immi2006
09-26 10:22 AM
Do you think Lawyers used the rally to further their business and had IV as a front to project that as a H1 CAP increase ?
1) Lawyers would not do anything for free
2) At the very best - we need to have another rally in Silicon Valley to highlight
our cause with immeiate Effect, otherwise, folks can twist it as H1 rally.
We will have to explicity state Rally for
Green Cards for tax paying professionals !
What do you all think ? - Do u think we can mobilise folks for this saturday ?
We need to keep the momentum high in public than in Blogs and IV site,.
1) Lawyers would not do anything for free
2) At the very best - we need to have another rally in Silicon Valley to highlight
our cause with immeiate Effect, otherwise, folks can twist it as H1 rally.
We will have to explicity state Rally for
Green Cards for tax paying professionals !
What do you all think ? - Do u think we can mobilise folks for this saturday ?
We need to keep the momentum high in public than in Blogs and IV site,.
wallpaper National Geographic Wallpaper
boppana99
09-26 11:17 AM
Just sent an email that the rally was to put forward the delays enforced by USCIS for the green cards and not for the H-1B cap increase. Gave the IV link to check for the rally facts.
pappu
07-26 10:28 AM
are they encouraging prinicipal aliens to "batter" spouses, so that they will be given permission to work:) Isn't spouses not able to work a pain by itself? Geez
btw law states that domestic violence is a deportable offence. it is taken seriously by uscis. even convicted greencard holders are deported.
btw law states that domestic violence is a deportable offence. it is taken seriously by uscis. even convicted greencard holders are deported.
2011 National Geographic Wallpaper
alex99
11-01 12:33 PM
Bumping..
more...
rajuram
03-23 04:02 PM
Economy was slow in 2001 -02, how come there are so many people from that time?
mlvats
06-10 06:22 PM
My wife is working with a company "A" in India and have filed for H1 through a company "B" in USA.
Currently she does not have any VISA.
Can her current company "A" apply for L1 and she can come to USA on L1?
And suppose she can come to US on L1 through company "A", What happens if her H1 gets approved through Company "B", Can she still continue
working for Comapny "A".?
Thanks in Advance.
-Moti
Currently she does not have any VISA.
Can her current company "A" apply for L1 and she can come to USA on L1?
And suppose she can come to US on L1 through company "A", What happens if her H1 gets approved through Company "B", Can she still continue
working for Comapny "A".?
Thanks in Advance.
-Moti
more...
hasil
03-19 06:36 PM
Before EB2 moves faster, every EB3 guy will get a new LC and jump in to EB2 line. Then EB3 line will be little lighter and moves a little faster. Then people will start asking like this - "Can we go back to EB3 line ? Can we have 3rd EB3 LC ( like LC sells in walmart) and another 485 ?" . Pretty much everyone wants to have 2 LC , 2 I-140 and 2 I-485 at any time. That way whichever category moves faster they will beat the system.
Then we come to this forum and wonder why there is so much backlog or why USCIS is so slow ( my favorite one).
This madness has to stop !
:)
Then we come to this forum and wonder why there is so much backlog or why USCIS is so slow ( my favorite one).
This madness has to stop !
:)
2010 National Geographic Wallpapers
sanju
04-04 03:30 PM
Your argument may be true only some extent. If you keep on asking more H1b and GC without meaningful reform of H1b then it won't sell in the congress and they will try to keep staus quo and you have to wait years to get gc. How do you resolve the problem of Cap reached within few days? Will congress accept unlimited H1bs? What is the solution for this?
Your posts seem to suggest that because we (collectively all of us on the forum) have not yet agreed to a �meaningful reform� of H-1b,that has prevented fixes to the green card process? Is that what has truly delayed fixing the current green card backlog?
Secondly, we do not have to choose between the one and the other i.e. we do not have to choose between supporting Durbin-Grassley bill and delay with the green card. Do you think that supporting Durbin-Grassley bill that contains absolutely nothing to fix green card delays will somehow speed up the green card process?
We (all of us when calling lawmakers) HAVE to differentiate between increase/decrease in H-1b and green card delays. H-1b is not our issue and we will be better of staying as far away from that issue as possible. If we have to call, then we should call in to support a bill that has our provisions, rather than a bill that has nothing for us or maybe stuff that would hurt us.
Your posts seem to suggest that because we (collectively all of us on the forum) have not yet agreed to a �meaningful reform� of H-1b,that has prevented fixes to the green card process? Is that what has truly delayed fixing the current green card backlog?
