jonty_11
07-11 03:41 PM
Previously, the policy was that all worldwide numbers would fall down into worldwide third and then from there, fall across to the countries impacted by retrogression (i.e. India, China). The policy was recently clarified and today the unused numbers are allocated within the same preference classification.
Can you provide the source of this info? a link or something?
Can you provide the source of this info? a link or something?
wallpaper love images quotes. images of
Googler
02-21 05:15 PM
I-485: EB2 India with PD June 2003
I was wondering why I am I getting a LUD in Feb 08? (since EB2 India is 'U').
Now I know why :) it seems USCIS is getting ready for the deluge in April 08' :D
Lord almighty people are getting really carried away. :) This cutoff setting guy hadn't even made up his mind as of Feb 13. Also read my entire post, he won't set the date till he sees the estimate from USCIS.
Btw, my PD is Jan 03 and my LUD is still back in November 07 (when my attorney changed).
I was wondering why I am I getting a LUD in Feb 08? (since EB2 India is 'U').
Now I know why :) it seems USCIS is getting ready for the deluge in April 08' :D
Lord almighty people are getting really carried away. :) This cutoff setting guy hadn't even made up his mind as of Feb 13. Also read my entire post, he won't set the date till he sees the estimate from USCIS.
Btw, my PD is Jan 03 and my LUD is still back in November 07 (when my attorney changed).
El_Guapo
11-13 10:25 AM
The 1st quarter ends Dec 31. So technically, USCIS has until that to allocate the total of 35,000 visas. Now, let's assume they have only approved 5000 visas across all categories thus far, then that doesn't mean they can go and allocate the remaining 30,000 in December to the retrogressed countries.
I think the way the spillover works (except for the last month of last quarter) is at the end of the quarter (technically Jan bulletin is published around Dec 15) based on the demand for the last 2 weeks for that quarter, USCIS will spillover visas. So I think we should wait until the Jan bulletin that comes out in December before we push for a lawsuit. If you want to send letters to people, then so be it, but I am pretty sure USCIS is well within its operating procedure wrt spillover. If spillover doesn't happen in the Jan bulletin, then we have ground for a strong case.
I think the way the spillover works (except for the last month of last quarter) is at the end of the quarter (technically Jan bulletin is published around Dec 15) based on the demand for the last 2 weeks for that quarter, USCIS will spillover visas. So I think we should wait until the Jan bulletin that comes out in December before we push for a lawsuit. If you want to send letters to people, then so be it, but I am pretty sure USCIS is well within its operating procedure wrt spillover. If spillover doesn't happen in the Jan bulletin, then we have ground for a strong case.
2011 pics of love quotes. love
GCBy3000
07-13 07:37 PM
I dont see any problem if we align with like minded orgs. If we allow today Murthy to take credit, then we are mis-directing our fellow immigrants who would be comng down the years here. They all believe Murthy is for immigrants and fall in their trap.
So let us all be clear in selecting our friends or foe keeping our goals and vision for future immigrants. I am OK if we dont get anything, but I dont want to lose anything.
All,
Discrediting attorney Murthy does not serve our purpose.
If she is doing something good, that is generating more pressure on USCIS, then let's stop criticizing her.
Though she is taking the step a few days late, it is a step in right direction and lets support and thank her...
Everyone has their motives...What matters is the end product...
So let us all be clear in selecting our friends or foe keeping our goals and vision for future immigrants. I am OK if we dont get anything, but I dont want to lose anything.
All,
Discrediting attorney Murthy does not serve our purpose.
If she is doing something good, that is generating more pressure on USCIS, then let's stop criticizing her.
Though she is taking the step a few days late, it is a step in right direction and lets support and thank her...
Everyone has their motives...What matters is the end product...
more...
Zil
09-28 03:20 AM
I have 2 European co-workers. They both told me, "The only way we will go back to Europe is when we die".
Which European countries are they from? Their opinion can be relevant in this context if they are from a rich EU country, but less convincing if they are from Albania, for example.
