chanduv23
11-14 10:13 AM
Totally agree, very nicely put. They will hear - listen if we present ideas that are pertinent to the existing situation. Nothing more pertinent than the housing mess. No one cares about old jaded ideas like "high talent" etc.
Can people in California approach Zoe Lofergens office with the idea?
On my part I will start sending letters and emails to the law makers.
Some one in the core has to take the lead and give some direction to this effort......
Do not regret if six months from now the housing crisis has cooled a little, no one will listen to us then. We would have wasted another chance. Do not take it for granted that now Obama is in office, he will do smoething about our problems.
Why do u limit urself to just sending letters. Whhy can't you approach Zoe's office, why can't you take the lead?
Can people in California approach Zoe Lofergens office with the idea?
On my part I will start sending letters and emails to the law makers.
Some one in the core has to take the lead and give some direction to this effort......
Do not regret if six months from now the housing crisis has cooled a little, no one will listen to us then. We would have wasted another chance. Do not take it for granted that now Obama is in office, he will do smoething about our problems.
Why do u limit urself to just sending letters. Whhy can't you approach Zoe's office, why can't you take the lead?
wallpaper 2011 Friend quotes 18. Tags:
alex99
10-30 08:51 AM
Participate in EB3 Poll
kalakotim
07-18 10:03 AM
Guys,
We all should be ok.One of my friends called USCIS several times and everytime he has been told that all the applications filed on July 2nd and after were put on HOLD. I wouldn't worry abt Greg's comments.
We all should be ok.One of my friends called USCIS several times and everytime he has been told that all the applications filed on July 2nd and after were put on HOLD. I wouldn't worry abt Greg's comments.
2011 Those Friendship Quotes always
sidbee
03-12 10:20 AM
IV needs to OPEN ITS BOOKS
And show DONORS where their money is going? Where is the sponsors money going? and what is this ORGANIZATION planning to do. IF not, one these days they will find themselves in a audit and public scrutiny.
Any yes people who says open your eyes? Have you got your GC? EAD is only a means and not the destination
PAPU, you need to explain to all IV members and disclose the books and what you are doing as IV head, and dont give me the bull, of we are working, you want our support, we want clarity and real action.
If this happens, i would like to donate to IV.
I cannot trust anyone blindly, thats my problem.
And show DONORS where their money is going? Where is the sponsors money going? and what is this ORGANIZATION planning to do. IF not, one these days they will find themselves in a audit and public scrutiny.
Any yes people who says open your eyes? Have you got your GC? EAD is only a means and not the destination
PAPU, you need to explain to all IV members and disclose the books and what you are doing as IV head, and dont give me the bull, of we are working, you want our support, we want clarity and real action.
If this happens, i would like to donate to IV.
I cannot trust anyone blindly, thats my problem.
more...
mirage
02-04 10:50 AM
For people who don't know, Country Cap goes by Country of Birth , not country of citizenship...So if you are born in India but now you are canadian Citizen, you will still be counted as Indian for EB based Green Card allocation, isn't this a blatent racist agenda. I have a letter from Congresswoman Zoe Logfren's office, which clearly says 'I will work on removing arbitrary country quota on employement based Green Cards', we just need to pursue her...
gbarquero
09-13 11:52 AM
Everyone bring U.S. flags if you can!!! (ONLY U.S. Flags - thanks!!!)
I think this is very important, I asked in the past about it but I got no answer.
It would be OK for me to buy a bunch of flags (50-100) and maybe get reimbursed for them at the rally if somebody wants one? I get support from anyone?
I think this is very important, I asked in the past about it but I got no answer.
It would be OK for me to buy a bunch of flags (50-100) and maybe get reimbursed for them at the rally if somebody wants one? I get support from anyone?
more...
suriajay12
03-30 07:47 AM
very good point and I agree 100 percent ..sad part is that such a good post gets buried under 20 posts which ask for more donations.
as far as I know FOIA campaign was for 5000 dollars ..then it was increased to 10,000. will it increase again ?
Do we do any more than just agreeing with others or disagreeing.. Sorry.. but we must not let down our efforts. I wrote to Zoe Lofgren and change.gov this weekend. What did you do for your problems?
as far as I know FOIA campaign was for 5000 dollars ..then it was increased to 10,000. will it increase again ?
Do we do any more than just agreeing with others or disagreeing.. Sorry.. but we must not let down our efforts. I wrote to Zoe Lofgren and change.gov this weekend. What did you do for your problems?
2010 friendship quotes tags.
mallu
06-20 02:54 PM
PD Nov.2002 India EB2( original labor ).
I-485 RD Jul 2006 . AD : June 2008.
Waiting for actual card...:D
I-485 RD Jul 2006 . AD : June 2008.
Waiting for actual card...:D
more...
morpheus
07-24 10:21 AM
I believe you are overlooking three very important facts.
