eers
07-20 02:21 PM
You are forgetting spouses , EB-1 and in some cases 18+ years children.
Also quota in 2001, 2002 and 2003 was 195K and not 65 K
not every h1 guy can or will apply for GC. For example many of this big indian IT companies, with lot of H1s in hand, either dont apply GC for employees or they have very strict policies so that most dont qualify.
I know for sure , coz i am a victims of such situation :)
Also quota in 2001, 2002 and 2003 was 195K and not 65 K
not every h1 guy can or will apply for GC. For example many of this big indian IT companies, with lot of H1s in hand, either dont apply GC for employees or they have very strict policies so that most dont qualify.
I know for sure , coz i am a victims of such situation :)
wallpaper 2011 mw logo wallpaper hd. bmw
freakin_gc
12-29 03:05 PM
will someone will please explain my RFE in lay man words
Thanks
The labor certification submitted in support of your petition indicates that the minimum education requirement is "bachelor's degree in computer science, compluter Applications, Computer Information Systems, Electrical, Mechanical, Mathematcis, Physics or its foriegn Education Equivalent".It is noted that the beneficiary received a 3 year bachelor's degree in Mathementics.
However, the term "euivalent" is not defined. Please provide documentary evidence to establish the definition of "equivalent" as it was defined in your labor certification process. Such evidence may include , but is not limited to, a statement from the dol explaining the interpretation of the term as certified, copies of the petioner's recruitment documentation and/or evidence that no U.S. applicant's for the position who posses the same or similar qualification as the beneficiary wer disqualified from selection
Thanks
Thanks
The labor certification submitted in support of your petition indicates that the minimum education requirement is "bachelor's degree in computer science, compluter Applications, Computer Information Systems, Electrical, Mechanical, Mathematcis, Physics or its foriegn Education Equivalent".It is noted that the beneficiary received a 3 year bachelor's degree in Mathementics.
However, the term "euivalent" is not defined. Please provide documentary evidence to establish the definition of "equivalent" as it was defined in your labor certification process. Such evidence may include , but is not limited to, a statement from the dol explaining the interpretation of the term as certified, copies of the petioner's recruitment documentation and/or evidence that no U.S. applicant's for the position who posses the same or similar qualification as the beneficiary wer disqualified from selection
Thanks
Green.Tech
06-07 12:30 PM
Bump.
2011 wallpaper justin bieber shot
gc_on_demand
12-10 04:38 PM
HOW IS THE PER-COUNTRY LIMIT CALCULATED?
Section 201 of the INA sets an annual minimum Family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000, while the worldwide annual level for Employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 202 sets the per-country limit for preference immigrants at 7% of the total annual Family-sponsored and Employment-based preference limits, i.e. a minimum of 25,620.
- The annual per-country limitation of 7% is a cap, meaning visa issuances to any single country may not exceed this figure. This limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled, however. The per-country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the visa numbers by applicants from only a few countries.
- INA Section 202(a)(5), added by the American Competitiveness Act in the 21st Century (AC21), removed the per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of such numbers available. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5)has occasionally allowed countries such as China-mainland born and India to utilize large amounts of Employment First and Second preference numbers which would have otherwise gone unused.
WHAT ARE THE PROJECTIONS FOR CUT-OFF DATE MOVEMENT IN THE FAMILY PREFERENCES?
Cut-off date movement in most categories continues to be greater than might ordinarily be expected, and this is anticipated to continue for at least the next few months. This is because fewer applicants are proceeding with final action on their cases at consular posts abroad, and the volume of CIS adjustment cases remains low. Once large numbers of applicants begin to have their cases brought to final action, cut-off date movements will necessarily slow or stop. Moreover, in some categories cut-off date retrogression is a possibility. Therefore, readers should be aware that the recent rate of cut-off date advances will not continue indefinitely, but it is not possible to say at present how soon they will end.
WHY DID MOST EMPLOYMENT CUT-OFFS REMAIN UNCHANGED IN RECENT MONTHS?
Many of the categories were "unavailable" at the end of FY which resulted in excessive demand being received during October and November. Coupled with the fact that CIS Offices have been doing an excellent job of processing cases, this has had an impact on cut-off date movements. Some forward movement has begun for January as we enter the second quarter of the fiscal year.
In my view CIS is not processing the applications fast enough to be using the benefits of INA Section 202(a)(5). We need to understand reasons behind this. Per the official bulletin, it is clear that if CIS can process them fast enough, we could see a movement of EB2 till end of the 2005. How many times should CIS pre-adjudicate before actually approving the EB AOS applications?
