greenscope
09-24 10:10 AM
When can I get my gc based on these uscis data for sept 2005 eb-2.Please suggest me.
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
longq
02-13 02:17 PM
Further division is not good.
I was on record that DOS/USCIS misallocated visas in 2005. India received much more in eb3 then what they were entitled to. In fact, India, China, Mexico and Phillipines should have not gone over their 7% as a whole of the 250,000 greencards available. Because of this; dos/uscis learned their lesson and started to follow the law appropriately.
I did say that if in 2006 any country went above their limit of 7% then it would cause a lawsuit which I would be a part of. However, there would be some negative outcomes from it. UScIS/DOS behaviour could only change going forward. They could revoke the greencards issued in 2005 for people who went over the 7% limit (uscis has upto 5 years to rescind greencard if approved by mistake) but they would not get re-allocated because there is no carryover from one year to the next in the current law. Only outcome would be to change it going forward. As I've said in the past; people were spoiled at the laziness of DOS/USCIS. Retrogression and the visa allocation should have happened a long time ago.
Again wrong information by you and trying to hide background or historical information. Either USDOS/USCIS has not mismanaged the numbers in 2005. Claiming India and China was given more than they entitled to is wrong . They (DOS) did everything right till 2005. Now only they are violating. One has to study the historical issues before 1999. Before 1999, both India and China (both EB2 and EB3) were retrogressed heavily and backlogged. However ROW was current in all EB catagories. There was no retrogression in ROW. It was always current before 1999.
For example, here is March 1999 VB
All Charge-
ability Areas CHINA-
Except Those mainland
Listed born INDIA MEXICO PHILIPPINES
Employment-
Based
1st C 22JAN98 C C C
2nd C 08SEP96 08SEP97 C C
3rd C 01JAN95 08FEB96 C C
As a part of AC21 act in 2000, the unused numbers (about 100,000) were recaptured to eliminate the backlogs in EB categories. The reason was this recapture to remove retrogression in India and China, as because that was only two countries backlogged at that point.
After that ac21 law, there were additional 100,000 visas available apart from 140,000 visas every year. DOS has given 100,000 additional visas to USCIS in 2000 itself to consume it. Because of USCIS slowness/inefficiency in processing 485s between 1999 and 2004, they even did not have processed the yearly quota. Therefore the recaptured visas were remain unused for 5 years because of USCIS inefficiency. Therefore, at some point, it has to be consumed. Therefore USCIS did backlog elimination drive in 2005 (6 months processing of 485s ) to use all the recaptured visas. The original intension to remove backlogs in India and China. That was done by USCIS. USCIS can not hold that recaptured numbers for ever (by imposing 7% limit in India and China) how the future demands will be in EB3-ROW. Far example, if ROW demands 200,000 EB3 visas in year 2020, USCIS/DOS can not hold that AC21 numbers (that were recaptured in 2000) for ROW to be consumed in 2020, by imposing 7% limit. No one can anticipate future demands.
Theoretically speaking those numbers belongs (AC21 recaptured numbers came only from EB1 and EB2 pool) belongs to EB1 and EB2 category. EB3 never gave any unused numbers in previous years. Ideally speaking, those numbers should have been issued to EB2 category first to eliminate backlogs in EB2 then only to EB3 ROW. Infact, all the ac21 numbers were used to eliminate retro in EB3 only. In 2005 they issed only 44,000 EB2 compare to about 150,000 visas in EB3. This is big injustice to EB2 India and China.
Bottom line is EB3-ROW is enjoying with the expense of EB2 India and China.
I was on record that DOS/USCIS misallocated visas in 2005. India received much more in eb3 then what they were entitled to. In fact, India, China, Mexico and Phillipines should have not gone over their 7% as a whole of the 250,000 greencards available. Because of this; dos/uscis learned their lesson and started to follow the law appropriately.
I did say that if in 2006 any country went above their limit of 7% then it would cause a lawsuit which I would be a part of. However, there would be some negative outcomes from it. UScIS/DOS behaviour could only change going forward. They could revoke the greencards issued in 2005 for people who went over the 7% limit (uscis has upto 5 years to rescind greencard if approved by mistake) but they would not get re-allocated because there is no carryover from one year to the next in the current law. Only outcome would be to change it going forward. As I've said in the past; people were spoiled at the laziness of DOS/USCIS. Retrogression and the visa allocation should have happened a long time ago.
Again wrong information by you and trying to hide background or historical information. Either USDOS/USCIS has not mismanaged the numbers in 2005. Claiming India and China was given more than they entitled to is wrong . They (DOS) did everything right till 2005. Now only they are violating. One has to study the historical issues before 1999. Before 1999, both India and China (both EB2 and EB3) were retrogressed heavily and backlogged. However ROW was current in all EB catagories. There was no retrogression in ROW. It was always current before 1999.
