chanduv23
03-08 08:48 PM
Wow,
at first glance it seems 245(i) is kicking in real hard.
Look at EB-3 numbers for Mexico, Phillipines, Pakistan, South Korea, Guatemala, Brazil, Equador, Peru, Poland, El Salvador, Bolivia, Ecquador,
Compare this with H1-B data and you'll see what I mean.
Also EB-1 seems unusually high at ~37,000
EB-1 is even higher than EB-2
isn't that unusual?
Maybe the numbers were high as they spilled over, but that does not explain why eb2 and eb3, where they must be equal.
It if definitely interesting to note that eb1 India has so much demand.
at first glance it seems 245(i) is kicking in real hard.
Look at EB-3 numbers for Mexico, Phillipines, Pakistan, South Korea, Guatemala, Brazil, Equador, Peru, Poland, El Salvador, Bolivia, Ecquador,
Compare this with H1-B data and you'll see what I mean.
Also EB-1 seems unusually high at ~37,000
EB-1 is even higher than EB-2
isn't that unusual?
Maybe the numbers were high as they spilled over, but that does not explain why eb2 and eb3, where they must be equal.
It if definitely interesting to note that eb1 India has so much demand.
wallpaper computer wallpaper desktop
lazycis
01-15 12:16 PM
Wow! That should save me a bunch. I smell immigrationvoice is getting another donation soon :).
Now what aranya said would be wrong right? I just want to confirm as quite a few employers follow this practice. As mine is a govt. agency if it is a law I assume they will follow it. But just wanted to confirm..
Thanks!!
Quite a few employers do not pay full salary while you are on the bench. It does not mean it's lawful.
Here is the link to access the regulation in question
http://frwebgate1.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate.cgi?WAISdocID=41788073114+1+1+0&WAISaction=retrieve
Look at page 132.
Now what aranya said would be wrong right? I just want to confirm as quite a few employers follow this practice. As mine is a govt. agency if it is a law I assume they will follow it. But just wanted to confirm..
Thanks!!
Quite a few employers do not pay full salary while you are on the bench. It does not mean it's lawful.
Here is the link to access the regulation in question
http://frwebgate1.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate.cgi?WAISdocID=41788073114+1+1+0&WAISaction=retrieve
Look at page 132.
iptel
09-21 01:12 PM
I look at wam4wam suggestion as a sound strategy. Its all about putting carrot to get our job done...
Core team member should give some serious thought to this sugestion..
i
the other glimmer of hope in all this is the house has inadverently left out the fact on how they are going to fund the building of the wall
it is here that we step in...
fees for filing I485 for people under SKIL
fees for being able to file 485 before visa numbers
etc etc etc
we have to take advantage of this opportunity
in the mean while....SEND FAXES ABOUT SKIL BILL
Core team member should give some serious thought to this sugestion..
i
the other glimmer of hope in all this is the house has inadverently left out the fact on how they are going to fund the building of the wall
it is here that we step in...
fees for filing I485 for people under SKIL
fees for being able to file 485 before visa numbers
etc etc etc
we have to take advantage of this opportunity
in the mean while....SEND FAXES ABOUT SKIL BILL
2011 Christmas Desktop wallpaper
gbof
10-16 10:13 AM
This is what I can speculate from logical point of view. There can be an 2nd RFE which is basically seeking more clarification on an earlier RFE. These kind of RFE will be pretty much immediate to the preceeding RFE (within 1 -2 months)
After that hopefully there should not be any unrelated RFE with the assumption that IO has taken a complete look at the file before issuing a RFE. We do not want a RFE for BC and when that is replied IO sending another one for Medical or Marriage Certificate. We should reasonably assume that IO has taken a good look at the application before sending RFE.
But we can expect RFE for cases that are current. The reason being most of these cases might be lying with CIS for over 2-3 years before getting current and considering the current state of economy they might issue a RFE for updated EVL to check if the person is still working. That is again just a pure guess no one knows how CIS works in reality
eb2_mumbai,
Most your recent postings are logical but still so much red here- I gave you green.