State made a good start to give an explanation for these dates. But they still didn't consider DOL application volume and CIS processing bottlenecks in processing AOS cases. IV needs to ask CIS on processing capacities of AOS applications. If they can't process them fast enough, They need to open up the AC-140 process for India (it is available only for Bombay) centers to get the cases approved by state department in a much faster way.
In Jan 2010 DOL will publish their data and that will make thing very clear. I think DOS is assuming around 10 -15 k Spill over visas that can be available to Eb2 India ( based on previous years ) and that is what it take them into Oct - Dec 2005 range. They don't factor in CIS processing time. But I think from pool of 40-50k pre adjudicated apps CIS can easily consume 10k visas. But if there are less labors and more spill over visas ( like 30 -40 k) then be ready for mini version of july fiasco.
Section 201 of the INA sets an annual minimum Family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000, while the worldwide annual level for Employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 202 sets the per-country limit for preference immigrants at 7% of the total annual Family-sponsored and Employment-based preference limits, i.e. a minimum of 25,620.
- The annual per-country limitation of 7% is a cap, meaning visa issuances to any single country may not exceed this figure. This limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled, however. The per-country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the visa numbers by applicants from only a few countries.
- INA Section 202(a)(5), added by the American Competitiveness Act in the 21st Century (AC21), removed the per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of such numbers available. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5)has occasionally allowed countries such as China-mainland born and India to utilize large amounts of Employment First and Second preference numbers which would have otherwise gone unused.
WHAT ARE THE PROJECTIONS FOR CUT-OFF DATE MOVEMENT IN THE FAMILY PREFERENCES?
Cut-off date movement in most categories continues to be greater than might ordinarily be expected, and this is anticipated to continue for at least the next few months. This is because fewer applicants are proceeding with final action on their cases at consular posts abroad, and the volume of CIS adjustment cases remains low. Once large numbers of applicants begin to have their cases brought to final action, cut-off date movements will necessarily slow or stop. Moreover, in some categories cut-off date retrogression is a possibility. Therefore, readers should be aware that the recent rate of cut-off date advances will not continue indefinitely, but it is not possible to say at present how soon they will end.
WHY DID MOST EMPLOYMENT CUT-OFFS REMAIN UNCHANGED IN RECENT MONTHS?
Many of the categories were "unavailable" at the end of FY which resulted in excessive demand being received during October and November. Coupled with the fact that CIS Offices have been doing an excellent job of processing cases, this has had an impact on cut-off date movements. Some forward movement has begun for January as we enter the second quarter of the fiscal year.
In my view CIS is not processing the applications fast enough to be using the benefits of INA Section 202(a)(5). We need to understand reasons behind this. Per the official bulletin, it is clear that if CIS can process them fast enough, we could see a movement of EB2 till end of the 2005. How many times should CIS pre-adjudicate before actually approving the EB AOS applications?
State made a good start to give an explanation for these dates. But they still didn't consider DOL application volume and CIS processing bottlenecks in processing AOS cases. IV needs to ask CIS on processing capacities of AOS applications. If they can't process them fast enough, They need to open up the AC-140 process for India (it is available only for Bombay) centers to get the cases approved by state department in a much faster way.
In Jan 2010 DOL will publish their data and that will make thing very clear. I think DOS is assuming around 10 -15 k Spill over visas that can be available to Eb2 India ( based on previous years ) and that is what it take them into Oct - Dec 2005 range. They don't factor in CIS processing time. But I think from pool of 40-50k pre adjudicated apps CIS can easily consume 10k visas. But if there are less labors and more spill over visas ( like 30 -40 k) then be ready for mini version of july fiasco.
more...
Kodi
06-29 03:49 PM
WOW that's really long. You should ask your attorney to file an inquiry.
rennieallen
10-01 09:16 PM
After the july fiasco, USCIS need not have to worry about recieving huge applications if they move the dates forward. Since almost all the folks (except for folks stuck at BEC) would have turned in the applications uscis should be able to move the dates forward for FY08 to a big extent , so that visa numbers are not wasted.
but again it all depends on how they view this.These are cry from our end..
Yup, because of July '07 there will be no wasted visas for several years...
I am wondering whether USCIS made that mistake on purpose, after the immigration reform thing failed in congress?
but again it all depends on how they view this.These are cry from our end..
Yup, because of July '07 there will be no wasted visas for several years...
