mygc2006
10-16 02:45 PM
PD is Aug 2002 / EB3 India / I 140 Approved / 485 Pending
wallpaper nicki minaj nose before
anurakt
12-27 02:14 PM
INFO PROVIDED FOR UK IS INCORRECT.
Last year my wife (who is on H4) but with a valid US visa stamp on her passport was NOT allowed to board a Continental Airlines flight at Houston airport on her way to India. She was sent home even though she had valid US visa in passport as she did not have UK Transit visa.
We tried pour level best to convince the ppl at the flight desk but they wouldnt let her check in because of transit visa issues. So please be very careful while transiting through London. We had to pay and reroute via Paris the next day.
I hope when you say valid visa , you are talking about non-expired visa.
I think you should sue continental airlines...here is the infor right from the UK consulate website
Next time take a print out....and go to airport and argue...many a times these airlines people are confused and do not know the current regulations...
http://www.ukvisas.gov.uk/servlet/UKVisasDoINeedAVisa?url=%2Fservlet%2FFront%3Fpagen ame%3DOpenMarket%2FXcelerate%2FShowPage%26c%3DPage %26cid%3D1006977149962&purpose=Transit&nationality=India&location=United+States
Info :
Do I Need A UK Visa
You asked if a national of India needs a visa to pass through the UK in transit.
Yes, you need a Direct Airside Transit (DAT) visa, unless you qualify for exemption because you hold one of the following:
a valid visa for entry to Australia, Canada, New Zealand or the United States of America and a valid airline ticket for travel via the United Kingdom as part of a journey from another country or territory to the country in respect of which the visa is held;
a valid visa for entry to Australia, Canada, New Zealand or the United States of America and a valid airline ticket for travel via the United Kingdom as part of a journey from the country in respect of which the visa is held to another country or territory;
a valid airline ticket for travel via the United Kingdom as part of a journey from Australia, Canada, New Zealand or the United States of America to another country or territory, provided that the transit passenger does not seek to transit the United Kingdom on a date more than six months from the date on which he last entered Australia, Canada, New Zealand or the United States of America with a valid visa for entry to that country;
a valid USA I-551 Permanent Resident Card issued on or after 21st April 1998;
a valid Canadian Permanent Resident Card issued on or after 28th June 2002;
a valid common format Category D visa for entry to an EEA State;
a valid common format residence permit issued by an EEA State pursuant to Council Regulation (EC) No. 1030/2002;
a diplomatic or service passport issued by the People�s Republic of China; or
a diplomatic or official passport issued by India; or,
a diplomatic or official passport issued by Vietnam.
Notes:
A valid U.S. immigrant visa packet (form 155A/155B) is a 'valid visa' for DATV exemption purposes.
An expired I-551 Permanent Resident Card issued on or after 21 April 1998 when accompanied by an I-797 letter issued by the Bureau of Citizenship authorising its extension, exempts the holder from the DATV requirement.
Holding either an I-512 Parole letter or an I-797C (Notice of Action) instead of a valid U.S. visa; or a Transportation Letter instead of a valid U.S. Permanent Residence Card issued on or after 21 April 1998 does NOT qualify for exemption from the DAT visa requirement.
Holding a valid travel document with a U.S. ADIT stamp worded � �Processed for I-551. TEMPORARY EVIDENCE OF LAWFUL ADMISSION FOR PERMANENT RESIDENCE VALID UNTIL�. EMPLOYMENT AUTHORIZED� does NOT qualify for exemption from the DAT visa requirement.
Whether holders of non-national (including refugee travel documents) require a DATV depends on their nationality and whether they qualify for one of the exemptions listed above. So, for instance, the holder of a non-national travel document (e.g. a refugee travel document) who is a national or a citizen of one of the countries listed on the DATV list (e.g. Afghanistan) will require a direct airside transit visa if they are travelling to the UK to transit on to a third country.
Transiting to the Republic of Ireland
Passengers must pass through immigration control in order to take a flight to Ireland. Visa nationals (and passengers qualifying for DATV exemption above) may Transit without Visa providing they fulfil the TWOV conditions and are properly documented for entry into Ireland.
DATV nationals transiting to Ireland must obtain a visit visa - not a Visitor in Transit visa which is only for transit to a destination outside the Common Travel Area (Rules HC395 paragraph 47 refers).
All visa nationals wishing to transit the UK but spend longer doing so than the 24 hours permitted under the TWOV concession must obtain a visitor in transit visa for stays up to 48 hours or a visit visa.
Nationals of certain countries, which includes India - unless exempt as detailed above - must have a DAT visa to transit through the United Kingdom. The visa does not allow entry to the UK: other than to catch a connecting flight; leaving from the same airport on the same day; where you do not need to pass through immigration control to catch the flight. This is called Direct Airside Transit.
Please read Guidance - Visitors for more information.
Any dependants under 16 years old, included on your passport, can be included on the same form, but those older will need to fill in separate forms.
Please make your application to Chicago, Los Angeles, or New York.