1. The USCIS main priority at the moment is to reduce backlogs. Unfortunately retrogression works in their favor because it reduces the processing they have to do. Your proposal would increase the processing by forcing them to accept 485 filings and building up a backlog.
2. The USCIS administrator would not be allowed to make a decision like this without input from Congress. It's radically different from concurrent processing, which is a minor administrative change. With AC21, filing 485 without a visa number would allow people to change jobs etc, so it is in the realm of political decisions, not administrative.
3. The USCIS can't even manage to get premium I140 processing (planned since 2002), multi-year EAD's (overdue for years now) or issue regulations on AC21 (due since 2000). Even Congress can barely get them to act!
1. The USCIS main priority at the moment is to reduce backlogs. Unfortunately retrogression works in their favor because it reduces the processing they have to do. Your proposal would increase the processing by forcing them to accept 485 filings and building up a backlog.
2. The USCIS administrator would not be allowed to make a decision like this without input from Congress. It's radically different from concurrent processing, which is a minor administrative change. With AC21, filing 485 without a visa number would allow people to change jobs etc, so it is in the realm of political decisions, not administrative.
3. The USCIS can't even manage to get premium I140 processing (planned since 2002), multi-year EAD's (overdue for years now) or issue regulations on AC21 (due since 2000). Even Congress can barely get them to act!
hair Tags: friendship quotes
kramesh_babu
07-15 12:49 PM
People say you can still use your AP to reenter as long as its not expired.
I have an AP and my Priority date is current. What will happend to my AP when my 485 is approved and I am out of country?
I have an AP and my Priority date is current. What will happend to my AP when my 485 is approved and I am out of country?
more...
andycool
03-16 02:04 PM
141,020 visa numbers used in FY2009
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV.pdf
Look at the last page.
The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is 140,000. So the usage was actually more.
__________________
Not a legal advice.
Hello Desi,
"Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by documentarily qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation, that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may require the establishment of an earlier cut-off date than that which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
Furthermore, Section 202(a)(2) reads, �2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. Subject to paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed seven percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or two percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.� The seven percent per-country limit specified in INA 202(a)(2) is considered to be for both Family-sponsored and Employment-based numbers combined.
Allocation of visa numbers under Section 202(e) is accomplished as follows:
1. If based on historical patterns or current demand it appears that during a fiscal year number use by aliens chargeable to a particular country will exceed the per-country numerical limit for both the Family and Employment preferences combined, that country would be considered oversubscribed. Both the Family and Employment preferences would be subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1).
2. Sometimes during a fiscal year it may become apparent that because of a lack of demand in the Family preferences, number use by aliens chargeable to an oversubscribed country will be well within the per-country numerical limit. In such case the excess Family numbers would be made available to the Employment preferences subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1). Each of the first three Employment categories would receive 28.6% of the excess numbers, and each of the Fourth and Fifth preference categories 7.1%. (Fall-across would likewise apply if an oversubscribed country lacked sufficient demand in the Employment preferences but had excess demand in the Family preferences.)
If a foreign state other than an oversubscribed country has little Family preference demand but considerable Employment preference demand, the otherwise unused Family numbers fall across to Employment (and vice versa) for purposes of that foreign state�s annual numerical limit. For example, in FY-2009 South Korea used a grand total of 15,899 Family and Employment preference numbers, of which 1,688 were Family numbers and 14,211 were Employment numbers. This grand total was well within the FY-2009 per-country numerical limit of 25,620 Family and Employment numbers combined, so South Korea was not oversubscribed. The unused Family numbers were distributed within the Employment categories, allowing South Korea to be considerably over the 9,800 Employment limit which would have been in effect had it been an oversubscribed country.
This is from April Visa Bulletin , according to this S korea got 14,211 visas from FB ( spill over from FB - EB) then dont you think the total EB visas issued in 2009 should be around 150000 instead of 141000....
I am little confused...
your comment will be greatly appreciated ;)
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV.pdf
Look at the last page.
The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is 140,000. So the usage was actually more.
__________________
Not a legal advice.
Hello Desi,
"Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by documentarily qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation, that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may require the establishment of an earlier cut-off date than that which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
Furthermore, Section 202(a)(2) reads, �2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. Subject to paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed seven percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or two percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.� The seven percent per-country limit specified in INA 202(a)(2) is considered to be for both Family-sponsored and Employment-based numbers combined.
Allocation of visa numbers under Section 202(e) is accomplished as follows:
1. If based on historical patterns or current demand it appears that during a fiscal year number use by aliens chargeable to a particular country will exceed the per-country numerical limit for both the Family and Employment preferences combined, that country would be considered oversubscribed. Both the Family and Employment preferences would be subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1).