Secondly, we do not have to choose between the one and the other i.e. we do not have to choose between supporting Durbin-Grassley bill and delay with the green card. Do you think that supporting Durbin-Grassley bill that contains absolutely nothing to fix green card delays will somehow speed up the green card process?
We (all of us when calling lawmakers) HAVE to differentiate between increase/decrease in H-1b and green card delays. H-1b is not our issue and we will be better of staying as far away from that issue as possible. If we have to call, then we should call in to support a bill that has our provisions, rather than a bill that has nothing for us or maybe stuff that would hurt us.
more...
sledge_hammer
06-08 06:03 PM
Welcome to the club, China! :D
hair National Geographic Wallpaper
amitjoey
07-05 04:38 PM
Added my $100 towards our common dreams and goals! I still vote to keep this site free for everyone's benefit. Believe me ppl will come around..took me a while but as they say better late than never!
IV you have our support! United we stand!
Paypal Confirmation Number: 8GH00265XS5850731
PD: Aug 04
RD: ????
Thanks Rohit!.
IV you have our support! United we stand!
Paypal Confirmation Number: 8GH00265XS5850731
PD: Aug 04
RD: ????
Thanks Rohit!.
more...
tooclose
07-12 06:52 PM
Hi,
Can you point me to the source of the above? The reason why I ask this is because my priority date falls between March 01 and 07....So near, yet so far!
Thanks,
Same boat, my PD is 3-Mar-2006. Are there any chances that the Sep visa bulletin would atleast move by a month ?
Gurus post your thoughts...
Can you point me to the source of the above? The reason why I ask this is because my priority date falls between March 01 and 07....So near, yet so far!
Thanks,
Same boat, my PD is 3-Mar-2006. Are there any chances that the Sep visa bulletin would atleast move by a month ?
Gurus post your thoughts...
hot 1999 NGM National Geographic
crystal
07-16 05:52 PM
H-1Bs have an affirmative action preference ... What a shameful propaganda?
(4) Most H-1Bs are of a "protected" ethnic group, so H-1Bs have an affirmative action preference when competing with Americans for the same jobs.
.
(4) Most H-1Bs are of a "protected" ethnic group, so H-1Bs have an affirmative action preference when competing with Americans for the same jobs.
.
more...
house Wolf Desktop Wallpaper,
wc_user
10-13 12:13 PM
Hi,
The response to my RFE reached USCIS on 10/12 at 9 am and I haven't got any online status update as of now - 10/13 1 pm EST. Should I be worried or does it generally take them some time to update their records. Just want to make sure that the RFE reached USCIS since the due date for RFE response is coming up soon.
Thanks.
The response to my RFE reached USCIS on 10/12 at 9 am and I haven't got any online status update as of now - 10/13 1 pm EST. Should I be worried or does it generally take them some time to update their records. Just want to make sure that the RFE reached USCIS since the due date for RFE response is coming up soon.
Thanks.
tattoo National Geographic Wallpaper
indianindian2006
07-14 06:09 PM
This is aboslutly incorrect. Dont spread false information.
Here is the Q&A in USCIS memo abot changing employer before 180 days
Question 10. Should service centers or district offices deny portability cases on the sole basis that the alien has left his or her employment with the I-140 petitioner prior to the I-485 application pending for 180 days?
Answer: No. The basis for adjustment is not actual (current) employment but prospective employment. Since there is no requirement that the alien have ever been employed by the petitioner while the I-140 and/or I-485 was pending, the fact that an alien left the I-140 petitioner before the I-485 has been pending 180 days will not necessarily render the alien ineligible to port. However, in all cases an offer of employment must have been bona fide. This means that, as of the time the I-140 was filed and at the time of filing the I-485 if not filed concurrently, the I-140 petitioner must have had the intent to employ the beneficiary, and the alien must have intended to undertake the employment, upon adjustment. Adjudicators should not presume absence of such intent and may take the I-140 and supporting documents themselves as prima facie evidence of such intent, but in appropriate cases additional evidence or investigation may be appropriate
You are correct but his case could be that his employer cancelled his 140 which could damage his case more than the use of AC21 to change employers.
Here is the Q&A in USCIS memo abot changing employer before 180 days
Question 10. Should service centers or district offices deny portability cases on the sole basis that the alien has left his or her employment with the I-140 petitioner prior to the I-485 application pending for 180 days?