After that hopefully there should not be any unrelated RFE with the assumption that IO has taken a complete look at the file before issuing a RFE. We do not want a RFE for BC and when that is replied IO sending another one for Medical or Marriage Certificate. We should reasonably assume that IO has taken a good look at the application before sending RFE.
But we can expect RFE for cases that are current. The reason being most of these cases might be lying with CIS for over 2-3 years before getting current and considering the current state of economy they might issue a RFE for updated EVL to check if the person is still working. That is again just a pure guess no one knows how CIS works in reality
eb2_mumbai,
Most your recent postings are logical but still so much red here- I gave you green.
more...
sk.aggarwal
05-04 11:19 AM
What happens, once he moves to the new employer and his present employer withdraws I-140? For any subsequent H1 transfers/extensions will he will need to have an approved I-140, which is not withdrawn ?
Could there be issues, if new employer does a lay off what happens when perm/i-140 is pending or not filled yet
Could there be issues, if new employer does a lay off what happens when perm/i-140 is pending or not filled yet
Openarms
12-05 01:44 PM
Bump
what is this bump means???
what is this bump means???
more...
optimystic
04-24 02:45 AM
Hi god_bless_you,
Title should have been: "God blessed me !! Got GC." Fix the title, other wise it looks like "God blessed you !! I got into trouble", Unless you feel GC as some trouble imposed on you.
I am (and most of IV visitors) still without GC and years to go before getting GC.
Any way, whatever, congratulations.
--Dhundhun
OP said "God bless you !!!, I got GC". Not bless*ed*. Those extra two letters might convey the meaning that you suggest. (God blessed you!! , and I got nothing! :) )
But as is (without the 'ed' after bless), the title does indeed convey appropriate meaning ! Its like saying, "May god bless you (too..) , I have been blessed !" .
But anyway, we are splitting hairs here :D . Congratulations to the original poster
Title should have been: "God blessed me !! Got GC." Fix the title, other wise it looks like "God blessed you !! I got into trouble", Unless you feel GC as some trouble imposed on you.
I am (and most of IV visitors) still without GC and years to go before getting GC.
Any way, whatever, congratulations.
--Dhundhun
OP said "God bless you !!!, I got GC". Not bless*ed*. Those extra two letters might convey the meaning that you suggest. (God blessed you!! , and I got nothing! :) )
But as is (without the 'ed' after bless), the title does indeed convey appropriate meaning ! Its like saying, "May god bless you (too..) , I have been blessed !" .
But anyway, we are splitting hairs here :D . Congratulations to the original poster
2010 Christmas Wallpaper 3
natrajs
08-02 12:05 AM
Best Wishes from Tri State
more...
suny_saini
08-05 11:46 PM
My case cannot be processed under CSPA, because the form I-824 was not filed within one year of the visa becoming available.
but i have a valid point mentioned after the follwing subject. please check if the point is valid.
ACC TO SUBJECT: CHILD STATUS PROTECTION ACT: ALDAC #2
REF: (A) 02 STATE 163054 (B) 02 STATE 123775
-------
If the principal applicant adjusted status in the U.S. and a derivative is applying for a visa abroad to
follow-to-join, then the date on which the derivative will be considered to have sought LPR status for
purposes of satisfying CSPA Section 3 will generally be the date on which the principal (acting as the
derivative beneficiary's agent) filed the Form I-824 that is used to process the derivative's following to
join application. Therefore, in cases involving a derivative seeking to follow to join a principal who adjusted
in the U.S., the derivative can benefit from the CSPA if the principal filed a Form I-824 for the beneficiary
within one year of a visa becoming available (i.e., within one year of the case becoming current or petition
approval, whichever is later). The instructions to Form I-485 (the adjustment application) advise aliens
adjusting status in the U.S. who have derivatives abroad to file a Form I-824 for such derivatives, and the
I-485 Form indicates that that Form I-824 can be filed simultaneously with the Form I-485
(READ MORE FROM http://guangzhou.usconsulate.gov/cspa.html )
I NEED HELP AND I THINK THERE IS ALWAYS AN ALTERNATIVE OF THINGS.