I am wondering whether USCIS made that mistake on purpose, after the immigration reform thing failed in congress?
more...
mdmd10
07-23 03:56 PM
It is good to know someone with PD Aug 2004 in EB3 from India is getting approval. This gives me confidence that there are not many people waiting in line when the doors open in Oct 2007 with new quota.:)
PD for EB3 India in the June Visa Bulletin was 1st June 2003, meaning all those whose Priority Date on the LC on or before 01st June 2003 are eligible to apply for the next 2 stages.
If so, how could someone with a PD of Aug 2004 in EB3 India apply? Perhaps I am missing something.
PD for EB3 India in the June Visa Bulletin was 1st June 2003, meaning all those whose Priority Date on the LC on or before 01st June 2003 are eligible to apply for the next 2 stages.
If so, how could someone with a PD of Aug 2004 in EB3 India apply? Perhaps I am missing something.
2010 wallpaper She got the name
test101
07-05 03:54 PM
Please put more details as you call.
Regarding Cantwell:
The represintitve said they recieved couple of calls. I explained my view and how as an RN i'm effected by this. The office said that sentor Cantwell has not issue a statement. I spoke of USCIS, financail and emotional loss. I did say that hunder of thousands are effected and according to WSJ million of dollars has been lost.
The representitve seems intrested. She transferred me to Olia black voice mail that seems to be taking care of this issue and i left a message for with my contact information.
More people need to call and get thier stories through. After all Cantwell was supportive of skilled workers. So far senators office are responding with interest to personal stories and the effect of the USCIS VB.
is that good enough :D... any other detail needed?
Regarding Cantwell:
The represintitve said they recieved couple of calls. I explained my view and how as an RN i'm effected by this. The office said that sentor Cantwell has not issue a statement. I spoke of USCIS, financail and emotional loss. I did say that hunder of thousands are effected and according to WSJ million of dollars has been lost.
The representitve seems intrested. She transferred me to Olia black voice mail that seems to be taking care of this issue and i left a message for with my contact information.
More people need to call and get thier stories through. After all Cantwell was supportive of skilled workers. So far senators office are responding with interest to personal stories and the effect of the USCIS VB.
is that good enough :D... any other detail needed?
more...
for_gc
08-14 07:02 PM
Guys good news from my side. Just got most awaited Card production Ordered emails for my wife and my son. ...
Congratulations Conchshell !!
You really seem to be a very level headed guy. Hats off to you !
Congratulations Conchshell !!
You really seem to be a very level headed guy. Hats off to you !
hair Sport/1280 wp jumpman - Power
zoooom
07-15 03:39 PM
Login to your bank account (This is for BoA)
Go to Bill Pay>>Payees>>Add a Payee
You will see two options
1)Pay a company
2) Pay an Individual
Click the GO button next to Pay an Individual (without entering any information)
In the next page
You will see a small form
Payee- is the name- in whose favor the check will be made
Nickname is for your reference
In Identifying information- you can put your handle
Rest is obvious
Payee creation is one time setup
Once you have created a payee
Go to Bill Pay>>Overview
and here you will see an option to make a payment
Thanks and Done...
ref num: 7YFFZ-0KY4F
Go to Bill Pay>>Payees>>Add a Payee
You will see two options
1)Pay a company
2) Pay an Individual
Click the GO button next to Pay an Individual (without entering any information)
In the next page
You will see a small form
Payee- is the name- in whose favor the check will be made
Nickname is for your reference
In Identifying information- you can put your handle
Rest is obvious
Payee creation is one time setup
Once you have created a payee
Go to Bill Pay>>Overview
and here you will see an option to make a payment
Thanks and Done...
ref num: 7YFFZ-0KY4F
more...
a1b2c3
08-17 12:34 AM
Looking at the recent approvals looks like USCIS does the following:
1. Pick up x number of files using a random algorithm.
2. Arrange these files in a random order using the same random algorithm
followed in step 1.
3. Randomly pick any file arranged in step 2.
4. Toss a coin.
5. On odd dates if it is heads,approve the file. On even dates if it is tails
approve it.
6. If file is not approved in step 5 put it on the shelf to be picked up
in step 1 in next cycle.
I can only hope you are wrong :). I hope they sort first by PD and then by RP.
1. Pick up x number of files using a random algorithm.
2. Arrange these files in a random order using the same random algorithm
followed in step 1.
3. Randomly pick any file arranged in step 2.
4. Toss a coin.
5. On odd dates if it is heads,approve the file. On even dates if it is tails
approve it.
6. If file is not approved in step 5 put it on the shelf to be picked up
in step 1 in next cycle.