If you are applying to our visa sections in the USA, you can now make your application and pay online though the visa4UK website.
Last year my wife (who is on H4) but with a valid US visa stamp on her passport was NOT allowed to board a Continental Airlines flight at Houston airport on her way to India. She was sent home even though she had valid US visa in passport as she did not have UK Transit visa.
We tried pour level best to convince the ppl at the flight desk but they wouldnt let her check in because of transit visa issues. So please be very careful while transiting through London. We had to pay and reroute via Paris the next day.
I hope when you say valid visa , you are talking about non-expired visa.
I think you should sue continental airlines...here is the infor right from the UK consulate website
Next time take a print out....and go to airport and argue...many a times these airlines people are confused and do not know the current regulations...
http://www.ukvisas.gov.uk/servlet/UKVisasDoINeedAVisa?url=%2Fservlet%2FFront%3Fpagen ame%3DOpenMarket%2FXcelerate%2FShowPage%26c%3DPage %26cid%3D1006977149962&purpose=Transit&nationality=India&location=United+States
Info :
Do I Need A UK Visa
You asked if a national of India needs a visa to pass through the UK in transit.
Yes, you need a Direct Airside Transit (DAT) visa, unless you qualify for exemption because you hold one of the following:
a valid visa for entry to Australia, Canada, New Zealand or the United States of America and a valid airline ticket for travel via the United Kingdom as part of a journey from another country or territory to the country in respect of which the visa is held;
a valid visa for entry to Australia, Canada, New Zealand or the United States of America and a valid airline ticket for travel via the United Kingdom as part of a journey from the country in respect of which the visa is held to another country or territory;
a valid airline ticket for travel via the United Kingdom as part of a journey from Australia, Canada, New Zealand or the United States of America to another country or territory, provided that the transit passenger does not seek to transit the United Kingdom on a date more than six months from the date on which he last entered Australia, Canada, New Zealand or the United States of America with a valid visa for entry to that country;
a valid USA I-551 Permanent Resident Card issued on or after 21st April 1998;
a valid Canadian Permanent Resident Card issued on or after 28th June 2002;
a valid common format Category D visa for entry to an EEA State;
a valid common format residence permit issued by an EEA State pursuant to Council Regulation (EC) No. 1030/2002;
a diplomatic or service passport issued by the People�s Republic of China; or
a diplomatic or official passport issued by India; or,
a diplomatic or official passport issued by Vietnam.
Notes:
A valid U.S. immigrant visa packet (form 155A/155B) is a 'valid visa' for DATV exemption purposes.
An expired I-551 Permanent Resident Card issued on or after 21 April 1998 when accompanied by an I-797 letter issued by the Bureau of Citizenship authorising its extension, exempts the holder from the DATV requirement.
Holding either an I-512 Parole letter or an I-797C (Notice of Action) instead of a valid U.S. visa; or a Transportation Letter instead of a valid U.S. Permanent Residence Card issued on or after 21 April 1998 does NOT qualify for exemption from the DAT visa requirement.
Holding a valid travel document with a U.S. ADIT stamp worded � �Processed for I-551. TEMPORARY EVIDENCE OF LAWFUL ADMISSION FOR PERMANENT RESIDENCE VALID UNTIL�. EMPLOYMENT AUTHORIZED� does NOT qualify for exemption from the DAT visa requirement.
Whether holders of non-national (including refugee travel documents) require a DATV depends on their nationality and whether they qualify for one of the exemptions listed above. So, for instance, the holder of a non-national travel document (e.g. a refugee travel document) who is a national or a citizen of one of the countries listed on the DATV list (e.g. Afghanistan) will require a direct airside transit visa if they are travelling to the UK to transit on to a third country.
Transiting to the Republic of Ireland
Passengers must pass through immigration control in order to take a flight to Ireland. Visa nationals (and passengers qualifying for DATV exemption above) may Transit without Visa providing they fulfil the TWOV conditions and are properly documented for entry into Ireland.
DATV nationals transiting to Ireland must obtain a visit visa - not a Visitor in Transit visa which is only for transit to a destination outside the Common Travel Area (Rules HC395 paragraph 47 refers).
All visa nationals wishing to transit the UK but spend longer doing so than the 24 hours permitted under the TWOV concession must obtain a visitor in transit visa for stays up to 48 hours or a visit visa.
Nationals of certain countries, which includes India - unless exempt as detailed above - must have a DAT visa to transit through the United Kingdom. The visa does not allow entry to the UK: other than to catch a connecting flight; leaving from the same airport on the same day; where you do not need to pass through immigration control to catch the flight. This is called Direct Airside Transit.
Please read Guidance - Visitors for more information.
Any dependants under 16 years old, included on your passport, can be included on the same form, but those older will need to fill in separate forms.
Please make your application to Chicago, Los Angeles, or New York.
