lahiribaba
02-05 11:35 PM
like minded folks, please post your ideas.
This time to ombudsman office and to the white house. I have seen no other campaign been so successful like what we did in July 2007 that made USCIS reverse their decision.The whole point of this is to make a point to the ones who have the power to change things.
This time to ombudsman office and to the white house. I have seen no other campaign been so successful like what we did in July 2007 that made USCIS reverse their decision.The whole point of this is to make a point to the ones who have the power to change things.
wallpaper Heart tattoos are popular with
GCBy3000
07-12 11:32 PM
This is just a stunt. WHy did she wait allthese days to write this letter. Now when everything falls in place by others efforts, she wants people to think it is because her effort all these things are happening. I hate murthy or your murfhy.
alex99
10-30 08:51 AM
Participate in EB3 Poll
2011 best art vine tattoo designs
desi3933
02-09 03:14 PM
And reply you will never get.
141,020 visa numbers used in FY2009
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV.pdf
Look at the last page.
The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is 140,000. So the usage was actually more.
__________________
Not a legal advice.
141,020 visa numbers used in FY2009
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV.pdf
Look at the last page.
The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is 140,000. So the usage was actually more.
__________________
Not a legal advice.
more...
coolmanasip
03-10 01:05 PM
Change of employer does not imply your use of the AC21.....the rule does not require you to notify USCIS....so in many cases, if you do not notify them, it is likely that they will never know and approve your GC. But, if they issue an RFE and if your sponsoring employer gives you the offer for future job you should be okay..........you may only have to work for them for at least a little bit after you got your GC....
humdesi
03-19 07:09 PM
Any chance of EB2 India moving forward to April 05 by October 2008??
NO, no way.
There are tens of thousands of EB2 India applicants from 2000 to 2002. Add labor substituters, EB2 converters, and you'll be lucky to see EB-2 India at even Dec 2002. Most likely within a few weeks of Apr, all EB-2 India visas will get used up. Keep in mind the new EB-2 numbers are from EB-1 India flowover. So it's going to last even less time than Oct-Nov last year.
NO, no way.
There are tens of thousands of EB2 India applicants from 2000 to 2002. Add labor substituters, EB2 converters, and you'll be lucky to see EB-2 India at even Dec 2002. Most likely within a few weeks of Apr, all EB-2 India visas will get used up. Keep in mind the new EB-2 numbers are from EB-1 India flowover. So it's going to last even less time than Oct-Nov last year.
more...
fromnaija
01-19 10:59 AM
The following is a copy paste of the hopeless situation for many many of us, from the presentation paskal was referring to.
Please add more facts, figures, numbers.
There are around 147,000 employment based Visa number available every year.
Each country in the world, irrespective of population, equally share from the same bucket for Visa Number.
Total there are 100 (suppose) country in world. Each country will get 1470 Visa Number allocated / year.
This 1470 will be divided between EB1, EB2 and EB3 category
That means every category will get 490 Visa Number.
USCIS statistics show each household has at least two member. So only 245 household from India in EB3 category will get GC in a year.
Total GC application pending with USCIS is around 1MM.
In simple you are in a funnel and if you don�t act now you will be in funnel for lifetime.
There is only one thing wrong with this figure. Not all of the 100 countries will have immigrants in the EB category. The fact is that no one country can have more than 7% of the available visas i.e. 9800 of the available 140,000 EB visas per year.
Please add more facts, figures, numbers.
There are around 147,000 employment based Visa number available every year.
Each country in the world, irrespective of population, equally share from the same bucket for Visa Number.
Total there are 100 (suppose) country in world. Each country will get 1470 Visa Number allocated / year.
This 1470 will be divided between EB1, EB2 and EB3 category
That means every category will get 490 Visa Number.
USCIS statistics show each household has at least two member. So only 245 household from India in EB3 category will get GC in a year.
Total GC application pending with USCIS is around 1MM.
In simple you are in a funnel and if you don�t act now you will be in funnel for lifetime.
There is only one thing wrong with this figure. Not all of the 100 countries will have immigrants in the EB category. The fact is that no one country can have more than 7% of the available visas i.e. 9800 of the available 140,000 EB visas per year.
2010 tattoo designs for girls feet.
feedfront
10-14 12:18 PM
FeedFront
I got the radiologist's report. Its on an official letterhead of the hospital and it includes his findings, recommendations etc. but it doesn't contain his signature. It only says "Read By: Dr. XXX and Prepared by: Dr. XXX. Nothing is handwritten, its all in print and the top portion says Radiology Report. It includes all my information including my DOB etc.