IS THERE ANY OTHER WAY ANY ANY ANY WAY???
CAN THEY APPROVE IF I REQUEST THEM ?
WHAT IS the way out?
I checked the visa bulletin from august 2003 to the dates when it was current for our category E3.
I have found this point please have a look and determine if there is a chance?
VISA WAS AVAILABLE FROM AUGUST 2003 TO JUNE 2005.
ACC TO LAW FORM i-824 SHOULD BE FILED WITHIN 1 YEAR OF VISA AVAILIABILITY.
SINCE THE I-824 WAS FILED ON AUGUST 2005 WHICH COMES WITHIN ONE YEAR FROM THE DATE
JUNE 2005. SO IS IT A VALID POINT TO BE ELEGIBLE TO PROCESSED UNDER CSPA?
ALSO there is a last hope
A 221(g) refusal will not be considered a "final determination," regardless of whether it occurred within
a year of August 6, 2002 or earlier. (The only exception to this would be if the alien's case was ultimately
terminated under INA 203(g) for failure to make reasonable efforts to overcome to 221(g) refusal. A
203(g) termination will be considered a "final determination.")
AND VISA AVAILIBLITY IS THE DATE WHEN THE PRIORITY DATES BECAME CURRENT OR THE DATE WHEN I-140 WAS APPROVED.
WITH this OR option in above line we can also consider the visa availibity date as the date when priority dates were current
Please correct me.
but i have a valid point mentioned after the follwing subject. please check if the point is valid.
ACC TO SUBJECT: CHILD STATUS PROTECTION ACT: ALDAC #2
REF: (A) 02 STATE 163054 (B) 02 STATE 123775
-------
If the principal applicant adjusted status in the U.S. and a derivative is applying for a visa abroad to
follow-to-join, then the date on which the derivative will be considered to have sought LPR status for
purposes of satisfying CSPA Section 3 will generally be the date on which the principal (acting as the
derivative beneficiary's agent) filed the Form I-824 that is used to process the derivative's following to
join application. Therefore, in cases involving a derivative seeking to follow to join a principal who adjusted
in the U.S., the derivative can benefit from the CSPA if the principal filed a Form I-824 for the beneficiary
within one year of a visa becoming available (i.e., within one year of the case becoming current or petition
approval, whichever is later). The instructions to Form I-485 (the adjustment application) advise aliens
adjusting status in the U.S. who have derivatives abroad to file a Form I-824 for such derivatives, and the
I-485 Form indicates that that Form I-824 can be filed simultaneously with the Form I-485
(READ MORE FROM http://guangzhou.usconsulate.gov/cspa.html )
I NEED HELP AND I THINK THERE IS ALWAYS AN ALTERNATIVE OF THINGS.
IS THERE ANY OTHER WAY ANY ANY ANY WAY???
CAN THEY APPROVE IF I REQUEST THEM ?
WHAT IS the way out?
I checked the visa bulletin from august 2003 to the dates when it was current for our category E3.
I have found this point please have a look and determine if there is a chance?
VISA WAS AVAILABLE FROM AUGUST 2003 TO JUNE 2005.
ACC TO LAW FORM i-824 SHOULD BE FILED WITHIN 1 YEAR OF VISA AVAILIABILITY.
SINCE THE I-824 WAS FILED ON AUGUST 2005 WHICH COMES WITHIN ONE YEAR FROM THE DATE
JUNE 2005. SO IS IT A VALID POINT TO BE ELEGIBLE TO PROCESSED UNDER CSPA?
ALSO there is a last hope
A 221(g) refusal will not be considered a "final determination," regardless of whether it occurred within
a year of August 6, 2002 or earlier. (The only exception to this would be if the alien's case was ultimately
terminated under INA 203(g) for failure to make reasonable efforts to overcome to 221(g) refusal. A
203(g) termination will be considered a "final determination.")
AND VISA AVAILIBLITY IS THE DATE WHEN THE PRIORITY DATES BECAME CURRENT OR THE DATE WHEN I-140 WAS APPROVED.