If you are applying to our visa sections in the USA, you can now make your application and pay online though the visa4UK website.
chanduv23
02-18 10:07 AM
Guys,
1. I live in Cary and planning to drive to DC on Apr 04/05. Open to car pool.
2. I just came across this forum and made a small $50 donation. ( More later on how things work out) . I still don't have access to Donor forums. I did mail StarSun my unique#.
inputs appreciated.
Awesome, way to go. Invite your friends, bring your colleagues.
1. I live in Cary and planning to drive to DC on Apr 04/05. Open to car pool.
2. I just came across this forum and made a small $50 donation. ( More later on how things work out) . I still don't have access to Donor forums. I did mail StarSun my unique#.
inputs appreciated.
Awesome, way to go. Invite your friends, bring your colleagues.
2011 nicki minaj surgery list.
rajagram
02-12 07:36 AM
Hi
I am regular reader of immigration voice as well, I am also able to pick some people from Hotel and drop them back to Hotel on advocacy days.
I am regular reader of immigration voice as well, I am also able to pick some people from Hotel and drop them back to Hotel on advocacy days.
more...
invincibleasian
01-31 06:18 PM
Well excuse me, but people having queries other than the reason why this thread was started, please create a new thread.
Sorry to say so, but my query for travel has been sidelined because of other issues.
thanks in advance for your cooperation.
Dude quit hogging any thread!
Sorry to say so, but my query for travel has been sidelined because of other issues.
thanks in advance for your cooperation.
Dude quit hogging any thread!
stucklabor
07-24 01:52 PM
The law 245 (c) clearly states that the status of the applicant may be adjusted to that of permanent resident only if the visa number is available.
Nowhere does it state that the application for adjustment of status can be accepted only if visa number is available.
What part of "an immigrant visa is immediately available to him at the time his application is filed" do you not understand?
And my comments about "The law is the law" and "There is no room for interpretation" refers only to this situation. It is clear as lagoon water that an immigrant visa needs to be available to the applicant at the time that the application is filed. As I said, any attempt to convince USCIS otherwise is a waste of time.
Nowhere does it state that the application for adjustment of status can be accepted only if visa number is available.
What part of "an immigrant visa is immediately available to him at the time his application is filed" do you not understand?
And my comments about "The law is the law" and "There is no room for interpretation" refers only to this situation. It is clear as lagoon water that an immigrant visa needs to be available to the applicant at the time that the application is filed. As I said, any attempt to convince USCIS otherwise is a waste of time.
more...
ysnraju
04-22 11:26 AM
In my Opinion all non-immigrant s require to get the comprehensive conclusion on the STRIVE Act first before going through.
STRIVE Act is to reform the deficiencies in current Immigration policies so that it streamlines the immigration process and makes easy for the immigrants to join their families and also make the kids of non-immigrants who were bought to this country of not their knowledge/ choice able to work �
If the immigration process is proper there is no requirement for the people to come here and work illegally. Under new work process this illegal immigration can be resolved is the Point brought through these STRIVE Act.
Some of IV members getting to these meetings and keep saying I am legal and not able to get visa because there is no visa numbers available. It directly implicates that if there are Visa numbers available we are not here to support this.
In reality that is true if you happen to see the people who already went through the process, they always say/wonder why they are making the process so simple. In some occasions when the Labor certification process is made premium processing the questions/comments raised by GC holders is, why they are making this process so simple/ OO they are giving the LC just like that etc. once the GC is in hand no one will talk about anything.
Off these so called 12 million Illegal people can make the country aware of these problems in one moment and they can make the country stand still by calling a day or more off the work. In other hand, we so called high skilled immigrants (prefer calling high labor) they never, able to make this aware off. Not able to call a single day off the work. Even if they do they will make sure that nothing feels the absence giving automate script etc. Under legal doing illegal work is this high labor. Take consensus and you will find at least higher percentage will say they are always work more than 40 hrs a week. Which does legally illegal work? In other hand illegal but doing legal work in this country is the illegal immigrants they work for by hour and if they work an hour extra they collect for that also.
We always want the process from higher level, want to meet Law makers and want them to reform and understand the issue. But always forget the basic the Law makers are made by people. Did we had a chance to make the people understand this? Higher percentage of companies in this country employ immigrants and leaving the few exceptional company at most 10% of the work force in average is immigrants. So did we any time educated the reset of 90% our co-workers? We never do go and ask them they will start ask you what is work visa?
So we never try to make the people around us aware of the issue but we want founds to meet lawmakers, and make them understand. So instead how much you are donating, how many people around you making aware of the issue is better. Did you manage to educate 90% of your company aware of this issue is very important.
If you want really a change, start wearing protest black badge till the law is reformed and start educate the people around to aware of the issue. Possible meet your company top level people and make them aware of. Among these there will be lot of people kids, nieces, nephews, brothers, sisters, spouses, friends of law makers who can chat with them without appointment. Of these there are many hidden people who can pull the strings in so many unknown ways. At that point you are not half million your strength is multiplied people are aware of this.
Of the all my request is please do not behave that Visa numbers are not available so I am here. Do not put the behavior before Gate Pass something and after the Pass what is this type.