But the RFE says that the Radiologist's report should be on an official letterhead and signed by the Radiologist.
When i called the Doctor's office, they said that these documents are received electronically and are E-Signed so there won't be any signatures as such. They have mailed me a sealed copy but I'm wondering if this will be a problem since it doesn't contain the Radiologists's signature.
Any inputs on this would be appreciated.
Thanks,
I've not seen any report with person's signature. It's valid/acceptable as long as it is on letterhead. Even my last two reports (X-ray) did not bear Radiologist's signature and is same as you mentioned. Hope it helps.
I got the radiologist's report. Its on an official letterhead of the hospital and it includes his findings, recommendations etc. but it doesn't contain his signature. It only says "Read By: Dr. XXX and Prepared by: Dr. XXX. Nothing is handwritten, its all in print and the top portion says Radiology Report. It includes all my information including my DOB etc.
But the RFE says that the Radiologist's report should be on an official letterhead and signed by the Radiologist.
When i called the Doctor's office, they said that these documents are received electronically and are E-Signed so there won't be any signatures as such. They have mailed me a sealed copy but I'm wondering if this will be a problem since it doesn't contain the Radiologists's signature.
Any inputs on this would be appreciated.
Thanks,
I've not seen any report with person's signature. It's valid/acceptable as long as it is on letterhead. Even my last two reports (X-ray) did not bear Radiologist's signature and is same as you mentioned. Hope it helps.
more...
desi3933
03-17 07:36 AM
Hello Desi,
.....
......
This is from April Visa Bulletin , according to this S korea got 14,211 visas from FB ( spill over from FB - EB) then dont you think the total EB visas issued in 2009 should be around 150000 instead of 141000....
I am little confused...
your comment will be greatly appreciated ;)
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV.pdf
Country EB1 EB2 EB3
India 6672 10124 2306
China 4999 3046 1027
S Korea 2311 4991 4001
Philippines 524 1853 5540
Mexico 2010 922 3745
All visa numbers allocated to South Korea are against EB visa numbers.
_________________
Not a legal advice.
.....
......
This is from April Visa Bulletin , according to this S korea got 14,211 visas from FB ( spill over from FB - EB) then dont you think the total EB visas issued in 2009 should be around 150000 instead of 141000....
I am little confused...
your comment will be greatly appreciated ;)
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV.pdf
Country EB1 EB2 EB3
India 6672 10124 2306
China 4999 3046 1027
S Korea 2311 4991 4001
Philippines 524 1853 5540
Mexico 2010 922 3745
All visa numbers allocated to South Korea are against EB visa numbers.
_________________
Not a legal advice.
hair Girls Hibiscus Tattoo for Feet
coopheal
03-20 08:43 AM
I agree with you man. These screwed up desi consulting firms sell LCs like it is walmart. And people who work for them don't care about the position offered or their qualifications. They just want to have multiple LCs and I-140s and then cut the line when it is convenient.
Don�t do character assassination of EB3 applicants. EB3s who now have qualifications/job for EB2 should definitely try to convert over to EB2. EB3s don�t listen to people like these. It�s the same mentality which opposes eliminating country limits; more over its same mentality which opposes EB reforms. Grow up��
Trying to stop an EB3 person who spent more time than you in GC queue and has qualification for EB2 is just insane.
Don�t do character assassination of EB3 applicants. EB3s who now have qualifications/job for EB2 should definitely try to convert over to EB2. EB3s don�t listen to people like these. It�s the same mentality which opposes eliminating country limits; more over its same mentality which opposes EB reforms. Grow up��
Trying to stop an EB3 person who spent more time than you in GC queue and has qualification for EB2 is just insane.
more...
kartikiran
03-18 01:24 PM
Its more than 6 yrs now, since I started my GC process.
__________________
PD Date: 03/25/2002 EB3
I140 aprvd from TSC: 06/2006
485 filed @ TSC: June 29th 2007.
__________________
PD Date: 03/25/2002 EB3
I140 aprvd from TSC: 06/2006
485 filed @ TSC: June 29th 2007.
hot Spider Tattoo Design for Feet
amsgc
03-16 04:51 PM
It is good to see a sensible post in a long time.