Answer: No. The basis for adjustment is not actual (current) employment but prospective employment. Since there is no requirement that the alien have ever been employed by the petitioner while the I-140 and/or I-485 was pending, the fact that an alien left the I-140 petitioner before the I-485 has been pending 180 days will not necessarily render the alien ineligible to port. However, in all cases an offer of employment must have been bona fide. This means that, as of the time the I-140 was filed and at the time of filing the I-485 if not filed concurrently, the I-140 petitioner must have had the intent to employ the beneficiary, and the alien must have intended to undertake the employment, upon adjustment. Adjudicators should not presume absence of such intent and may take the I-140 and supporting documents themselves as prima facie evidence of such intent, but in appropriate cases additional evidence or investigation may be appropriate
You are correct but his case could be that his employer cancelled his 140 which could damage his case more than the use of AC21 to change employers.
more...
pictures national geographic wallpapers
rayen
04-01 06:18 PM
Does anyone have the format of the employment letter? My attorney didn't request one even when I emailed him few time.
Form I-140 has an area to write the wages per week? The amount my attorney wrote is wages for the year. Is this ok?
Thank you.
USCIS � Texas Service Center
Attention: I-485 Unit
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Dear Sir/Madam
This letter is to confirm our intent to continue employing Mr. XXX on a full-time basis of 40 hours per week as an Oracle Systems Analyst with a wage of $XX.XX per hour upon obtaining his U.S.Permanent Residence. All of the terms and conditions of the employment-based labor certification continue to exist.
As an XXXXXX, his duties entail:
Job description( Detail)
Sincerely,
Name and Title of Signer
Form I-140 has an area to write the wages per week? The amount my attorney wrote is wages for the year. Is this ok?
Thank you.
USCIS � Texas Service Center
Attention: I-485 Unit
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Dear Sir/Madam
This letter is to confirm our intent to continue employing Mr. XXX on a full-time basis of 40 hours per week as an Oracle Systems Analyst with a wage of $XX.XX per hour upon obtaining his U.S.Permanent Residence. All of the terms and conditions of the employment-based labor certification continue to exist.
As an XXXXXX, his duties entail:
Job description( Detail)
Sincerely,
Name and Title of Signer
dresses National Geographic Wallpapers
virginian99
06-13 01:05 PM
Looks like Cirus is comming back. we should plan for our EB provisions...
Sens. McConnell & Lott on verge of passing amnesty -- unless you get in their way
THE U.S. HOUSE TODAY is dealing with many important immigration matters as it amends the Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill. Your NumbersUSA Capitol Hill Team is following this closely. You can follow all amendments and votes on our special VOTE DAY page. We update at least by the hour. If you see something you want to support or oppose, don't hesitate to call your U.S. Rep.
TO BEST FIGHT THE SENATE AMNESTY, read Rosemary Jenks' short summary of all the key elements of the S. 1348 Bush/Kennedy amnesty bill as introduced. Scroll down to BACKGROUND INFORMATION.
Read short descriptions of all amendments the Senate has already passed to modify the bill. Scroll down to FINISHED VOTES.
Friends,
I regret to tell you that our victory of last Thursday night has eroded to almost nothing by this morning.
Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and Senate Republican Whip Trent Lott of Mississippi have succeeded in twisting nearly enough GOP arms to assure Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) that they can deliver the votes to pass his S. 1348 amnesty for 12-20 million illegal aliens.
Here is the pitch that McConnell and Lott are said to be using -- and the pitch that only you can persuade Republican Senators to reject:
Lawmakers are being told that they must agree to vote for cloture on the amnesty in exchange for a chance to have some favorite amendments brought up OR they will lose a chance to "sit at the table" in final fashioning of this bill.
A senior GOP leadership aide confirmed that anti-amnesty Republicans are being told by Party leadership that they “need to get on board if they want to remain relevant.”
I have some actions related to Democratic Senators that I'll detail further in this email. But our most urgent work today is with GOP Senators.
NO MATTER HOW MANY TIMES YOU HAVE PHONED IN THE LAST MONTH, YOUR PHONE CALLS ARE DESPERATELY NEEDED TODAY.
CALL SENATORS IN D.C.
202-224-3121
(If you live in Mississippi and Kentucky, I've already sent you your action opportunities. You have to take responsibility for the two Senators who at this moment are competing for the title of America's No. 1 and No. 2 Enemy. I am sending this alert to you so you have the additional information that is in it.)