STRIVE Act is to reform the deficiencies in current Immigration policies so that it streamlines the immigration process and makes easy for the immigrants to join their families and also make the kids of non-immigrants who were bought to this country of not their knowledge/ choice able to work �
If the immigration process is proper there is no requirement for the people to come here and work illegally. Under new work process this illegal immigration can be resolved is the Point brought through these STRIVE Act.
Some of IV members getting to these meetings and keep saying I am legal and not able to get visa because there is no visa numbers available. It directly implicates that if there are Visa numbers available we are not here to support this.
In reality that is true if you happen to see the people who already went through the process, they always say/wonder why they are making the process so simple. In some occasions when the Labor certification process is made premium processing the questions/comments raised by GC holders is, why they are making this process so simple/ OO they are giving the LC just like that etc. once the GC is in hand no one will talk about anything.
Off these so called 12 million Illegal people can make the country aware of these problems in one moment and they can make the country stand still by calling a day or more off the work. In other hand, we so called high skilled immigrants (prefer calling high labor) they never, able to make this aware off. Not able to call a single day off the work. Even if they do they will make sure that nothing feels the absence giving automate script etc. Under legal doing illegal work is this high labor. Take consensus and you will find at least higher percentage will say they are always work more than 40 hrs a week. Which does legally illegal work? In other hand illegal but doing legal work in this country is the illegal immigrants they work for by hour and if they work an hour extra they collect for that also.
We always want the process from higher level, want to meet Law makers and want them to reform and understand the issue. But always forget the basic the Law makers are made by people. Did we had a chance to make the people understand this? Higher percentage of companies in this country employ immigrants and leaving the few exceptional company at most 10% of the work force in average is immigrants. So did we any time educated the reset of 90% our co-workers? We never do go and ask them they will start ask you what is work visa?
So we never try to make the people around us aware of the issue but we want founds to meet lawmakers, and make them understand. So instead how much you are donating, how many people around you making aware of the issue is better. Did you manage to educate 90% of your company aware of this issue is very important.
If you want really a change, start wearing protest black badge till the law is reformed and start educate the people around to aware of the issue. Possible meet your company top level people and make them aware of. Among these there will be lot of people kids, nieces, nephews, brothers, sisters, spouses, friends of law makers who can chat with them without appointment. Of these there are many hidden people who can pull the strings in so many unknown ways. At that point you are not half million your strength is multiplied people are aware of this.
Of the all my request is please do not behave that Visa numbers are not available so I am here. Do not put the behavior before Gate Pass something and after the Pass what is this type.
2010 nicki minaj surgery list.
yabadaba
08-21 02:32 PM
luvschocolates: not sure what you are looking for from an employment based immigration site?
You have broken the law and you are illegally here. End of story. Even if there is no one here that will do the job that you do, there has to be documentation that proves that. Immigration law is one of the most complicated laws out there and other than a few categories like family based immigration or diversity lottery based immigration, most forms are extremely complex and reguire legal guidance to do so.
Yours is an open and shut case, no lawyer worth his salt will take you case up for free. Like a poster said earlier, ignorance of the law does not allow you to break it.
By your analogy, if I come from a country where there are no seat belt laws and using my international driver's permit I drive a car without weaing a seatbelt, does not make it ok. When caught, I will be arrested and fined.
In your case it would be easier for you to leave by yourself, rather than risk being deported and getting a 10 year entry ban.
You have broken the law and you are illegally here. End of story. Even if there is no one here that will do the job that you do, there has to be documentation that proves that. Immigration law is one of the most complicated laws out there and other than a few categories like family based immigration or diversity lottery based immigration, most forms are extremely complex and reguire legal guidance to do so.
Yours is an open and shut case, no lawyer worth his salt will take you case up for free. Like a poster said earlier, ignorance of the law does not allow you to break it.
By your analogy, if I come from a country where there are no seat belt laws and using my international driver's permit I drive a car without weaing a seatbelt, does not make it ok. When caught, I will be arrested and fined.
In your case it would be easier for you to leave by yourself, rather than risk being deported and getting a 10 year entry ban.
more...
conundrum
10-17 11:36 AM
Faxed and mailed!
hair Nicki Minaj Before Plastic
rajeev_74
07-05 04:44 PM
Really shameful...we have a thick skin & a weak heart
Update: Thank you everyone who has contributed since July 2 when we announced the drive. Our total contributions from paypal and google are around $2,500 till now (despite having 15 k members). As you can understand this is hardly of any significance for even a small legal effort. A big lawsuit is out of question. Thus IV core will use it for IV activities to further pursue its advocacy efforts. IV encourages its members being a plaintiffs with AILF if they so desire. If you are an IV member and also a plaintiff, you can let us know for any guidance we can provide. IV will be coming up with more direction to its members soon. We will have some plan for everyone and will need participation from everyone. Please stay tuned.