Last Nov. I had gone for my biometrics and met this Chinese guy whose EB2 PD was somewhere in Jun 06 (EB2 China at the time was Jan 06). He was very confident that he will be current in a few months, and just rejected my efforts to recruit him (for IV). Well, it is now a few months later and the EB2 China PD is Dec 03. Unfortunately, because of the arbitrary movement in the visa bulletin, many people seem to think that their PD will be current soon. The truth of the matter is that the number of people in line (w/ or w/o labor sub, pd porting etc) is just very large. So, even if your PD becomes current, there is a slim chance that it will be adjudicated, and you will get the visa number assigned to your case, before the dates fall back again. Only a handful of very lucky people will get the GC, but for the majority, the frustration will continue.
The only way is to lobby congress for increasing the 140k cap. If they are not willing, then recapture numbers, exempt dependents etc. If even that is not acceptable this year then atleast lobby for admin fixes in the IV agenda - such as 3 yr. ead/ap, ability to file when PD is not current, and relax the AC21 rule further regarding proof of a valid job offer at the time of adjudication.
most people who filed LC in 2004/2005 before PERM got approvals in 2006 and 2007 and have only got a chance to apply for 485 in July VB. There are 10s of thousands of such people with that LC and EB2-India. When was the opportunity to get approval?
without an administrative fix, and with the current levels of demand and supply I would say its NIL. It needs to be a mistake...
Also, with H1 quota possibly going up this year or next, expect even more demand, and the dates will probably not be current for atleast a decade. The demand is going to go up (more H1s filing for greencards) and supply remaining the same (140k + country-limits etc)
Last Nov. I had gone for my biometrics and met this Chinese guy whose EB2 PD was somewhere in Jun 06 (EB2 China at the time was Jan 06). He was very confident that he will be current in a few months, and just rejected my efforts to recruit him (for IV). Well, it is now a few months later and the EB2 China PD is Dec 03. Unfortunately, because of the arbitrary movement in the visa bulletin, many people seem to think that their PD will be current soon. The truth of the matter is that the number of people in line (w/ or w/o labor sub, pd porting etc) is just very large. So, even if your PD becomes current, there is a slim chance that it will be adjudicated, and you will get the visa number assigned to your case, before the dates fall back again. Only a handful of very lucky people will get the GC, but for the majority, the frustration will continue.
The only way is to lobby congress for increasing the 140k cap. If they are not willing, then recapture numbers, exempt dependents etc. If even that is not acceptable this year then atleast lobby for admin fixes in the IV agenda - such as 3 yr. ead/ap, ability to file when PD is not current, and relax the AC21 rule further regarding proof of a valid job offer at the time of adjudication.
most people who filed LC in 2004/2005 before PERM got approvals in 2006 and 2007 and have only got a chance to apply for 485 in July VB. There are 10s of thousands of such people with that LC and EB2-India. When was the opportunity to get approval?
without an administrative fix, and with the current levels of demand and supply I would say its NIL. It needs to be a mistake...
Also, with H1 quota possibly going up this year or next, expect even more demand, and the dates will probably not be current for atleast a decade. The demand is going to go up (more H1s filing for greencards) and supply remaining the same (140k + country-limits etc)
more...
house star tattoos on foot designs.
nomi
12-11 02:38 PM
[QUOTE=wildvoice]
Yes, I am definitely for this idea that we should petition/ask USCIS to change the rules to allow those with approved I-140 to be able to file I-485 while their PD is not yet current even if we would pay US$5,000.:rolleyes:
[QUOTE]
Yes, I am definitely for this idea that we should petition/ask USCIS to change the rules to allow those with approved I-140 to be able to file I-485 while their PD is not yet current even if we would pay US$5,000.:rolleyes:
[QUOTE]
tattoo Sexy Girl Star Tattoo Designs
delax
07-19 08:55 PM
We need a realistic estimate of how many applications are pending with PD in 2004, which really seems like the bottleneck. Another thing to bear in mind is the conversion from EB3->EB2. That is also going to hinder the movement of EB2. There are a lot of people trying to use that route.
Here you go - conversion should not impact this as the number of LC approvals remains the same:
Here are all the LC approvals for India in the last seven years.