TELL GOP SENATORS TO REFUSE 'A SEAT AT THE TABLE' AND TO REMAIN 'RELEVANT' BY PROTECTING THE WORKERS AND VOTERS OF THEIR STATE
Call their offices and tell them you have heard of the 'take-it-or-leave-it' deal they are being offered and that your advice is:
"Refuse a Seat at The Table If All They're Serving Is Rancid Mush."
Tell them that permanently legalizing 12-20 million illegal aliens and giving them permanent access to our jobs is a dish not worth fussing over. No amount of seasoning or ingredient changing can make this dish palatable to the voters of your state.
Any amendment that would truly protect Americans would be killed by the Bush/Kennedy coalition.
No matter how many amendments are allowed for votes, the end result bill will be terrible -- maybe slightly less terrible than now, but still terrible. There is no point in trading away a YES vote on cloture for the chance to offer an amendment.
You must make it clear to every one of these Senators that they will be made to pay politically over and over the next year (maybe their whole careers) for a YES vote if this bill comes up again on cloture.
Remind them that Sen. McCain has seen his front-runner status in the Presidential primary race plummet because of his highly public support for this bill.
Why would any of these Senators want to carry around that same kind of baggage?
And tell your Senators that they have all the "relevance" they need by being the representative or your state in the U.S. Senate. They don't need George Bush or Karl Rove to give them relevance, especially if relevance has to come at the expense of principle.
EXPOSE AND CHALLENGE THE LIES THAT POLLS SHOW AMERICANS SUPPORT THIS AMNESTY
Yet more news media polls are being released purporting to show that the majority of the public supports this Senate amnesty bill. The big use of these polls by reporters and open-borders advocates is to supposedly prove that all of your phone calls are just a loud-mouthed minority.
The fact is that nearly all the media polls fail to offer people the choice of Attrition Through Enforcement.
When Americans are offered a choice between legalization, attrition or mass deportations, most Americans choose attrition. And an overhwelming portion choose either attrition or mass deportation.
You can find great backing of what I just said by going to our web page on polls.
OUR ARMY IS GROWING -- Let's Hold Back Disaster While We Recruit Another Army of Reinforcements
I hope you feel encouraged to know that another 4,081 Americans registered with NumbersUSA and immediately began faxing and phoning -- that was just yesterday, one day.
Day after day, the word is getting out. More and more Americans understand that they must take real action if they are to save their American quality of life.
We started the year with around 250,000 activist members. Barely a month ago, we hit the big 300,000 milestone. It looks like we will hit the 400,000 mark tomorrow!
In addition, we have a total email list of more than 1.5 million now.
Unfortunately, not everybody who connects, becomes a direct activist with us (although we assume they are having some influence among their friends and colleagues). And not all who register as activist members respond regularly to our Alerts. We know we probably need to have 2 million activist members to ensure that 500,000 are acting at any point. This is true of any organization. But we appreciate every one of you for whatever you are able to do. It all adds up to something strong.
Numbers of faxes you ordered the last two days:
Tuesday -- 89,776 faxes
Monday -- 61,647 faxes
HOLD ONTO OUR DEMOCRATIC ANTI-AMNESTY VOTES
It is imperative that we hold onto at least 9 of the 12 Democratic and Independent NO votes we got last Thursday on the cloture vote.
Phone these offices and urge them not to be taken in by the Republican leadership's pandering to Big Business lobbyists who are demanding to keep employing their 7-million-plus illegal workers and are demanding an amnesty for all the lawbreaking by the outlaw companies in the past.
Tell these Democrats that they are standing with the American workers on this and should be proud of their principled stand against Pres. Bush's dream of globalizing the American labor force.
THE 12 NON-REPUBLICANS WHO VOTED AGAINST AMNESTY LAST WEEK
(* Up for re-election in 2008)
* Baucus (D-Mont.)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-Calif.)
Byrd (D-WV)
Dorgan (D-ND)
* Landrieu (D-La.)
McCaskill (D-Mo.)
* Pryor (D-Ark.)
* Rockefeller(D-WV)
Sanders (I-Vt.)
Tester (D-Mont.)
Webb (D-Va.)
THE BASIC MATH
Last week, 45 Senators voted for cloture. It takes 60 votes for cloture to pass, thus ending a filibuster and allowing a final vote, which at this time would require at most 50 votes to pass.
The pro-amnesty Bush/Kennedy coalition has to persuade 15 Senators who voted NO last week to switch to YES if the cloture vote comes up again.