Update: Thank you everyone who has contributed since July 2 when we announced the drive. Our total contributions from paypal and google are around $2,500 till now (despite having 15 k members). As you can understand this is hardly of any significance for even a small legal effort. A big lawsuit is out of question. Thus IV core will use it for IV activities to further pursue its advocacy efforts. IV encourages its members being a plaintiffs with AILF if they so desire. If you are an IV member and also a plaintiff, you can let us know for any guidance we can provide. IV will be coming up with more direction to its members soon. We will have some plan for everyone and will need participation from everyone. Please stay tuned.
more...
pappu
01-17 11:19 AM
/\/\/\/
bumping up the thread since this is the most crtical thing for us to achieve at this time so that we can put more resources at work in the coming months. As everyone could see on this thread, only few members have signed up for recurring contributions. We sent emails to all 8000+ members and the emails are still bouncing. Members have put fake email addresses. Despite repeated requests members have not updated their profile. In future when we send out updates by email or phone, such members will not get any updates too.
Since yesterday more than 2000 members have visited IV site and read this thread. We did not even get 1/100th of members signing up for this and contributing as little as $20.
Is this your commitment to the cause?
bumping up the thread since this is the most crtical thing for us to achieve at this time so that we can put more resources at work in the coming months. As everyone could see on this thread, only few members have signed up for recurring contributions. We sent emails to all 8000+ members and the emails are still bouncing. Members have put fake email addresses. Despite repeated requests members have not updated their profile. In future when we send out updates by email or phone, such members will not get any updates too.
Since yesterday more than 2000 members have visited IV site and read this thread. We did not even get 1/100th of members signing up for this and contributing as little as $20.
Is this your commitment to the cause?
hot nicki minaj surgery list.
rimzhim
01-28 11:04 AM
I don’t want to start another war here but all I am asking for is a fair treatment of people and not discriminate against people based on country of birth. One of the reasons I left my country, India, is because of the discriminating that exists there in terms of "reservations" where everything is reserved based on your caste for 50%. Now please dont tell me reservations and country cap are different, they are not different they are the same. they accomplish the same purpose in case of skilled immigration.I never thought such a thing would happen in US but it seems worst here because Indians and Chinese make up almost 70 to 80% of H1 (which is dual intent) but when it comes to employment based green cards (which are based on H1) Indians and Chinese combined get only 14% of the visas, don’t you see the tragedy here? Why don’t they enforce the country cap on H1 also, that way people from India and china will not have to suffer worse than others? But US is a competitive country, they want the best available talent for H1 and that’s the reason they don’t put country caps on H1.
Take my case for example, I have come to this country in 1999 on F1 and have been working and paying takes since 2001. I am not even able to apply for 485. If I get laid off now I will have to leave US next year. Contrast this with somebody from Taiwan, UK or some non retrogressed country. In some cases they can get green card within the first year of coming to US. This is not a hypothetical case but a scenario which is happening quite often, especially in EB2. In my own company I have seen people (6 so far) who are 5 years junior to me (i.e joined the company 5 years after I did) get a green card where as I am dazed and confused and haven’t even applied for 485.
I totally agreed with country caps in non skilled immigration, because the only criteria is that you don’t have any diseases and don’t have a criminal background. But in skilled immigration it does not make sense to apply country caps unless you apply country caps in H1. but US is a competitive country, they want the best available talent for H1and that’s the reason they don’t put country caps on H1.
I understand your plight, but then the solution is to put a country cap to H1. Also, I respectfully disagree with comparing your situation in regards to caste etc in your country to country-cap based quotas in the US. This has only happened because the number of H1s for many years exceeded the number of GCs allowed every yr. The US does believe in some diversity which is why they have affirmative action, and the country cap has been imposed in the same spirit. Affirmative action will not go away from the US even if it is, as you say, same thing as caste-based reservations in your home country. I agree: there should be a country cap on H1 also and the total number of H1 per yr should never exceed the number of GCs per yr.
Take my case for example, I have come to this country in 1999 on F1 and have been working and paying takes since 2001. I am not even able to apply for 485. If I get laid off now I will have to leave US next year. Contrast this with somebody from Taiwan, UK or some non retrogressed country. In some cases they can get green card within the first year of coming to US. This is not a hypothetical case but a scenario which is happening quite often, especially in EB2. In my own company I have seen people (6 so far) who are 5 years junior to me (i.e joined the company 5 years after I did) get a green card where as I am dazed and confused and haven’t even applied for 485.
I totally agreed with country caps in non skilled immigration, because the only criteria is that you don’t have any diseases and don’t have a criminal background. But in skilled immigration it does not make sense to apply country caps unless you apply country caps in H1. but US is a competitive country, they want the best available talent for H1and that’s the reason they don’t put country caps on H1.