WITH this OR option in above line we can also consider the visa availibity date as the date when priority dates were current
Please correct me.
hair This Amazing Grace Christmas
hotscud21
10-31 09:24 AM
I am planning to shift employers and I have a question:
Company A applied for my green card and I have an approved I-140, passed the 6 month mark and now planning to shift jobs on EAD. I have an offer from Company B with a condition that my offer would be permanent upon approval of my green card. I cannot work for company B till I physically have my GC. In the mean time can I work for Company C ( in a completely different field) till my GC gets approved without any issues?
Company A applied for my green card and I have an approved I-140, passed the 6 month mark and now planning to shift jobs on EAD. I have an offer from Company B with a condition that my offer would be permanent upon approval of my green card. I cannot work for company B till I physically have my GC. In the mean time can I work for Company C ( in a completely different field) till my GC gets approved without any issues?
more...
GlobalCitizen
08-21 01:16 PM
Gurus,
I need help please!
My employer applied for my H1B renewal very close to the expiration of my first H1B and I was told today that they got back the application becuase they made a mistake on the check. unfortunalty, they got back the application after my first H1B expired. They sent back the application with the right check and we have not heard anything yet. Am I ok or am I in a big trouble? Please, help! Thank you all.
I need help please!
My employer applied for my H1B renewal very close to the expiration of my first H1B and I was told today that they got back the application becuase they made a mistake on the check. unfortunalty, they got back the application after my first H1B expired. They sent back the application with the right check and we have not heard anything yet. Am I ok or am I in a big trouble? Please, help! Thank you all.
hot Desktop Wallpaper.
gcpain
07-24 03:30 PM
Thanks for your info. Surely I am applying my new passport tomorrow. I am trying to call my attorney and left message. Still I did not hear back from him. My passoprt expires on August 05, 2007. My all applications mailed and are on the way to USCIS. I have option to recall my complete package only today. If I lose todays date then there will be no option.what should I do now?
more...
house mac os desktop backgrounds
a1b2c3
04-14 09:11 PM
If senior citizens have to travel frequently from India to the Bay area (California) what is the most preferred airlines?
Points of comparisons would be pricing (frequent flyer discounts), leg room, optimum layover, wheelchair facility, good in-flight attendance, food and so on...the experience with the emirates has been ok thus far.
emirates didn't provide the wheel chair at the airport although it was made available in india and sfo. also the leg from dubai to sfo is very long.
please share your experiences and provide your feedback.
Points of comparisons would be pricing (frequent flyer discounts), leg room, optimum layover, wheelchair facility, good in-flight attendance, food and so on...the experience with the emirates has been ok thus far.
emirates didn't provide the wheel chair at the airport although it was made available in india and sfo. also the leg from dubai to sfo is very long.
please share your experiences and provide your feedback.
tattoo Christmas Desktop
DDash
08-06 06:04 PM
Thanks for all your wishes. Appreciate your quick responses friends. Hope every member in this community will get their emails as well.
Good luck to you all.
PS: As promised I gave green dots to the responses :)
Good luck to you all.
PS: As promised I gave green dots to the responses :)
more...
pictures Mac Christmas Background
WaitingYaar
01-18 06:50 PM
Is there any reason that NSC I-140 processing times not moving forward. Moving by 5-10 days every month? It seems that the processing times are over 7 months.
dresses ALTools Christmas Desktop
DSLStart
10-01 09:30 AM
search forums here, people haven't gotten their FP renewal notices even after requesting number of times to USCIS. Request from congress member compels uscis to move their butt.
Congressman for FP, you may want to contact USCIS first. They may not expedite your I-485 but they are good in sending these things...
Congressman for FP, you may want to contact USCIS first. They may not expedite your I-485 but they are good in sending these things...
more...
makeup Setting as Desktop wallpaper
h12gc
04-30 02:42 AM
Thanks Morcha for your reply.
girlfriend cool ackgrounds for pictures.
