ashkam
07-28 12:14 PM
What's with all the fundies crawling out of the woodwork?
By the way, dear fundies, if you are so against the First Amendment (freedom of speech), why are you in this country applying for a green card anyways? Because, you know, the First Amendment is kind of a big deal here.
By the way, dear fundies, if you are so against the First Amendment (freedom of speech), why are you in this country applying for a green card anyways? Because, you know, the First Amendment is kind of a big deal here.
wallpaper londe hair colours highlights
pcs
11-10 09:18 PM
Pappu, Aman et all...
Let push it... this is too uch for too long !!!!
Let us have a call on this. This is high time, we do something to mobilize guys for some common cause.
Let push it... this is too uch for too long !!!!
Let us have a call on this. This is high time, we do something to mobilize guys for some common cause.
pappu
12-18 09:27 AM
Hello Everyone,
Can we have the conference call again on Wednesday, 12/20/2006 at 9.00 PM EDT. Also, let me know if you think its a good idea to create an NJ yahoo group so we can all get notified instead of checking back in here every now and then.
Thanks,
Varsha
Hello Varsha,
Pls organize the conf call and PM everyone in the group. If you like you can start a thread on the main forum to announce this call so that memebers can attend. We need members to actively participate in state chapters. It is very easy to feel frustrated with retrogression and complain but in order to fix the problem we all need to work on it.
Can we have the conference call again on Wednesday, 12/20/2006 at 9.00 PM EDT. Also, let me know if you think its a good idea to create an NJ yahoo group so we can all get notified instead of checking back in here every now and then.
Thanks,
Varsha
Hello Varsha,
Pls organize the conf call and PM everyone in the group. If you like you can start a thread on the main forum to announce this call so that memebers can attend. We need members to actively participate in state chapters. It is very easy to feel frustrated with retrogression and complain but in order to fix the problem we all need to work on it.
2011 Brunette Hair With Blonde Hair
delax
07-19 08:55 PM
We need a realistic estimate of how many applications are pending with PD in 2004, which really seems like the bottleneck. Another thing to bear in mind is the conversion from EB3->EB2. That is also going to hinder the movement of EB2. There are a lot of people trying to use that route.
Here you go - conversion should not impact this as the number of LC approvals remains the same:
Here are all the LC approvals for India in the last seven years.
Year, Total LC Approved, Total India
2007 85112 24573
2006 79782 22298
2005 6133 1350
2004 43582 No Info
2003 62912 No Info
2002 79784 No Info
2001 77921 No Info
2000 70204 No Info
Lets assume about 25% of pre-PERM LCs are India based on post-PERM data. Thus for fiscal 2004 (Oct 2003 thru Sep 2004) the total LC number is 43,852. Assume 25% of that to be India based on PERM data. That gives about 11,000 India LCs in 2004 alone (All EB categories combined). If you assume an average of 2.5 dependents then the number of visas required for all India EB categories for 2004 is 27,500 (11,000*2.5). The regular quota for EB2 and EB3 combined is only about 9,800. That means 17,700 visas have to come from somewhere. I dont think those many visas are remaining for this year. Be prepared to see FIFO thrown under the bus and approvals with PDs that are all over the place. Please critique this analysis without piling on. Thoughts?
Here you go - conversion should not impact this as the number of LC approvals remains the same:
Here are all the LC approvals for India in the last seven years.
Year, Total LC Approved, Total India
2007 85112 24573
2006 79782 22298
2005 6133 1350
2004 43582 No Info
2003 62912 No Info
2002 79784 No Info
2001 77921 No Info
2000 70204 No Info
Lets assume about 25% of pre-PERM LCs are India based on post-PERM data. Thus for fiscal 2004 (Oct 2003 thru Sep 2004) the total LC number is 43,852. Assume 25% of that to be India based on PERM data. That gives about 11,000 India LCs in 2004 alone (All EB categories combined). If you assume an average of 2.5 dependents then the number of visas required for all India EB categories for 2004 is 27,500 (11,000*2.5). The regular quota for EB2 and EB3 combined is only about 9,800. That means 17,700 visas have to come from somewhere. I dont think those many visas are remaining for this year. Be prepared to see FIFO thrown under the bus and approvals with PDs that are all over the place. Please critique this analysis without piling on. Thoughts?
more...