I understand your plight, but then the solution is to put a country cap to H1. Also, I respectfully disagree with comparing your situation in regards to caste etc in your country to country-cap based quotas in the US. This has only happened because the number of H1s for many years exceeded the number of GCs allowed every yr. The US does believe in some diversity which is why they have affirmative action, and the country cap has been imposed in the same spirit. Affirmative action will not go away from the US even if it is, as you say, same thing as caste-based reservations in your home country. I agree: there should be a country cap on H1 also and the total number of H1 per yr should never exceed the number of GCs per yr.
more...
house nicki minaj surgery list. nicki minaj surgery list.
raysaikat
07-11 02:30 PM
In order to use left-over visa numbers from EB1 and EB2-ROW, the PD cut-off for China and India must be locked. That's one of the reason why India's cut-off date has also moved.
tattoo nicki minaj surgery list.
WillIBLucky
11-22 01:23 PM
I dont think that is correct - as per my lawyer this is what she says -
In order to move to a new employer and still continue with the same gc applications, you must meet all of the following conditions under AC21:
1. Your I-140 must be approved
2. Your I-485 must be filed and pending for at least 180 days
3. Your new job classification must be the same as in the old job
If you are missing any of the 3 conditions at the time you move to an employer, you will lose your gc application and you will need to start a new one.
So guys please make sure you give correct information. Also, I would suggest people who are asking various questions over here in IV should also talk to their own lawyers and take a decision. Please do not take decision based on comments given over here. So "LOOK BEFORE YOU LEAP".
In order to move to a new employer and still continue with the same gc applications, you must meet all of the following conditions under AC21:
1. Your I-140 must be approved
2. Your I-485 must be filed and pending for at least 180 days
3. Your new job classification must be the same as in the old job
If you are missing any of the 3 conditions at the time you move to an employer, you will lose your gc application and you will need to start a new one.
So guys please make sure you give correct information. Also, I would suggest people who are asking various questions over here in IV should also talk to their own lawyers and take a decision. Please do not take decision based on comments given over here. So "LOOK BEFORE YOU LEAP".
more...
pictures nicki minaj surgery list.
immigrant2007
09-10 12:50 PM
Thats what exactly I said
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/1984591-post28.html
sorry brother..didn't see your post earlier...but that makes two os us thinking the same way.....I think we should ask for more transprecany from USCIS/DOs on numbers and approvals and all backdoors being closed.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/1984591-post28.html
sorry brother..didn't see your post earlier...but that makes two os us thinking the same way.....I think we should ask for more transprecany from USCIS/DOs on numbers and approvals and all backdoors being closed.
dresses nicki minaj surgery list.
immi_seeker
04-09 06:32 PM
This is an "Ouch..." visa bulletin.
Dont want to be passimistic or discourage anyone; I have always been optimistic and will remain so...
However, this suggests that there will not be any fall down (previously called spillover) from EB4 and may not even be much from EB5 (Last year this was the major factor that gave 10k additional numbers to EB2 India). Lookes like people are finding alternate ways (who can) by these routes.
EB1 used up all its numbers last year and we dont know what will happen this year.
EB2 ROW usage looks low, but then again no movement in EB2 India...
Patience and persistence....
Good Luck to all of us.
EB1/EB2 demand is very low. So numbers should come from there i believe. Number crunchers could jump in and see how this EB4 demand will make a difference
Dont want to be passimistic or discourage anyone; I have always been optimistic and will remain so...
However, this suggests that there will not be any fall down (previously called spillover) from EB4 and may not even be much from EB5 (Last year this was the major factor that gave 10k additional numbers to EB2 India). Lookes like people are finding alternate ways (who can) by these routes.
EB1 used up all its numbers last year and we dont know what will happen this year.
EB2 ROW usage looks low, but then again no movement in EB2 India...
Patience and persistence....
Good Luck to all of us.
EB1/EB2 demand is very low. So numbers should come from there i believe. Number crunchers could jump in and see how this EB4 demand will make a difference
more...
makeup nicki minaj surgery list.
alterego
07-04 08:31 PM
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.
Excellent analysis and reccomendations. I feel that a visa number should be assigned at the point of 485 filing. If there is a problem it can be returned to the pool. That will be the least disruptive way to allot numbers in a timely fashion. In the end, that is likely to be the change that will come out of this.
This way, it will offer prospective applicants a more clear viewpoint of what they are up against when they consider their immigration options. i.e if you know you will have to wait 10 yrs to file an AOS even if you have an approved immigrant petition ala the family based immigrants, your plans would be different. You might not feel the wait worthwhile or even if you do, you do it fully aware of the consequences, 10 yrs exploitative employer on h1b etc.
If you notice, the level of hubris and cry is less in family based immigration even though the waits are longer. Atleast they know before they apply!
Your last point about a visa recapture is on the money. It is the least disruptive and easiest of the possible changes for current EB applicants in the current hostile atmosphere. It comes across as a rectification of USCIS inefficiency rather than a request for more immigration, which the public has clearly rejected at this time. If we can get 100-150K visas recaptured, this will greatly help EVERYONE in the EB queue for various reasons. It will buy us the 1-2 yrs needed before immigration is seriously addressed again. It will help those waiting to file 485 to file, those in 485 to have a hope to get out etc. It will help heavily retrogressed countries to keep getting more visas than the annual caps etc. I think that is something everyone can agree on as well.