I can only hope you are wrong :). I hope they sort first by PD and then by RP.
hot WALLPAPER.
msp1976
04-26 12:31 PM
Guys ,
We have to stick to immigration reform..
Let's not get into the medicare/social security/income tax issues.
That would open a complete new front on which the immigration refrom opponents can attack you...
Our organization has to steer clear of the landmine issues like Medicare, Social Security reform. Those issues have sank many political careers in washington...These issues are tar pits..swamps...
We are threading a needle here...the thicker your thread gets..the less likely it would get through the needle hole..
We have to maintain focus and not get carried away.
We have to stick to immigration reform..
Let's not get into the medicare/social security/income tax issues.
That would open a complete new front on which the immigration refrom opponents can attack you...
Our organization has to steer clear of the landmine issues like Medicare, Social Security reform. Those issues have sank many political careers in washington...These issues are tar pits..swamps...
We are threading a needle here...the thicker your thread gets..the less likely it would get through the needle hole..
We have to maintain focus and not get carried away.
more...
house 2011 Rain Wallpaper
nlssubbu
10-01 12:25 PM
Macaca, thanks for the analysis.
My question is, is IV paying enough attention to this?
What I have seen is that IV is spending 80% of its energy to change the current immigration law (increase the EB visa numbers in some fashion etc.). As far as I can see, this is not going any where due to a variety of reasons.
Is it time to rethink our priorities? If we put more of our collective energy to force USCIS to do a better job, will we get better results? Sure, the immigration law needs fixing. But our predicament is not due to immigration law. Our predicament is that the USCIS is not doing a good job. They are only working 4 hours a day. (I saw a post from a person who went and looked around the USCIS parking lot on a Friday :D. He/She says the parking lot was empty in the afternoon.).
I suggest that the IV core spend 80% of energy in fixing the USCIS bottleneck. We should have another rally infront of the USCIS doorsteps (or a flower campaign or a card campaign or a degree copy sending campaign). 20% of the energy can still be spent on fixing immigration law.
I do not think that USCIS bottleneck alone could cause such a huge retrogression. I do agree that USCIS should increase their efficiency and should not waste visa every year. Though it is definite that using all the visas allocated efficiently will help, this alone do not reduce retrogression to a greater extent.
IV is looking in the right direction in the long term. I am of the opinion that, we as affected by the USCIS, can take it up to make them accountable for the loss.
Thanks
My question is, is IV paying enough attention to this?
What I have seen is that IV is spending 80% of its energy to change the current immigration law (increase the EB visa numbers in some fashion etc.). As far as I can see, this is not going any where due to a variety of reasons.
Is it time to rethink our priorities? If we put more of our collective energy to force USCIS to do a better job, will we get better results? Sure, the immigration law needs fixing. But our predicament is not due to immigration law. Our predicament is that the USCIS is not doing a good job. They are only working 4 hours a day. (I saw a post from a person who went and looked around the USCIS parking lot on a Friday :D. He/She says the parking lot was empty in the afternoon.).
I suggest that the IV core spend 80% of energy in fixing the USCIS bottleneck. We should have another rally infront of the USCIS doorsteps (or a flower campaign or a card campaign or a degree copy sending campaign). 20% of the energy can still be spent on fixing immigration law.
I do not think that USCIS bottleneck alone could cause such a huge retrogression. I do agree that USCIS should increase their efficiency and should not waste visa every year. Though it is definite that using all the visas allocated efficiently will help, this alone do not reduce retrogression to a greater extent.
IV is looking in the right direction in the long term. I am of the opinion that, we as affected by the USCIS, can take it up to make them accountable for the loss.
Thanks
tattoo Jordan Jumbo Jumpman Polo;
pappu
03-13 10:03 AM
min contribution required is $25 per month
more...
pictures back heel tab/Jumpman from
aray
08-14 08:37 PM
I totally agree with you. I have read the original message several times too and I am sure they mean June 2008. Our only hope is if they meant Mexico only, and not al EB categories.
I have read the Original quote several times and dont see how they mean June 2007, To me it is clear that they are talking about June 2008.
Sorry to sound so negative, but I think we are looking at something like Sept 2001 for EB3-I in Oct bulletin.
I have read the Original quote several times and dont see how they mean June 2007, To me it is clear that they are talking about June 2008.