Imigrait
07-11 05:28 PM
Can you provide the source of this info? a link or something?
Here's your link
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4252.html
Look at Section E. I have also pasted the text below.
E. EMPLOYMENT SECOND PREFERENCE VISA AVAILABILITY
There have been questions raised regarding the way numbers have been provided to the China and India in the Employment Second preference categories beginning in April. Section 202(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act states that if total demand for visas in an Employment preference category is insufficient to use all available visa numbers in that category in a calendar quarter, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limit. (For example: If the second preference annual limit were 40,000, number use by �All Other Countries� were estimated to be only 25,000, and the China/India combined number use based on their per-country limits were 6,000, then there would be 9,000 numbers unused. Those 9,000 numbers could then be made available to China and India applicants without regard to their per-country limits.)
Based on the informaiton available, it was been determined that the demand from �All Other Countries� for Second preference numbers, plus the amount of numbers available under China and India Second preference per-country limit, would be insufficient to utilize all available numbers under the annual limit for this category. Therefore, pursuant to Section 202(a)(5) of the Act, the unused numbers have been made available to China and India Second preference applicants. Since Section 203(e)(1) of the Act requires that such unused numbers be made available strictly in priority date order, the China and India applicants have been subject to the identical cut-off date. As there are more Employment Second preference applicants from India and the Indian applicants may have earlier priority dates, it is likely that Indian applicants will receive a larger portion of the available numbers than Chinese applicants.
It should be noted that the Employment Second preference category is "Current" for all countries except China and India. If at any point it appears that demand from �All Other Countries� would utilize all available numbers, then an adjustment would be made to the China/India cut-off date. Therefore, providing the unused numbers to China and India in no way disadvantages applicants from any other country, and helps to insure that the worldwide annual limit can be reached.
Here's your link
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4252.html
Look at Section E. I have also pasted the text below.
E. EMPLOYMENT SECOND PREFERENCE VISA AVAILABILITY
There have been questions raised regarding the way numbers have been provided to the China and India in the Employment Second preference categories beginning in April. Section 202(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act states that if total demand for visas in an Employment preference category is insufficient to use all available visa numbers in that category in a calendar quarter, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limit. (For example: If the second preference annual limit were 40,000, number use by �All Other Countries� were estimated to be only 25,000, and the China/India combined number use based on their per-country limits were 6,000, then there would be 9,000 numbers unused. Those 9,000 numbers could then be made available to China and India applicants without regard to their per-country limits.)
Based on the informaiton available, it was been determined that the demand from �All Other Countries� for Second preference numbers, plus the amount of numbers available under China and India Second preference per-country limit, would be insufficient to utilize all available numbers under the annual limit for this category. Therefore, pursuant to Section 202(a)(5) of the Act, the unused numbers have been made available to China and India Second preference applicants. Since Section 203(e)(1) of the Act requires that such unused numbers be made available strictly in priority date order, the China and India applicants have been subject to the identical cut-off date. As there are more Employment Second preference applicants from India and the Indian applicants may have earlier priority dates, it is likely that Indian applicants will receive a larger portion of the available numbers than Chinese applicants.
It should be noted that the Employment Second preference category is "Current" for all countries except China and India. If at any point it appears that demand from �All Other Countries� would utilize all available numbers, then an adjustment would be made to the China/India cut-off date. Therefore, providing the unused numbers to China and India in no way disadvantages applicants from any other country, and helps to insure that the worldwide annual limit can be reached.
kate123
02-19 04:58 PM
DITTO!
I feel the same...