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.
Excellent analysis and reccomendations. I feel that a visa number should be assigned at the point of 485 filing. If there is a problem it can be returned to the pool. That will be the least disruptive way to allot numbers in a timely fashion. In the end, that is likely to be the change that will come out of this.
This way, it will offer prospective applicants a more clear viewpoint of what they are up against when they consider their immigration options. i.e if you know you will have to wait 10 yrs to file an AOS even if you have an approved immigrant petition ala the family based immigrants, your plans would be different. You might not feel the wait worthwhile or even if you do, you do it fully aware of the consequences, 10 yrs exploitative employer on h1b etc.
If you notice, the level of hubris and cry is less in family based immigration even though the waits are longer. Atleast they know before they apply!
Your last point about a visa recapture is on the money. It is the least disruptive and easiest of the possible changes for current EB applicants in the current hostile atmosphere. It comes across as a rectification of USCIS inefficiency rather than a request for more immigration, which the public has clearly rejected at this time. If we can get 100-150K visas recaptured, this will greatly help EVERYONE in the EB queue for various reasons. It will buy us the 1-2 yrs needed before immigration is seriously addressed again. It will help those waiting to file 485 to file, those in 485 to have a hope to get out etc. It will help heavily retrogressed countries to keep getting more visas than the annual caps etc. I think that is something everyone can agree on as well.
girlfriend nicki minaj surgery list.
pappu
11-20 01:09 PM
All pls PM each other and exchange phone numbers and emails so that you can start building your local IV community. Once you have contacted each other, you can start the action items for state chapters.
hairstyles tattoo nicki minaj surgery list. nicki minaj surgery list. nicki minaj
gsc999
09-20 02:37 AM
Congratulations to all of us for having marched yesterday, I was extremely impressed with the level of organization. Salut to everyone who made it possible.
However, I have a whole bunch of points, sorry if they come out strong....
1) I absolutely agree with the 'Legal' Immigration issue, we did look as if we were immigrants and not defined as legal, I think high-skilled is secondary to the legality... This is one of the reasons I have not purchased merchandise, as it looks like it addresses immigration as such. I think banner by Chinese group exphasizing the legal aspect looked very impressive..
2) It was obvious from speeches on Monday night and yesterday (friendship between US and India comments, etc) that this is seen as an Indian issue. Unless you are trying to show it as such, something has to be done about it. Non-indians were marching with you as well, and next time effort should be made to put together Indian, Chinese and whoever else when putting pictures, RollCall for example, or talking to the press, or talking to representatives. I have expressed my desire and submitted all information to the person in charge of organizing meetings on Capitol Hill, but was not provided with this oppportunity..
Basically, it was clear that, as of now, even many representatives see the issue as Indians versus Mexicans... Not a good idea....
3) I thought that some of the signs were extremely offensive to the Americans "We brought you yahoo/hotmail/google" and as such... if I were an American contemplating about my views on the immigration, and if I were as patriotic as many Americans are, I would be upset with the messages putting down local brains...
4) It was a very impressive effort by Chinese group, thumbs up. Although very strange that so ew of them showed up. My CHinese colleague who alreday has GC and helped distribute info to his friends, told me that all 5 Chinese papers in the area had big announcements about the Rally
5) I agree with disappointment about local people, it seemed like there were many more members from CA, NY and other places than VA/MD/DC, we should all be wokring on raising awareness.
All for now
Agains, congrats to all of us
----
Good observation.
Here is my response. to point # 1 & #3.
Look, legal immigration is not just restricted to employment based immigration, it includes family based immigration. So if you say you support legal immigration that doesn't differentiate your message, infact, compared to 950K family based annual visas only 140K go to employment based legal immigrants. IV's agenda is employment based immigration. We are very clear about where we stand.
Now point # 3. No Americans are not upset about confronting the reality about Hotmail, Google and other companies that create jobs for Americans. How can they, we are a country of immigrants. These placards were carefully selected and a lot of due diligence went into their selection and all of them had a positive message.
Having said that, if you notice none of the IV members who attended the rally ever congratulated the Indian or English core members. Your post is the first post which thanks individual communities.
I agree with rest of your message and that is why we need more support from members like you to bring diversity to IV. This is not an Indian organization and we never claim it to be. We need your paricipation to prove that point.
However, I have a whole bunch of points, sorry if they come out strong....
1) I absolutely agree with the 'Legal' Immigration issue, we did look as if we were immigrants and not defined as legal, I think high-skilled is secondary to the legality... This is one of the reasons I have not purchased merchandise, as it looks like it addresses immigration as such. I think banner by Chinese group exphasizing the legal aspect looked very impressive..
2) It was obvious from speeches on Monday night and yesterday (friendship between US and India comments, etc) that this is seen as an Indian issue. Unless you are trying to show it as such, something has to be done about it. Non-indians were marching with you as well, and next time effort should be made to put together Indian, Chinese and whoever else when putting pictures, RollCall for example, or talking to the press, or talking to representatives. I have expressed my desire and submitted all information to the person in charge of organizing meetings on Capitol Hill, but was not provided with this oppportunity..