2. Sometimes during a fiscal year it may become apparent that because of a lack of demand in the Family preferences, number use by aliens chargeable to an oversubscribed country will be well within the per-country numerical limit. In such case the excess Family numbers would be made available to the Employment preferences subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1). Each of the first three Employment categories would receive 28.6% of the excess numbers, and each of the Fourth and Fifth preference categories 7.1%. (Fall-across would likewise apply if an oversubscribed country lacked sufficient demand in the Employment preferences but had excess demand in the Family preferences.)
If a foreign state other than an oversubscribed country has little Family preference demand but considerable Employment preference demand, the otherwise unused Family numbers fall across to Employment (and vice versa) for purposes of that foreign state�s annual numerical limit. For example, in FY-2009 South Korea used a grand total of 15,899 Family and Employment preference numbers, of which 1,688 were Family numbers and 14,211 were Employment numbers. This grand total was well within the FY-2009 per-country numerical limit of 25,620 Family and Employment numbers combined, so South Korea was not oversubscribed. The unused Family numbers were distributed within the Employment categories, allowing South Korea to be considerably over the 9,800 Employment limit which would have been in effect had it been an oversubscribed country.
This is from April Visa Bulletin , according to this S korea got 14,211 visas from FB ( spill over from FB - EB) then dont you think the total EB visas issued in 2009 should be around 150000 instead of 141000....
I am little confused...
your comment will be greatly appreciated ;)
hot Friendship quotes
delhikadesi
11-11 01:16 AM
You will cure a lot of ppl, atleast I burst in laughter..
PCS - What you are suffering from is known as PVBS (Post Visa Bulletin Syndrome). It is very common in Indian and Chinese community living in the US.
This condition stays with the patient/sufferer for 15 days or so and then disappears like a f*a*r*t in the wind. It is more likely to happen to those who fall under EB-2 category and especially those who are 6 months or so from priority date to be current. This condition keeps re-appearing till the patient gets green card and then it gives birth to another condition call PGCS (Post Green Card Syndrome). Typically, that condition lasts for 5 years till the patient gets US citizenship. There are some documented evidences that Amway and QuickStar have tried to fix this condition but medical community is yet to approve that.
Laughter is the only known cure of this condition. Returning back to home country can also cure this condition.
PCS - What you are suffering from is known as PVBS (Post Visa Bulletin Syndrome). It is very common in Indian and Chinese community living in the US.
This condition stays with the patient/sufferer for 15 days or so and then disappears like a f*a*r*t in the wind. It is more likely to happen to those who fall under EB-2 category and especially those who are 6 months or so from priority date to be current. This condition keeps re-appearing till the patient gets green card and then it gives birth to another condition call PGCS (Post Green Card Syndrome). Typically, that condition lasts for 5 years till the patient gets US citizenship. There are some documented evidences that Amway and QuickStar have tried to fix this condition but medical community is yet to approve that.
Laughter is the only known cure of this condition. Returning back to home country can also cure this condition.
more...
house Categories: Pictures Quotes
gimme_GC2006
03-09 03:54 PM
If your kids were born in the US then maybe they will be able to file for you by then and that will be definitely faster than EB-3. :D
looks like that is Plan B :D:D
looks like that is Plan B :D:D
tattoo friendship quotes
Openarms
10-17 11:23 AM
Notarized & mailed my FOIA letter yesterday.
more...
pictures About: Friends quotes
immig4me
03-01 08:57 AM
/\/\/\/\/\/
dresses friendship quotes tags.
kaisersose
07-24 02:05 PM
If I-140 has been certified OR application has already been submitted, then maybe you DO need a employment letter - to prove that the job is still available.
If I-140 and 485 are being submitted concurrently, then OBVIOUSLY there is a job offer (thats part of the reason the I-140 is filed by company) and maybe the employment letter is not required.
My thoughts.
You are right on both accounts.
1. I-140 already approved: Yes. A job offer should be attached with the 485 application as the 485 is your application. Is not including the offer letter grounds for rejection for lack of initial evidence? Probably not. But it is almost certain to invoke an RFE.
2. Concurrent Filing: As 140 is applied by the employer and not by you, that by itself is evidence that at this time, this employer intends to hire you or continue to employ you after GC. No separate letter is needed.
If I-140 and 485 are being submitted concurrently, then OBVIOUSLY there is a job offer (thats part of the reason the I-140 is filed by company) and maybe the employment letter is not required.
My thoughts.
You are right on both accounts.
1. I-140 already approved: Yes. A job offer should be attached with the 485 application as the 485 is your application. Is not including the offer letter grounds for rejection for lack of initial evidence? Probably not. But it is almost certain to invoke an RFE.