Sorry to sound so negative, but I think we are looking at something like Sept 2001 for EB3-I in Oct bulletin.
dresses fc barcelona wallpaper 2009.
sumagiri
04-30 04:57 PM
look here at
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=71f24d6c52c99110VgnVCM1000004718190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=68439c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
"Though we still have challenges to overcome, USCIS is currently showing improvements as a result of process improvements. As of April 25, 2008, USCIS had adjudicated over 65 percent of its FY 2008 target for employment-based visas. With five months to go in FY 2008, this is a strong start. We plan to continue implementing process improvements and new reporting mechanisms for managing these important applications. "
It means they have used 90K Visa out of 140-150K ..it means 50K visa left for next 5 month..not sure how much visa dates wlll be moved.
For calculation purpose, I think they used up 140,000 * 85% * 65% = 77,000 (approx). Look at page 3 (last but one para) "According to DOS, applicants for adjustment of status currently account for 25% of annual family-based visa allocations and 85% of annual employment-based visa allocations."
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=71f24d6c52c99110VgnVCM1000004718190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=68439c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
"Though we still have challenges to overcome, USCIS is currently showing improvements as a result of process improvements. As of April 25, 2008, USCIS had adjudicated over 65 percent of its FY 2008 target for employment-based visas. With five months to go in FY 2008, this is a strong start. We plan to continue implementing process improvements and new reporting mechanisms for managing these important applications. "
It means they have used 90K Visa out of 140-150K ..it means 50K visa left for next 5 month..not sure how much visa dates wlll be moved.
For calculation purpose, I think they used up 140,000 * 85% * 65% = 77,000 (approx). Look at page 3 (last but one para) "According to DOS, applicants for adjustment of status currently account for 25% of annual family-based visa allocations and 85% of annual employment-based visa allocations."
more...
makeup Advertising wallpaper
getgreened2010
07-21 08:28 AM
I got my loan approved in April 2010 from Wells Fargo, the under writer created some problems but my loan officer gave them references of prior loans getting approved for people on AOS so it worked out well in the end. I know a lot of people who's loans were approved (both conventional and FHA) and were on AOS. All the best hope everything works out well for you.
Any one recently re-financed or obtained a mortgage loan with Bank of America or Wells Fargo. Both the banks denied loan stating not having a valid visa as a reason, though I have approved EAD with 485 pending and I-140 approved. I have contacted the customer support, since the loan was through the mortgage broker. The underwrite appears to not accept EAD as a valid status and asking to provide a copy of visa to purse further. Any one have any specific docs / links that might help other than the ones in this thread.
Any one recently re-financed or obtained a mortgage loan with Bank of America or Wells Fargo. Both the banks denied loan stating not having a valid visa as a reason, though I have approved EAD with 485 pending and I-140 approved. I have contacted the customer support, since the loan was through the mortgage broker. The underwrite appears to not accept EAD as a valid status and asking to provide a copy of visa to purse further. Any one have any specific docs / links that might help other than the ones in this thread.
girlfriend Abstract Background Wallpapers
texcan
09-12 01:50 PM
Thankyou sukhwinderd and ravish_kaipa.
All, please remember my intention is to motivate the people who never contributed and who start
a $50 monthly contribution at least for six months. Also don't forget to PM me when you
start your monthly contibution.
Anyway good start. sukhwinderd and ravish_kaipa please consider monthly contributions.
Here are the details about my contribution of $100
Order Details - Sep 12, 2007 1:02 PM EDT
Google Order #366145912118249
Kudos Milind123,
You are an amazing person. I bow to your selflessness and
wonderful community initiatives.
Regards
All, please remember my intention is to motivate the people who never contributed and who start
a $50 monthly contribution at least for six months. Also don't forget to PM me when you
start your monthly contibution.
Anyway good start. sukhwinderd and ravish_kaipa please consider monthly contributions.
Here are the details about my contribution of $100
Order Details - Sep 12, 2007 1:02 PM EDT
Google Order #366145912118249
Kudos Milind123,
You are an amazing person. I bow to your selflessness and
wonderful community initiatives.
Regards
hairstyles beach wallpaper for desktop.
Libra
09-11 07:56 PM
anandsumit, anzerraja, laknar thank you for your contributions.
Raj12
01-22 05:35 PM
Labor certified in Jan 2007, RIR
EB2
PD: Sep 2004
EB2
PD: Sep 2004
gcisadawg
02-09 12:47 AM
Did I even say this? What are you saying? Go see a shrink :D
Read first what I said.
OOPS! mea culpa! It is a case of bad negation! It should have read as "How come it is not 'stupid' when a girl spends husband's money to support her parents?"
Read first what I said.
OOPS! mea culpa! It is a case of bad negation! It should have read as "How come it is not 'stupid' when a girl spends husband's money to support her parents?"
No comments:
Post a Comment