Basically, it was clear that, as of now, even many representatives see the issue as Indians versus Mexicans... Not a good idea....
3) I thought that some of the signs were extremely offensive to the Americans "We brought you yahoo/hotmail/google" and as such... if I were an American contemplating about my views on the immigration, and if I were as patriotic as many Americans are, I would be upset with the messages putting down local brains...
4) It was a very impressive effort by Chinese group, thumbs up. Although very strange that so ew of them showed up. My CHinese colleague who alreday has GC and helped distribute info to his friends, told me that all 5 Chinese papers in the area had big announcements about the Rally
5) I agree with disappointment about local people, it seemed like there were many more members from CA, NY and other places than VA/MD/DC, we should all be wokring on raising awareness.
All for now
Agains, congrats to all of us
----
Good observation.
Here is my response. to point # 1 & #3.
Look, legal immigration is not just restricted to employment based immigration, it includes family based immigration. So if you say you support legal immigration that doesn't differentiate your message, infact, compared to 950K family based annual visas only 140K go to employment based legal immigrants. IV's agenda is employment based immigration. We are very clear about where we stand.
Now point # 3. No Americans are not upset about confronting the reality about Hotmail, Google and other companies that create jobs for Americans. How can they, we are a country of immigrants. These placards were carefully selected and a lot of due diligence went into their selection and all of them had a positive message.
Having said that, if you notice none of the IV members who attended the rally ever congratulated the Indian or English core members. Your post is the first post which thanks individual communities.
I agree with rest of your message and that is why we need more support from members like you to bring diversity to IV. This is not an Indian organization and we never claim it to be. We need your paricipation to prove that point.
sajimm
12-13 04:18 PM
I'm getting confused on the date part after reading various posts.
Is it mandatory to wait for 180 days after I140 to port your PD from an old I140 to a new I140(with a different company) ?
To change jobs and continue the same GC process I believe one has to complete at-least 1180 days in I485 stage. However in this stage the new job title and responsibilities should be same
I guess Employer cannot revoke I-140 after 180 days - You may want to check with Immigration Specialist/lawyer
Is it mandatory to wait for 180 days after I140 to port your PD from an old I140 to a new I140(with a different company) ?
To change jobs and continue the same GC process I believe one has to complete at-least 1180 days in I485 stage. However in this stage the new job title and responsibilities should be same
I guess Employer cannot revoke I-140 after 180 days - You may want to check with Immigration Specialist/lawyer
PresidentO
02-11 01:19 PM
Read this
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY08-AR-TableV.pdf
and tell us, where do you see 13,000 unused numbers?
Desi3933,
+1
People keep falling for the attorney's sensationalism. If he is so *darn* right, why does not he got to DOS and get an explanation on why they did not extend dates further and why DOS did not do the math right. Just because you have a blog does not mean that you can write what ever you want. Well I guess you could. Obviously, our fellow members think that they really lost a chance at the green card. An attorney writes a piece of crap with out substantiative evidence or an authority such as DOS confirming underutilization of visa numbers and our members go on the roof and start yelling What is IV doing?
If any one has looked at the bills sponsored by congresswoman lofgren in the past congress, one of the bills eliminate the spill over of visas from FB to EB and vice versa. If the numbers are coming into EB from FB this year, FB was the one that was supposed to get numbers from EB last year. As I recall during the final Q of 08, DOS announced that there were 22K visa numbers or what so ever that came in from FB and moved dates all the way into Aug 06 for EB2 India. Hence there must *NOT* have been any spill over last year and DOS unable to walk on the slippery slope actually issued 1120 more visas as you pointed and benefitted AOS applicants.
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY08-AR-TableV.pdf
and tell us, where do you see 13,000 unused numbers?
Desi3933,
+1
People keep falling for the attorney's sensationalism. If he is so *darn* right, why does not he got to DOS and get an explanation on why they did not extend dates further and why DOS did not do the math right. Just because you have a blog does not mean that you can write what ever you want. Well I guess you could. Obviously, our fellow members think that they really lost a chance at the green card. An attorney writes a piece of crap with out substantiative evidence or an authority such as DOS confirming underutilization of visa numbers and our members go on the roof and start yelling What is IV doing?
If any one has looked at the bills sponsored by congresswoman lofgren in the past congress, one of the bills eliminate the spill over of visas from FB to EB and vice versa. If the numbers are coming into EB from FB this year, FB was the one that was supposed to get numbers from EB last year. As I recall during the final Q of 08, DOS announced that there were 22K visa numbers or what so ever that came in from FB and moved dates all the way into Aug 06 for EB2 India. Hence there must *NOT* have been any spill over last year and DOS unable to walk on the slippery slope actually issued 1120 more visas as you pointed and benefitted AOS applicants.
0 comments:
Post a Comment