Which European countries are they from? Their opinion can be relevant in this context if they are from a rich EU country, but less convincing if they are from Albania, for example.
ramaonline
12-26 01:40 PM
there is no concept of employee transfer after 140 approval. once u get 140 approved u can get 3 year incremental h1 extension due to retrogression- portability is also allowed during these 3 years - so u can join any employer. (h1 transfer) also note that if ur current employer does not revoke the 140 u can retain the PD and use it for a new gc application with a new employer, else u must start the LC-140 etc process once again.
more...
lost_in_migration
08-15 04:04 PM
Although EB3 is still messed up this VB is lot better than all 'U's :)
2010 Screenshot of Love Poems
IfYouSeekAmy
08-21 03:54 PM
I am truly sorry for your situation and applogize for the lousy way people in this forum are treating you. It seems you have done everything honestly and legally. From your story I do not see any wrong intentions or trying to stay here illegally. If that was the case I don't see why you filed the pettion anyway so looks like you have done the right thing. I wish I could help. The only advise I could give you is to see if you can get an extension on the 30 day period. I do not know if that is possible but I sincerely hope that things will work out for you!
I did not marry the man I was engaged to. I came here initially for ONE month and was approved at the airport customs terminal to stay that long. When I got here, it was for a visit with my fiance only. Unfortunately, things did not work out and we broke it off. Thank God! However, I was staying with his uncle and aunt, and they had a disabled man in the house. HE turned out to be my sponsor when they asked me to care for him while they were doing long haul trucking. I agreed to do this and we immediately contacted USCIS to get instructions on what needed to be filed first. With that information in hand, we filed everything they requested. All the stuff on the RFE I received has never been mentioned before now and if it had, it would have been filed along with the rest. There are tons of applications, how is one supposed to know what to file and when if there are no specific instructions? I have gone through all the copies we have of all the required applications and I still do not see anything where all these other forms were to be filed along with the I-485.
Nothing was done illegally. He filed the application on my behalf, signed, sealed and delivered it himself. I did not do this on my own, I just signed whatever I was required to sign, he did the rest.
If all of this was illegal, then why was I not informed of this nearly 6 years ago when we filed the first application? Seems a bit odd that if I was illegal and they know where I am and who I live with that they wouldn't be quick to throw me out, but they have not done so.
My former fiance has nothing to do with this, I never intended to stay here when I first came, it was merely a visit but circumstances were such that I was needed at a moment's notice so we filed the necessary paperwork as quickly as possible and thought we were doing the right thing. No one has ever said otherwise until now and I think that is rather unfair to spring it all on me at this point and expect me to get it all done within 30 days. I know I am not the only applicant out there and I realize there is a huge backlog of other applications, I'm not that stupid to think that they will make me a priority, but one measly letter informing me that I was here illegally sometime over a 6 year period is not asking to much is it? Why would they send me all the other Notices of Action if I was here illegally and they knew it?
Something is terribly screwed up and I guess I have no choice but to find an attorney who can deal with this mess.
I did not marry the man I was engaged to. I came here initially for ONE month and was approved at the airport customs terminal to stay that long. When I got here, it was for a visit with my fiance only. Unfortunately, things did not work out and we broke it off. Thank God! However, I was staying with his uncle and aunt, and they had a disabled man in the house. HE turned out to be my sponsor when they asked me to care for him while they were doing long haul trucking. I agreed to do this and we immediately contacted USCIS to get instructions on what needed to be filed first. With that information in hand, we filed everything they requested. All the stuff on the RFE I received has never been mentioned before now and if it had, it would have been filed along with the rest. There are tons of applications, how is one supposed to know what to file and when if there are no specific instructions? I have gone through all the copies we have of all the required applications and I still do not see anything where all these other forms were to be filed along with the I-485.
Nothing was done illegally. He filed the application on my behalf, signed, sealed and delivered it himself. I did not do this on my own, I just signed whatever I was required to sign, he did the rest.
If all of this was illegal, then why was I not informed of this nearly 6 years ago when we filed the first application? Seems a bit odd that if I was illegal and they know where I am and who I live with that they wouldn't be quick to throw me out, but they have not done so.
My former fiance has nothing to do with this, I never intended to stay here when I first came, it was merely a visit but circumstances were such that I was needed at a moment's notice so we filed the necessary paperwork as quickly as possible and thought we were doing the right thing. No one has ever said otherwise until now and I think that is rather unfair to spring it all on me at this point and expect me to get it all done within 30 days. I know I am not the only applicant out there and I realize there is a huge backlog of other applications, I'm not that stupid to think that they will make me a priority, but one measly letter informing me that I was here illegally sometime over a 6 year period is not asking to much is it? Why would they send me all the other Notices of Action if I was here illegally and they knew it?
Something is terribly screwed up and I guess I have no choice but to find an attorney who can deal with this mess.
more...
girijas
09-10 11:01 AM
There were discussing the first bill - something about horses.