The only thing that can keep that from happening is an even larger outpouring of phone calls, faxes and local demonstrations at Senate offices, etc.
Sens. McConnell & Lott on verge of passing amnesty -- unless you get in their way
THE U.S. HOUSE TODAY is dealing with many important immigration matters as it amends the Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill. Your NumbersUSA Capitol Hill Team is following this closely. You can follow all amendments and votes on our special VOTE DAY page. We update at least by the hour. If you see something you want to support or oppose, don't hesitate to call your U.S. Rep.
TO BEST FIGHT THE SENATE AMNESTY, read Rosemary Jenks' short summary of all the key elements of the S. 1348 Bush/Kennedy amnesty bill as introduced. Scroll down to BACKGROUND INFORMATION.
Read short descriptions of all amendments the Senate has already passed to modify the bill. Scroll down to FINISHED VOTES.
Friends,
I regret to tell you that our victory of last Thursday night has eroded to almost nothing by this morning.
Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and Senate Republican Whip Trent Lott of Mississippi have succeeded in twisting nearly enough GOP arms to assure Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) that they can deliver the votes to pass his S. 1348 amnesty for 12-20 million illegal aliens.
Here is the pitch that McConnell and Lott are said to be using -- and the pitch that only you can persuade Republican Senators to reject:
Lawmakers are being told that they must agree to vote for cloture on the amnesty in exchange for a chance to have some favorite amendments brought up OR they will lose a chance to "sit at the table" in final fashioning of this bill.
A senior GOP leadership aide confirmed that anti-amnesty Republicans are being told by Party leadership that they “need to get on board if they want to remain relevant.”
I have some actions related to Democratic Senators that I'll detail further in this email. But our most urgent work today is with GOP Senators.
NO MATTER HOW MANY TIMES YOU HAVE PHONED IN THE LAST MONTH, YOUR PHONE CALLS ARE DESPERATELY NEEDED TODAY.
CALL SENATORS IN D.C.
202-224-3121
(If you live in Mississippi and Kentucky, I've already sent you your action opportunities. You have to take responsibility for the two Senators who at this moment are competing for the title of America's No. 1 and No. 2 Enemy. I am sending this alert to you so you have the additional information that is in it.)
TELL GOP SENATORS TO REFUSE 'A SEAT AT THE TABLE' AND TO REMAIN 'RELEVANT' BY PROTECTING THE WORKERS AND VOTERS OF THEIR STATE
Call their offices and tell them you have heard of the 'take-it-or-leave-it' deal they are being offered and that your advice is:
"Refuse a Seat at The Table If All They're Serving Is Rancid Mush."
Tell them that permanently legalizing 12-20 million illegal aliens and giving them permanent access to our jobs is a dish not worth fussing over. No amount of seasoning or ingredient changing can make this dish palatable to the voters of your state.
Any amendment that would truly protect Americans would be killed by the Bush/Kennedy coalition.
No matter how many amendments are allowed for votes, the end result bill will be terrible -- maybe slightly less terrible than now, but still terrible. There is no point in trading away a YES vote on cloture for the chance to offer an amendment.
You must make it clear to every one of these Senators that they will be made to pay politically over and over the next year (maybe their whole careers) for a YES vote if this bill comes up again on cloture.
Remind them that Sen. McCain has seen his front-runner status in the Presidential primary race plummet because of his highly public support for this bill.
Why would any of these Senators want to carry around that same kind of baggage?
And tell your Senators that they have all the "relevance" they need by being the representative or your state in the U.S. Senate. They don't need George Bush or Karl Rove to give them relevance, especially if relevance has to come at the expense of principle.
EXPOSE AND CHALLENGE THE LIES THAT POLLS SHOW AMERICANS SUPPORT THIS AMNESTY
Yet more news media polls are being released purporting to show that the majority of the public supports this Senate amnesty bill. The big use of these polls by reporters and open-borders advocates is to supposedly prove that all of your phone calls are just a loud-mouthed minority.
The fact is that nearly all the media polls fail to offer people the choice of Attrition Through Enforcement.
When Americans are offered a choice between legalization, attrition or mass deportations, most Americans choose attrition. And an overhwelming portion choose either attrition or mass deportation.
You can find great backing of what I just said by going to our web page on polls.
OUR ARMY IS GROWING -- Let's Hold Back Disaster While We Recruit Another Army of Reinforcements
I hope you feel encouraged to know that another 4,081 Americans registered with NumbersUSA and immediately began faxing and phoning -- that was just yesterday, one day.