You guys are really making me laugh by having this less than and longer than 5 years arguing. If you've been on this forum long enough, you'll know the chance of this bill passes will be next to nothing.
I feel the same...
You guys are really making me laugh by having this less than and longer than 5 years arguing. If you've been on this forum long enough, you'll know the chance of this bill passes will be next to nothing.
more...
InTheMoment
05-26 07:13 PM
Actually entire state of NH is within 100 miles of Canada and the coast.
I feel the 100 mile rule is very reasonable and Border Patrol has every right to conduct random searches, question or detain whoever they suspect is breaking the law. Since it is clear that they could do that in this area, it is absolutely no burden for me to carry my papers when traveling here. At least it is easy when I know where the enforcement will be tighter. Harassment... absolutely not! I would so encourage something similar in my own country :)
I myself was once stopped on a cold December night in 2003 in VT on I-91 by the border patrol and all 4 occupants in the car were questioned about citizenship. We showed our I-94's. We felt good that there is someone is actually doing the enforcement of immigration laws.
Found this when I googled. Borderpatrol seems to have the authority to do whatever they did within 100 miles off any international border. It falls under 8 CFR 287.1. Entire state of NH is within 100 miles of Canada.
http://www.usborderpatrol.com/Border_Patrol608_2.htm
I feel the 100 mile rule is very reasonable and Border Patrol has every right to conduct random searches, question or detain whoever they suspect is breaking the law. Since it is clear that they could do that in this area, it is absolutely no burden for me to carry my papers when traveling here. At least it is easy when I know where the enforcement will be tighter. Harassment... absolutely not! I would so encourage something similar in my own country :)
I myself was once stopped on a cold December night in 2003 in VT on I-91 by the border patrol and all 4 occupants in the car were questioned about citizenship. We showed our I-94's. We felt good that there is someone is actually doing the enforcement of immigration laws.
Found this when I googled. Borderpatrol seems to have the authority to do whatever they did within 100 miles off any international border. It falls under 8 CFR 287.1. Entire state of NH is within 100 miles of Canada.
http://www.usborderpatrol.com/Border_Patrol608_2.htm
2010 The top of her hair is pulled
Macaca
07-17 09:24 AM
I am just re-posting something that I had posted elsewhere. I really think that we have to be professional and mature in our response. Does anyone know how one can go about writing an op-ed in the New York Times?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think IV should write a letter to the New York Times refuting the claims of NumbersUSA. This should be in response to the article that the New York Times published regarding NumbersUSA's influence on the immigration bill.
Please send email to reporter Robert Pear (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html). The email should include URL to authentic URL that requires H1B's to pay ALL taxes.
The article: Little-Known Group Claims a Win on Immigration (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/15/us/politics/15immig.html) By ROBERT PEAR (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html) New York Times, July 15, 2007
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think IV should write a letter to the New York Times refuting the claims of NumbersUSA. This should be in response to the article that the New York Times published regarding NumbersUSA's influence on the immigration bill.
Please send email to reporter Robert Pear (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html). The email should include URL to authentic URL that requires H1B's to pay ALL taxes.
The article: Little-Known Group Claims a Win on Immigration (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/15/us/politics/15immig.html) By ROBERT PEAR (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html) New York Times, July 15, 2007
more...
Pending
04-08 01:24 PM
I did contact Senator/Congress persons, and it it didn't help the FBI does not repond to congresional inquirie concerning name check.
All eyes are focused on the immigration bill at this point, so expect no help.
I am pending name check since 2002.
All eyes are focused on the immigration bill at this point, so expect no help.
I am pending name check since 2002.
hair londe hair highlights. londe
ilikekilo
01-18 07:54 PM
traffiic cop....i am not sure about that....you always have the right to remain silent ans ask whether u r free to go...period...
more...
soumeeram
03-09 12:14 PM
Eb2-i : 15-feb-04
eb3-i: 01-nov-01
eb3-i: 01-nov-01
hot makeup honey londe highlights
Macaca
04-04 03:53 PM
They have never said anything about GCs. If they have, show me where.