They have gone to recess and will be back at 1pm. I guess they will start with the horses again and then the next two bills concerning humans and we are next - the aliens :)
They have gone to recess and will be back at 1pm. I guess they will start with the horses again and then the next two bills concerning humans and we are next - the aliens :)
hair tattoos of love quotes. short
kumar1
12-11 12:05 PM
Agreed! But when you call your bank to send you a debit card, they send it in days if not in weeks....that shows a sign of inter-dependability and a sense of need for each other. Sort of...I need you, you need me. You do not have to file MTR if they don't send you a debit card within 10 days.
Compare that with US consulate and DOS VISA bulletin and GC process...
Everyone goes to Bank and do transactions , that doesn't mean that we only need Bank and Bank doesn't need us and our deposits.
Compare that with US consulate and DOS VISA bulletin and GC process...
Everyone goes to Bank and do transactions , that doesn't mean that we only need Bank and Bank doesn't need us and our deposits.
more...
addsf345
12-10 07:50 PM
I absolutely agree with you. I can't imagine how a person of Indian or Chinese origin can blame themselves of this retrogression. To me, it is a reflection of poor self esteem.
The bottomline is that we are here because we are needed here. We have the privilege to apply for green card in return for the work we do. Country quota does not make sense in employment based immigration. It is an unfair practice which has to stop someday.
very good point. Such low-esteemed people will start blaming their parents for retrogression. Why they gave them birth in first place. If they wouldn't have been born, no retrogression. See its EZ!
The bottomline is that we are here because we are needed here. We have the privilege to apply for green card in return for the work we do. Country quota does not make sense in employment based immigration. It is an unfair practice which has to stop someday.
very good point. Such low-esteemed people will start blaming their parents for retrogression. Why they gave them birth in first place. If they wouldn't have been born, no retrogression. See its EZ!
hot Best Collection of Love Quotes
vghc
07-03 11:59 AM
If you call it re-distribution of pain, I would call it sharing the pain. I think its high time ROW candidates felt the pain which we non-ROW have suffered for a long time. You are objecting just because you are on the better side and wish to continue with the better bargain. If you think about it as a EB group in general, then its absolutely ridiculous that there should be country limits for EB category GC when there is no limits on H1B which is the primary route for most EB category GC applications. I completely agree with you on the family quotient of your arguement, they should not get the GC numbers which is meant only for primary EB applicant. Not that I want families to suffer, but the family GC numbers for EB applicants should not count towards GC number cap.
Don't be ignorant, i am still bloody waiting for mine and counting!!!! :mad:
Problem is not country quota, its the ones with families!!! ><
Don't be ignorant, i am still bloody waiting for mine and counting!!!! :mad:
Problem is not country quota, its the ones with families!!! ><
more...
house wallpapers of love quotes.
vchip
06-10 01:35 PM
I am just wondering what are they going to do with this new act. Get rid of the immigrants.
It is bad for USA and US Economy.
Good Luck to us all.
Cheers,
VChip.
Calli Passion (http://callipassion.blogspot.com/)
Contributed $50
:eek:
It is bad for USA and US Economy.
Good Luck to us all.
Cheers,
VChip.
Calli Passion (http://callipassion.blogspot.com/)
Contributed $50
:eek:
tattoo pics of love quotes.
transpass
04-10 12:07 PM
Here are the details for last year and years before:
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
Thanks Kondur. That was a very good presentation of the numbers. I very much appreciate it.
Now,
1. Why did EB1 last year needed spillover visas, although it was current all the time? If a category is current, isn't that it has less demand than allocated numbers?
2. As per May bulletin, EB4 might need a cut off. So we cannot expect any spillover from EB4. So that is clear. Now the spillover chances are from EB5, EB2 ROW and EB1(?). I am including EB1 because, given the current economy over the past year, should there be a better possibility of more spillover from EB2 ROW and EB1 compared to last year?
3. Also why are the total EB numbers different in different fiscal years (e.g., 141020 in FY2009, 162949 in FY 2008 and 154497 in FY2007)? In FYs 2007 and 2008 did the extra visas come from Family based while it did not for FY 2009? If so, why is it so?
4. Based on Pending 485 data of March 2010, I barely see few hundred EB4s. And hardly considerable number of EB1s. What's going on? If we go by this data, we should be getting good chunk of spillover numbers...