Year, Total LC Approved, Total India
2007 85112 24573
2006 79782 22298
2005 6133 1350
2004 43582 No Info
2003 62912 No Info
2002 79784 No Info
2001 77921 No Info
2000 70204 No Info
Lets assume about 25% of pre-PERM LCs are India based on post-PERM data. Thus for fiscal 2004 (Oct 2003 thru Sep 2004) the total LC number is 43,852. Assume 25% of that to be India based on PERM data. That gives about 11,000 India LCs in 2004 alone (All EB categories combined). If you assume an average of 2.5 dependents then the number of visas required for all India EB categories for 2004 is 27,500 (11,000*2.5). The regular quota for EB2 and EB3 combined is only about 9,800. That means 17,700 visas have to come from somewhere. I dont think those many visas are remaining for this year. Be prepared to see FIFO thrown under the bus and approvals with PDs that are all over the place. Please critique this analysis without piling on. Thoughts?
Here you go - conversion should not impact this as the number of LC approvals remains the same:
Here are all the LC approvals for India in the last seven years.
Year, Total LC Approved, Total India
2007 85112 24573
2006 79782 22298
2005 6133 1350
2004 43582 No Info
2003 62912 No Info
2002 79784 No Info
2001 77921 No Info
2000 70204 No Info
Lets assume about 25% of pre-PERM LCs are India based on post-PERM data. Thus for fiscal 2004 (Oct 2003 thru Sep 2004) the total LC number is 43,852. Assume 25% of that to be India based on PERM data. That gives about 11,000 India LCs in 2004 alone (All EB categories combined). If you assume an average of 2.5 dependents then the number of visas required for all India EB categories for 2004 is 27,500 (11,000*2.5). The regular quota for EB2 and EB3 combined is only about 9,800. That means 17,700 visas have to come from somewhere. I dont think those many visas are remaining for this year. Be prepared to see FIFO thrown under the bus and approvals with PDs that are all over the place. Please critique this analysis without piling on. Thoughts?
more...
pictures 2011 Foot Tattoo Design
jaane_bhi_do_yaaro
08-10 08:18 PM
That means EB2 India/China will see drastic movement this year....may be to end or 2007 or 2008?
We need our messiah VLDRAO...
He s the MANNNN...
he predicted July 2007 fiasco and then he was the guy who fought for us...
VLDRAOOO where are you...
Please make dates current for everybody...
We need our messiah VLDRAO...
He s the MANNNN...
he predicted July 2007 fiasco and then he was the guy who fought for us...
VLDRAOOO where are you...
Please make dates current for everybody...
dresses Awesome Girls Tattoo Design
gcma08
06-14 04:07 PM
We received our plastic cards today.
more...
makeup Foot Tattoos Designs For Girls
vgayalu
10-07 02:41 PM
Mine and spouse I 485 are approved on 5th Oct 2010 after RFE and answering it.
But Kids one is not approved showing online status as initial review.
I called USCIS and came to know that I can not create second SR until I complete 30 days after answering first SR.
But I did not get answer for first SR. They are saying There is RFE on principal candidate application.
But that one is cleared and approved.
I escalated the issue to second level and then they are mentioning my kids one is also approved on last Monday. But still the online status is showing as initial review.
Is it or same kind of thing happened to any one else?
Please guide your experience.
But Kids one is not approved showing online status as initial review.
I called USCIS and came to know that I can not create second SR until I complete 30 days after answering first SR.
But I did not get answer for first SR. They are saying There is RFE on principal candidate application.
But that one is cleared and approved.
I escalated the issue to second level and then they are mentioning my kids one is also approved on last Monday. But still the online status is showing as initial review.
Is it or same kind of thing happened to any one else?
Please guide your experience.
girlfriend Simple Foot Tattoo Design
Jaime
09-12 05:06 PM
We Are All Going To Washington! Make Sure You Join Us! Together We Will Achieve Our Hard-earned Freedom!!!!
hairstyles 2011 Girls Star Tattoo Designs
shannonxi
07-18 10:47 AM
Mine reached NSC on July 2 at 9:02 AM. Got Fedex delivery confirmation and no receipt from CIS yet. Will check with my lawyer for advise.
DDD
03-11 12:04 AM
pretty cool grinch....gotta work on your lighting a bit...:beam:.
Administrator2
06-11 12:22 PM
Everyone is again talking about ifs and buts. Guys why do not you put your hard work on what is more important than what is never ever going to happen. People with a GC, if this Bill passes, they are not going to renew your GC also. How's about that? People with a US citizenship, with previous GC status, they will not renew the USA passport, if this Bill passes. How's about that?
So forget all these bogus bills, and support our main agenda, which is to remove the Backlogs. If you do not have any new news, then sit idle, but please do not spread these bogus out-of-world stories.