From here (http://www.ieeeusa.org/policy/issues/).
IEEE-USA will support public policies to ensure greater equity in the recruitment, utilization and compensation of US and foreign–born high tech workers. Priorities include:
Expediting visa processing for international researchers, scholars, teachers and students to travel and study in the U.S.
Reforming the H-1B and other non-immigrant (temporary) visa programs to prevent abuses, including displacement of US workers and underpayment of foreign workers.
Enacting legislation to facilitate the admission of foreign professionals with advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering and managerial fields as legal permanent residents.
From here (http://www.ieeeusa.org/policy/issues/).
IEEE-USA will support public policies to ensure greater equity in the recruitment, utilization and compensation of US and foreign–born high tech workers. Priorities include:
Expediting visa processing for international researchers, scholars, teachers and students to travel and study in the U.S.
Reforming the H-1B and other non-immigrant (temporary) visa programs to prevent abuses, including displacement of US workers and underpayment of foreign workers.
Enacting legislation to facilitate the admission of foreign professionals with advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering and managerial fields as legal permanent residents.
more...
house Leighton Meesters New Hair
jonty_11
10-20 02:56 PM
Obama may be great...but we dont know...At least McCain has helped sponsor or vote in favor of EB bills in the past...So History on EB supports him more than Obama....
tattoo hair color styles highlights.
pcs
11-10 09:18 PM
Pappu, Aman et all...
Let push it... this is too uch for too long !!!!
Let us have a call on this. This is high time, we do something to mobilize guys for some common cause.
Let push it... this is too uch for too long !!!!
Let us have a call on this. This is high time, we do something to mobilize guys for some common cause.
more...
pictures londe hair colors with
aka
04-24 12:12 PM
Congrats Googler, you have given so much to this community. You totally deserve the good news! Have a couple of cold ones on us...
dresses Blonde hair color
axp817
05-26 07:12 PM
Entire state of NH is within 100 miles of Canada.
No it isn't. :p
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&q=keene,+nh+to+colebrook,+nh&sll=44.531759,-71.30127&sspn=1.969612,4.921875&ie=UTF8&ll=43.893934,-71.806641&spn=1.991056,4.921875&z=8&saddr=keene,+nh&daddr=colebrook,+nh
The White mountain area probably is within a 100 miles of Canada though.
Jokes aside,
I read a similar rant on IV a few years ago, that was when I learned about this rule/law/requirement (immigrants required to carry immigration documents on them).
These days, I don't ever leave home without my EAD card, if I am going anywhere within driving distance of where I live. If I fly, I usually carry my passport as well (not sure if that is any good since I am on AOS exclusively, but I do).
No it isn't. :p
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&q=keene,+nh+to+colebrook,+nh&sll=44.531759,-71.30127&sspn=1.969612,4.921875&ie=UTF8&ll=43.893934,-71.806641&spn=1.991056,4.921875&z=8&saddr=keene,+nh&daddr=colebrook,+nh
The White mountain area probably is within a 100 miles of Canada though.
Jokes aside,
I read a similar rant on IV a few years ago, that was when I learned about this rule/law/requirement (immigrants required to carry immigration documents on them).
These days, I don't ever leave home without my EAD card, if I am going anywhere within driving distance of where I live. If I fly, I usually carry my passport as well (not sure if that is any good since I am on AOS exclusively, but I do).
more...
makeup Her hair perfectly matches her
kaisersose
03-07 10:54 AM
AC21 is simple and requires nothing from the new employer other than the offer letter.
Rajiv Khanna charges big bucks to send out the AC21 letter, but he also clearly said his services are necessary only for complex cases. A straightforward case does not require any attorney.
However, there are people who are scared of every little thing in life and if such people - though their cases are straightforward - still want to pay up $3k to lawyers for sending out the letter, lawyers are not going to turn them away.