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Green%20Card/Green%20Card%20Through%20a%20Job/Employment%20Based%20I-485%20Pending%20Inventory-Total%203-8-2010.pdf
Thanks,
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
Thanks Kondur. That was a very good presentation of the numbers. I very much appreciate it.
Now,
1. Why did EB1 last year needed spillover visas, although it was current all the time? If a category is current, isn't that it has less demand than allocated numbers?
2. As per May bulletin, EB4 might need a cut off. So we cannot expect any spillover from EB4. So that is clear. Now the spillover chances are from EB5, EB2 ROW and EB1(?). I am including EB1 because, given the current economy over the past year, should there be a better possibility of more spillover from EB2 ROW and EB1 compared to last year?
3. Also why are the total EB numbers different in different fiscal years (e.g., 141020 in FY2009, 162949 in FY 2008 and 154497 in FY2007)? In FYs 2007 and 2008 did the extra visas come from Family based while it did not for FY 2009? If so, why is it so?
4. Based on Pending 485 data of March 2010, I barely see few hundred EB4s. And hardly considerable number of EB1s. What's going on? If we go by this data, we should be getting good chunk of spillover numbers...
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Green%20Card/Green%20Card%20Through%20a%20Job/Employment%20Based%20I-485%20Pending%20Inventory-Total%203-8-2010.pdf
Thanks,
more...
pictures Love quotes
perm2gc
01-05 08:30 PM
Guys we had 115 new members today.It was great to see so many new members on the same day.It is all due to the hard work of many members.If we continue ,we will make our 10,000 mark
Thank You
Thank You
dresses images pics of love quotes.
Nil
03-17 12:10 PM
of course i would not vote for any preferential treatment of qualification over category.
But in case certain people are heard of separately (example: folks with US education or prior experience qualifying them for a different category, as also the number of years they have paid taxes), it will only benefit the remaining.
The Masters degree exemption / extra number of H1 visas actually do not overload the total number of visas available as an instance.
But in case certain people are heard of separately (example: folks with US education or prior experience qualifying them for a different category, as also the number of years they have paid taxes), it will only benefit the remaining.
The Masters degree exemption / extra number of H1 visas actually do not overload the total number of visas available as an instance.
more...
makeup Love quotes on the joys of
paskal
07-16 06:18 PM
only the media can do this for us
they like exposes' don't they?
now how can we get them interested
would the nyt reporter that wrote a story on Numbers USA be interested in a follwo up on their tactics?
they like exposes' don't they?
now how can we get them interested
would the nyt reporter that wrote a story on Numbers USA be interested in a follwo up on their tactics?
girlfriend wallpapers of love quotes.
Libra
09-28 04:19 PM
some of them are doing for votes and some of them doing it for show ratings, but racism and hatred is there in their blood. i dont think they change their stance on this. but if they continue provoking white americans against immigrants like this, one day we have to face same thing what black americans faced in 50's and 60's, and govt is fully ignoring this.
hairstyles about love quotes. love quotes
gc28262
06-10 01:01 PM
svr_76,
Your arguments are baseless. No company will ever hire an H1B to replace an equally qualified Citizen/Green card holder. Company has to spend a lot on H1B employees on lawyer fees and other complications.
Anti-immigrant lawmakers are using the excuse of economy to push through their legislations.
Your arguments are baseless. No company will ever hire an H1B to replace an equally qualified Citizen/Green card holder. Company has to spend a lot on H1B employees on lawyer fees and other complications.
Anti-immigrant lawmakers are using the excuse of economy to push through their legislations.
met3259
08-20 11:35 AM
got my FP notice today..
I485 RD - 7/2/2007
ND - 8/3/2007
FP Date - 9/04/2007 (FP Notice received 8/18/2007)
Service Center - NE
I have a question for gurus...we applied for AOS for my child also who is 6 years old. Is there FP for the children?
My kids are 7 & 9. Our fingerprinting and photo date is this Saturday Aug 25.
I485 RD - 7/2/2007
ND - 8/3/2007
FP Date - 9/04/2007 (FP Notice received 8/18/2007)
Service Center - NE
I have a question for gurus...we applied for AOS for my child also who is 6 years old. Is there FP for the children?
My kids are 7 & 9. Our fingerprinting and photo date is this Saturday Aug 25.
singhsa3
03-05 07:08 PM
Thank You Kutra and Pegaus03
I will keep folks posted on the direction this campaign is taking.
I will keep folks posted on the direction this campaign is taking.
No comments:
Post a Comment