Don’t think you understand so let me give it a shot.
We just got off a conference call with our coalition partners. This is a real threat. Everyone, including some of the largest of companies on the planet think this is a real threat. It you are a lawyer or if you represent some law firm, then please go back and get busy with entering items like first and last name in a simple immigration form. This is not your area of expertise.
Experts with this are saying that the language is deliberately kept vague. Some of the terms used in the language of the amendment do not have direct corresponding visa. Since we don’t trust the guys behind this amendment, we think they have deliberately kept the language which is not precise.
Consider this as a kick-off for the election campaign. The real risk is, even if this amendment is defeated, between now and the elections we will all see many similar amendments. At some point Senators will be forced to vote on an issue which is pitched as “American citizens” v/s “foreign workers”. Experts believe that anti immigrants will try to push this amendment in middle of the night in the must pass bills.
Some lawyer, for the purpose of pandering to the client base, is of the opinion that this amendment does not affect EADs. In the grand scheme of things this is plain wrong because he/she will not be asked to leave the country if such an amendment passes in the middle of the night. Just engaging in name calling Senator Grassley or calling the Senator pig face is not going to stop the amendment. Please grow up and get real. Your pandering may get innocent audience to believe that there is no real threat even when everyone with any real sense of expertise is scrambling to oppose this amendment.
Immigration Voice and its coalition partners do not see this amendment in isolation. We are hoping for the best and preparing for the worst. And for the lack of clarity from the amendment language, we think that the intent of the amendment sponsors is to see us all out of here.
There is no simple way for the anti-immigrants to throw us all out in a single stroke. They will always engage in systematic elimination of everyone starting from the most vulnerable. The language is vague and it could be interpreted in lot of different ways. It is not wise to look for the most favorable interpretation of the language to find reasons for not doing anything because in the end our interpretation will mean nothing.
Let’s be smart, think for ourselves and act on our own behalf to send simple message requesting the Senate offices to oppose this amendment. What is so complicated about this? And if you don't want to participate, that's fine, but why would you discourage others from sending a simple message to the Senators from their state? Don't you have anything better to do?
So forget all these bogus bills, and support our main agenda, which is to remove the Backlogs. If you do not have any new news, then sit idle, but please do not spread these bogus out-of-world stories.
Don’t think you understand so let me give it a shot.
We just got off a conference call with our coalition partners. This is a real threat. Everyone, including some of the largest of companies on the planet think this is a real threat. It you are a lawyer or if you represent some law firm, then please go back and get busy with entering items like first and last name in a simple immigration form. This is not your area of expertise.
Experts with this are saying that the language is deliberately kept vague. Some of the terms used in the language of the amendment do not have direct corresponding visa. Since we don’t trust the guys behind this amendment, we think they have deliberately kept the language which is not precise.
Consider this as a kick-off for the election campaign. The real risk is, even if this amendment is defeated, between now and the elections we will all see many similar amendments. At some point Senators will be forced to vote on an issue which is pitched as “American citizens” v/s “foreign workers”. Experts believe that anti immigrants will try to push this amendment in middle of the night in the must pass bills.
Some lawyer, for the purpose of pandering to the client base, is of the opinion that this amendment does not affect EADs. In the grand scheme of things this is plain wrong because he/she will not be asked to leave the country if such an amendment passes in the middle of the night. Just engaging in name calling Senator Grassley or calling the Senator pig face is not going to stop the amendment. Please grow up and get real. Your pandering may get innocent audience to believe that there is no real threat even when everyone with any real sense of expertise is scrambling to oppose this amendment.
Immigration Voice and its coalition partners do not see this amendment in isolation. We are hoping for the best and preparing for the worst. And for the lack of clarity from the amendment language, we think that the intent of the amendment sponsors is to see us all out of here.
There is no simple way for the anti-immigrants to throw us all out in a single stroke. They will always engage in systematic elimination of everyone starting from the most vulnerable. The language is vague and it could be interpreted in lot of different ways. It is not wise to look for the most favorable interpretation of the language to find reasons for not doing anything because in the end our interpretation will mean nothing.
Let’s be smart, think for ourselves and act on our own behalf to send simple message requesting the Senate offices to oppose this amendment. What is so complicated about this? And if you don't want to participate, that's fine, but why would you discourage others from sending a simple message to the Senators from their state? Don't you have anything better to do?
0 comments:
Post a Comment