Rajiv Khanna charges big bucks to send out the AC21 letter, but he also clearly said his services are necessary only for complex cases. A straightforward case does not require any attorney.
However, there are people who are scared of every little thing in life and if such people - though their cases are straightforward - still want to pay up $3k to lawyers for sending out the letter, lawyers are not going to turn them away.
girlfriend hair color highlights for men.
sreeraghu
09-19 09:36 AM
First, I would like to congratulate everyone who contributed to the success of the DC rally on Sep 18, 2007...
I was there and I am proud of our ImmigrationVoice members for this FANTASTIC effort!
We are just starting and taking baby steps with these kind of activities...So, anything I mention below is not a critic, but a humble feedback/opinion...Please don't get offended.
1. We must immediately change our name to LegalImmigrationVoice.org( LIV.org)...But still Immigrationvoice.org should work....This should be done ASAP...like within next week...Please conduct a poll for this ASAP.
2. We must/should always wear formal suits for these kind of rally....this would definitely give us a very high status and definitely there will not be any confusion if the rally is by legal or illegal immigrants. Even if it is hot summer, we must stick to this dress code...
3. In all the signs we had today, we need to have one line clearly in bold as "Legal Immigrants - LegalImmigrationVoice.com - Faster Green cards for Legal highly skilled Immigrants" - bold and clear..
Also, all our T-shirts should have
"Legal Immigrants - LegalImmigrationVoice.com - Faster Green cards for Legal highly skilled Immigrants" in the back
4. One of the rally participants told me that a guide was telling a tourists bus passengers quote "these folks are illegal immigrants...", the rally participant who heard this went to the guide and explained that we are legal immigrants...if you think the guide is not smart enough to read our signs and understand that we are legal immigrants, read next point...
5. On the rally route, one gentleman, who was dressed in suit, looked well educated came up to me and asked what we are concerned about...I told him that green card process for Legal Immigrants is taking between 5-10 years and we are requesting to expedite it.....so it is clear that all our signs need this text at the bottom "Legal Immigrants - LegalImmigrationVoice.com - Faster Green cards for Legal highly skilled Immigrants"
We cannot be perfect the first or second time....Lets learn from this rally....
A pat in the back to all those who attended the rally....
Good Luck
Legal Immigrants Rally
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...76080420003555
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...20059427058009
http://picasaweb.google.com/raghumoh...lyWashingtonDC
Happy viewing, Foward to your friends n family
--
Regards,
Raghu
I was there and I am proud of our ImmigrationVoice members for this FANTASTIC effort!
We are just starting and taking baby steps with these kind of activities...So, anything I mention below is not a critic, but a humble feedback/opinion...Please don't get offended.
1. We must immediately change our name to LegalImmigrationVoice.org( LIV.org)...But still Immigrationvoice.org should work....This should be done ASAP...like within next week...Please conduct a poll for this ASAP.
2. We must/should always wear formal suits for these kind of rally....this would definitely give us a very high status and definitely there will not be any confusion if the rally is by legal or illegal immigrants. Even if it is hot summer, we must stick to this dress code...
3. In all the signs we had today, we need to have one line clearly in bold as "Legal Immigrants - LegalImmigrationVoice.com - Faster Green cards for Legal highly skilled Immigrants" - bold and clear..
Also, all our T-shirts should have
"Legal Immigrants - LegalImmigrationVoice.com - Faster Green cards for Legal highly skilled Immigrants" in the back
4. One of the rally participants told me that a guide was telling a tourists bus passengers quote "these folks are illegal immigrants...", the rally participant who heard this went to the guide and explained that we are legal immigrants...if you think the guide is not smart enough to read our signs and understand that we are legal immigrants, read next point...