Day after day, the word is getting out. More and more Americans understand that they must take real action if they are to save their American quality of life.
We started the year with around 250,000 activist members. Barely a month ago, we hit the big 300,000 milestone. It looks like we will hit the 400,000 mark tomorrow!
In addition, we have a total email list of more than 1.5 million now.
Unfortunately, not everybody who connects, becomes a direct activist with us (although we assume they are having some influence among their friends and colleagues). And not all who register as activist members respond regularly to our Alerts. We know we probably need to have 2 million activist members to ensure that 500,000 are acting at any point. This is true of any organization. But we appreciate every one of you for whatever you are able to do. It all adds up to something strong.
Numbers of faxes you ordered the last two days:
Tuesday -- 89,776 faxes
Monday -- 61,647 faxes
HOLD ONTO OUR DEMOCRATIC ANTI-AMNESTY VOTES
It is imperative that we hold onto at least 9 of the 12 Democratic and Independent NO votes we got last Thursday on the cloture vote.
Phone these offices and urge them not to be taken in by the Republican leadership's pandering to Big Business lobbyists who are demanding to keep employing their 7-million-plus illegal workers and are demanding an amnesty for all the lawbreaking by the outlaw companies in the past.
Tell these Democrats that they are standing with the American workers on this and should be proud of their principled stand against Pres. Bush's dream of globalizing the American labor force.
THE 12 NON-REPUBLICANS WHO VOTED AGAINST AMNESTY LAST WEEK
(* Up for re-election in 2008)
* Baucus (D-Mont.)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-Calif.)
Byrd (D-WV)
Dorgan (D-ND)
* Landrieu (D-La.)
McCaskill (D-Mo.)
* Pryor (D-Ark.)
* Rockefeller(D-WV)
Sanders (I-Vt.)
Tester (D-Mont.)
Webb (D-Va.)
THE BASIC MATH
Last week, 45 Senators voted for cloture. It takes 60 votes for cloture to pass, thus ending a filibuster and allowing a final vote, which at this time would require at most 50 votes to pass.
The pro-amnesty Bush/Kennedy coalition has to persuade 15 Senators who voted NO last week to switch to YES if the cloture vote comes up again.
The only thing that can keep that from happening is an even larger outpouring of phone calls, faxes and local demonstrations at Senate offices, etc.
more...
makeup wallpapers national geographic
Saralayar
04-03 12:34 PM
Dude complete your profile first if you want to be taken seriously.
I would be hesitant to write to some anonymous email id.
For our accurate statistics, please fill all your details (Zuhail and others) with correct details (it won't affect you in anyways). For arriving at correct numbers for any Agendas, this is required. Then post your questions or start a thread in this forum.
I would be hesitant to write to some anonymous email id.
For our accurate statistics, please fill all your details (Zuhail and others) with correct details (it won't affect you in anyways). For arriving at correct numbers for any Agendas, this is required. Then post your questions or start a thread in this forum.
girlfriend next »
admin
02-04 03:45 PM
retrohatao,
We're asking for transparency and increase in efficiency in all of USCIS operations including Name Check.
We're asking for transparency and increase in efficiency in all of USCIS operations including Name Check.
hairstyles National Geographic Wallpapers
ak_2006
06-10 12:36 PM
Thanks Pappu to bring this to every notice of IV Community. It looks like they want to send every body out except citizens or GC holders.
jfredr
04-20 01:57 PM
I recently joined the forum with $20 Contributions.
my story is also same as many of u . Stuck in
Retrogression
thanks
my story is also same as many of u . Stuck in
Retrogression
thanks
hara_patta_for_rico
07-09 07:05 PM
I came across this law about the departmental control of numerical limitations, and I'd appreciate it if you all could post your interpretations of the same.
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
Clause B is not the only thing. In any quarter they are not supposed to issue any more than 27% of 140,000(100%) = 37800. according to Clause A. After June 15th they issued 140,000 - 66000 = 74000. What about the last quarter quota of 37800? Where did it go? It was not supposed to be used before July.
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
Clause B is not the only thing. In any quarter they are not supposed to issue any more than 27% of 140,000(100%) = 37800. according to Clause A. After June 15th they issued 140,000 - 66000 = 74000. What about the last quarter quota of 37800? Where did it go? It was not supposed to be used before July.
0 comments:
Post a Comment