximum good to the maximum number of our members.
If we ask for everything, we will end up with nothing. If we do not focus on a certain set of issues, we're just setting ourselves for failure. It is not that we're misleading others either. We've always been very open about our goals. We never claimed that we're going to represent every immigrant's wishes.
While what GCwaitforever, has asked is for a very good reason, we're right now focussed on bringing the maximum good to the maximum number of our members.
mmanurker
10-07 11:32 AM
irrational - Sorry to say this is little bit unlucky case. This happened to me also. My case got transferred to VSC from TSC in July 2009 and from then it is sitting there with no progress. Taken info pass but no use. (Yet to think about the next steps!).
I applied for EAD and AP in Aug last week and got the approved copies in Sep second week. I sent the application to TSC.
mmanurker - Can you please tell me how long your application was present in VSC? Also did you do anything to move it back to TSC or NSC.
my case was in VSC for about 10 months then for last 10 days or so its been going back and forth. I did not do anything at all at my end to move it back to TSC. You wont believe this, i got another email this morning that my case has been transferred again to Lincoln,NE (i guess this is Nebraska Service Center).
so now the sequence is TSC--->VSC--->TSC---->NSC---->USCIS Office(local office)--->Lincoln, NE:confused:
only service center that is left out is California:D
I applied for EAD and AP in Aug last week and got the approved copies in Sep second week. I sent the application to TSC.
mmanurker - Can you please tell me how long your application was present in VSC? Also did you do anything to move it back to TSC or NSC.
my case was in VSC for about 10 months then for last 10 days or so its been going back and forth. I did not do anything at all at my end to move it back to TSC. You wont believe this, i got another email this morning that my case has been transferred again to Lincoln,NE (i guess this is Nebraska Service Center).
so now the sequence is TSC--->VSC--->TSC---->NSC---->USCIS Office(local office)--->Lincoln, NE:confused:
only service center that is left out is California:D
0 comments:
Post a Comment