5. On the rally route, one gentleman, who was dressed in suit, looked well educated came up to me and asked what we are concerned about...I told him that green card process for Legal Immigrants is taking between 5-10 years and we are requesting to expedite it.....so it is clear that all our signs need this text at the bottom "Legal Immigrants - LegalImmigrationVoice.com - Faster Green cards for Legal highly skilled Immigrants"
We cannot be perfect the first or second time....Lets learn from this rally....
A pat in the back to all those who attended the rally....
Good Luck
Legal Immigrants Rally
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...76080420003555
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...20059427058009
http://picasaweb.google.com/raghumoh...lyWashingtonDC
Happy viewing, Foward to your friends n family
--
Regards,
Raghu
hairstyles /2010/08est-hair-color-
nirenjoshi
11-04 09:02 AM
Got the Request Reference #, but the request is on complex track.
I am thinking of modifying the request to just my category and only upto my PD date, since the letter says that more specific requests might be put on faster track.
Let me know what you guys think. Should we leave it on complex track or ask for more specific information?
Also, any idea how long would it take for USCIS to act on the request -are we looking at months or weeks?
Thanks,
I am thinking of modifying the request to just my category and only upto my PD date, since the letter says that more specific requests might be put on faster track.
Let me know what you guys think. Should we leave it on complex track or ask for more specific information?
Also, any idea how long would it take for USCIS to act on the request -are we looking at months or weeks?
Thanks,
srkamath
07-13 10:42 AM
Keep in mind two things. Many, quite possibly most of the July VB fiasco filed 485s have not been processed yet, Eb2 or EB3 India. There have been more recently (in the past couple of months) but still not most. A good number of those filers had earlier PDs.
The quarterly statutory quota for EB2 I or C is so puny (something like 700 visas) that any movement would almost entirely be dependent on the Eb1 and EB2ROW overflow. That is why I feel, once this next two months pass, we will see dates back in 2004 for EB2. Maybe not quite back in April, but sometime in the middle to later 2004. However we could see PDs move at a healthy clip for EB2 I and C next year. It will take most of next years overflow to clear up the EB2 backlog in my view.
They have no reason to pull the dates back. Most 2004, 2005, part 2006 people got to apply during the july07 fiasco. In the past, they have pulled the dates back if new applications flooded in when they pushed the dates up.
USCIS will process in the following order now
1. Pull out cases based on PD, review then approve/deny/RFE
2. While waiting for RFE, process the next based on PD
3. IF the RFE response window is outside of this fiscal, they will re-allocate the visa number to another approvable case.
They will manage to process about 20k cases approving as many as possible by Sep30th2008.
Therefore, only those with pending RFEs will be delayed into next year.
USCIS is not all that inefficient or incompetent, not sure about DOS (to be fair, the Visa Office seems to have got its act together in the recent months)
The quarterly statutory quota for EB2 I or C is so puny (something like 700 visas) that any movement would almost entirely be dependent on the Eb1 and EB2ROW overflow. That is why I feel, once this next two months pass, we will see dates back in 2004 for EB2. Maybe not quite back in April, but sometime in the middle to later 2004. However we could see PDs move at a healthy clip for EB2 I and C next year. It will take most of next years overflow to clear up the EB2 backlog in my view.
They have no reason to pull the dates back. Most 2004, 2005, part 2006 people got to apply during the july07 fiasco. In the past, they have pulled the dates back if new applications flooded in when they pushed the dates up.
USCIS will process in the following order now
1. Pull out cases based on PD, review then approve/deny/RFE
2. While waiting for RFE, process the next based on PD
3. IF the RFE response window is outside of this fiscal, they will re-allocate the visa number to another approvable case.
They will manage to process about 20k cases approving as many as possible by Sep30th2008.
Therefore, only those with pending RFEs will be delayed into next year.
USCIS is not all that inefficient or incompetent, not sure about DOS (to be fair, the Visa Office seems to have got its act together in the recent months)
cal_dood
07-05 01:43 PM
I'll just go back to forums of the leading lady immigration lawyer....
No comments:
Post a Comment