2. Concurrent Filing: As 140 is applied by the employer and not by you, that by itself is evidence that at this time, this employer intends to hire you or continue to employ you after GC. No separate letter is needed.
more...
makeup friendship quotes tags. Friendship Quote for Orkut
sunty
11-13 03:10 PM
A couple of documents about the
Immigrant Visa Allocation Management System (IVAMS)
This is the system that performs the analysis for the Visa demands/allocations etc...
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/109134.pdf
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/87963.pdf
Just on a side note, maybe to address the quarterly-spillover issue, this system needs to be updated/changed and since it will be "a decade long task" for the DOS to do it, we might not see the spillover for a while...:confused:..
Hope thats not the case though..
Immigrant Visa Allocation Management System (IVAMS)
This is the system that performs the analysis for the Visa demands/allocations etc...
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/109134.pdf
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/87963.pdf
Just on a side note, maybe to address the quarterly-spillover issue, this system needs to be updated/changed and since it will be "a decade long task" for the DOS to do it, we might not see the spillover for a while...:confused:..
Hope thats not the case though..
girlfriend Tag Your Friends on Facebook
mantric
02-17 05:07 AM
canuck has a point, although his wording is not the best.
our own self respect should come first when we are faced with economic coercion of our choices. we came here not as beggars but with skills to offer to employers. in exchange for commitment and hard work there was a promise to a path to permanent residency. we have a right to live here as employees without constant and undue stress because of discriminatory laws and unreasonable delays that constrain our advancement in the very careers that brought us here. this much is true of all EB immigrants.
self-respect is not a question of not obeying laws but of challenging them when they turn out to be unfair and discriminatory to hard working, tax paying residents. this issue is central, not the fact that i came from one country or another.
now if you look at rajiv khanna's lawsuit against USCIS, the main reason USCIS won was because of their argument that i-485 filers were not a unified class. so USCIS used the very argument that these filers were divided to win the case. when USCIS itself has used this argument of divisions between immigrants against legal eb immigrants howcome we are reluctant to admit this policy ?
the instruments of control are much more refined now than they used to be in the days of slavery and divide and rule. but they do exist in and it is for us to recognize them as such. that's the first step to freedom.
our own self respect should come first when we are faced with economic coercion of our choices. we came here not as beggars but with skills to offer to employers. in exchange for commitment and hard work there was a promise to a path to permanent residency. we have a right to live here as employees without constant and undue stress because of discriminatory laws and unreasonable delays that constrain our advancement in the very careers that brought us here. this much is true of all EB immigrants.
self-respect is not a question of not obeying laws but of challenging them when they turn out to be unfair and discriminatory to hard working, tax paying residents. this issue is central, not the fact that i came from one country or another.
now if you look at rajiv khanna's lawsuit against USCIS, the main reason USCIS won was because of their argument that i-485 filers were not a unified class. so USCIS used the very argument that these filers were divided to win the case. when USCIS itself has used this argument of divisions between immigrants against legal eb immigrants howcome we are reluctant to admit this policy ?
the instruments of control are much more refined now than they used to be in the days of slavery and divide and rule. but they do exist in and it is for us to recognize them as such. that's the first step to freedom.
hairstyles friendship quotes tags. girl
GCanyMinute
08-02 02:21 PM
you have already filed ur I485 right ? so what do u mean "y am i still waiting ?"
yes I did, but that's the thing.... what is the relation between "visa number" and the "greencard" ??? i'm confused.... whether I am still waiting for a "visa number" or for the "greencard".... please help!! :)
yes I did, but that's the thing.... what is the relation between "visa number" and the "greencard" ??? i'm confused.... whether I am still waiting for a "visa number" or for the "greencard".... please help!! :)
Pineapple
11-18 06:59 AM
My receipt number is NRC2008064605.
bidhanc
07-18 10:18 AM
Please explain Greg's comment,
"We presume some folks are still waiting on their July 2nd cases to be returned and are debating refiling new cases rather than waiting. Unfortunately, there is a risk of not getting the package back before August 17th and some people will need to refile without proof of the earlier filing."
Shouldn't any application rejected on July 2nd have already reached our lawyer's office by now?
Also, if my appliction, filled on July 2nd,reached 11:34 AM CST, has not been returned yet, shouldn't we assume that it will be accepted?
Is it not possible to re-submit the documents all over, even though USCIS might be holding on to our first applications of July 2nd?
What are the ramifications (if any) of doing this?
"We presume some folks are still waiting on their July 2nd cases to be returned and are debating refiling new cases rather than waiting. Unfortunately, there is a risk of not getting the package back before August 17th and some people will need to refile without proof of the earlier filing."
Shouldn't any application rejected on July 2nd have already reached our lawyer's office by now?
Also, if my appliction, filled on July 2nd,reached 11:34 AM CST, has not been returned yet, shouldn't we assume that it will be accepted?
Is it not possible to re-submit the documents all over, even though USCIS might be holding on to our first applications of July 2nd?
What are the ramifications (if any) of doing this?