HV000
04-15 10:20 AM
CONGRATS! One more approval from TSC.
hairstyles keira knightley wallpapers
mbartosik
03-12 03:33 PM
I am in ROW, EB2 if they processed the interfiling, EB3 if not, with a PD of Dec 2002, and receipt date of 5 May 2007.
My application was filed with Nebraska Service center, they moved to Texas (with SRC* receipt number), they moved back to Nebraska in October 2007.
Even on EB3 my PD is now current.
When they passed 60 days late according to processing times I raised a service request. They claim that they have 45 days to respond. Their 45 days will be up on Thursday, and I still have no response.
So here is my plan...
On Thursday call again. Raise another service request?
Make an Info pass appointment ? - not sure IO could tell me more in person than over phone.
On Thursday go see Congressman's office.
Come May 2008 (one year since filing I485) if there is still no suitable reply to service request file WOM. Their lack of response to service request should annoy the judge hopefully.
When I last spoke with an IO she thought that the notice date on the transfer notice was the processing date to use (Oct 2007) not the receipt date on it (May 2007). I believe she is plain wrong, and she was silent when I asserted that I believed she was wrong, and that's why the original receipt date is kept on the transfer notice. If someone has a link to the USCIS rule on this it would be helpful.
Any comments please?
My application was filed with Nebraska Service center, they moved to Texas (with SRC* receipt number), they moved back to Nebraska in October 2007.
Even on EB3 my PD is now current.
When they passed 60 days late according to processing times I raised a service request. They claim that they have 45 days to respond. Their 45 days will be up on Thursday, and I still have no response.
So here is my plan...
On Thursday call again. Raise another service request?
Make an Info pass appointment ? - not sure IO could tell me more in person than over phone.
On Thursday go see Congressman's office.
Come May 2008 (one year since filing I485) if there is still no suitable reply to service request file WOM. Their lack of response to service request should annoy the judge hopefully.
When I last spoke with an IO she thought that the notice date on the transfer notice was the processing date to use (Oct 2007) not the receipt date on it (May 2007). I believe she is plain wrong, and she was silent when I asserted that I believed she was wrong, and that's why the original receipt date is kept on the transfer notice. If someone has a link to the USCIS rule on this it would be helpful.
Any comments please?
dpp
06-20 05:42 PM
I am confused. I have I 140 approval copy but it does not have A# in it. I know lots of people who have approved I 140 and they have A# in it. Please let me know what should I do in this case?
Just leave it blank. But my approval has it and so i am using it.
Just leave it blank. But my approval has it and so i am using it.
eb3_nepa
02-18 11:17 AM
Your reasoning is nearly correct. But you are missing Two points:
1. There will be some cases from BECs which could not file AOSs in time since their labors did not clear for them in the july/aug timeframe. Only when these have cleared will the chances of further retrogression decrease.
2. ALSO - Just as an example, If there are 100000 Eb2s with PDs of 2005. We know that there are NOT 10000 visa #s available for EB2s, in that case too, the dates will retrogress - since thats the only way they can prevent visa #s being used.
Am I making much sense ?
My point here is:
Now there is NO reason for the DOS to miscalculate or not know how many applications are out there for AOS.
Someone mentioned that some BEC ppl were not able to apply for AOS coz their applications did not get released in time, that is a valid point. So maybe we should see one last backward movement if any and then it should be strictly forward movement. VERY SLOW movement i agree but forward movement.
1. There will be some cases from BECs which could not file AOSs in time since their labors did not clear for them in the july/aug timeframe. Only when these have cleared will the chances of further retrogression decrease.
2. ALSO - Just as an example, If there are 100000 Eb2s with PDs of 2005. We know that there are NOT 10000 visa #s available for EB2s, in that case too, the dates will retrogress - since thats the only way they can prevent visa #s being used.
Am I making much sense ?
My point here is:
Now there is NO reason for the DOS to miscalculate or not know how many applications are out there for AOS.
Someone mentioned that some BEC ppl were not able to apply for AOS coz their applications did not get released in time, that is a valid point. So maybe we should see one last backward movement if any and then it should be strictly forward movement. VERY SLOW movement i agree but forward movement.
No comments:
Post a Comment