For example, here is March 1999 VB
All Charge-
ability Areas CHINA-
Except Those mainland
Listed born INDIA MEXICO PHILIPPINES
Employment-
Based
1st C 22JAN98 C C C
2nd C 08SEP96 08SEP97 C C
3rd C 01JAN95 08FEB96 C C
As a part of AC21 act in 2000, the unused numbers (about 100,000) were recaptured to eliminate the backlogs in EB categories. The reason was this recapture to remove retrogression in India and China, as because that was only two countries backlogged at that point.
After that ac21 law, there were additional 100,000 visas available apart from 140,000 visas every year. DOS has given 100,000 additional visas to USCIS in 2000 itself to consume it. Because of USCIS slowness/inefficiency in processing 485s between 1999 and 2004, they even did not have processed the yearly quota. Therefore the recaptured visas were remain unused for 5 years because of USCIS inefficiency. Therefore, at some point, it has to be consumed. Therefore USCIS did backlog elimination drive in 2005 (6 months processing of 485s ) to use all the recaptured visas. The original intension to remove backlogs in India and China. That was done by USCIS. USCIS can not hold that recaptured numbers for ever (by imposing 7% limit in India and China) how the future demands will be in EB3-ROW. Far example, if ROW demands 200,000 EB3 visas in year 2020, USCIS/DOS can not hold that AC21 numbers (that were recaptured in 2000) for ROW to be consumed in 2020, by imposing 7% limit. No one can anticipate future demands.
Theoretically speaking those numbers belongs (AC21 recaptured numbers came only from EB1 and EB2 pool) belongs to EB1 and EB2 category. EB3 never gave any unused numbers in previous years. Ideally speaking, those numbers should have been issued to EB2 category first to eliminate backlogs in EB2 then only to EB3 ROW. Infact, all the ac21 numbers were used to eliminate retro in EB3 only. In 2005 they issed only 44,000 EB2 compare to about 150,000 visas in EB3. This is big injustice to EB2 India and China.
Bottom line is EB3-ROW is enjoying with the expense of EB2 India and China.
at0474
12-13 04:12 PM
I dont think that the per-country cap on immigration is "Unconstitutional." It may not seem fair to those affected but it does not violate any article of the US consititution. The country has a right to regulate its borders; that is its right. We should try to argue that the policy is counter-productive and harmful - not that it is illegal.
--Well said.
--Well said.
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
belmontboy
08-17 05:07 PM
True greatness is shown by humility, not pride.
Al Gore, Kalam, etc are great personalities.
SRK nah!!
Thousands of South Asians have gone through same treatment.
Growup SRK, don't be such a baby :D.
I have never watched his movies, and i got one more reason not to watch "My name is Khan".
Al Gore, Kalam, etc are great personalities.
SRK nah!!
Thousands of South Asians have gone through same treatment.
Growup SRK, don't be such a baby :D.
I have never watched his movies, and i got one more reason not to watch "My name is Khan".
more...
injrav
08-03 12:52 PM
This only proves that this is an important immigrant issue. Pappu should help educate every one.
Hi TravInd
keep going on man
you are the Pappu of this Thread
Hi TravInd
keep going on man
you are the Pappu of this Thread
lazycis
02-14 12:48 PM
Thanks, chanduv23, I do believe in using all possible means. I sent my letter to Mr. Bush.
On the other note, there is a thread on discussing the lawsuit possibility
http://www..com/discussion-forums/i485-1/67326117/last-page/
On the other note, there is a thread on discussing the lawsuit possibility
http://www..com/discussion-forums/i485-1/67326117/last-page/
more...
at0474
12-13 01:05 PM
"If you read the history of immigration this country you will see that such measures are typically taken with restriction in mind not diversity."
--Any country's immigration policy has to have some control measures built into it. I cannot imagine any country opening its gates wide open for the entire world to migrate into her without any limitations. So the question is, whom to "restrict" and whom to allow? This leads to the same argument, do you see this "restriction" as discrimination? There are others who see as fair "reservation" for them.
"Diversity is the nice sounding cloak."
--True. Every concept has been used and abused.
"There is a definite fear that FB will bring in many mexican migrants ( "chain migration") and the country quota holds that back imho. you think it's because of indian programmers? It was made long before those existed. remember we are a minuscule number- don't feel so important- the programmers are about 2% of all immigrants. 11% is all EB, half are families, half again are techies- not all those are programmers. do the math."
--I did not say EB quota system was framed due to high influx of indian programmers. You missed the whole point.
"Also remember that 50,000 Gc are given a year by lottery for "diversity". as a result more bangladeshis get Gc in a year than indians on EB. so why do we need the country quota in EB again?"
--Good question. If we look at what qualifies a country to be included in the lottery program (oversubscription etc?), it would again lead to the "balancing" intent with regards to immigration.
"To the person bringing up caste system and fences, here is my proposal.
i am a physician, i am being held behind hoardes of techies who can easily have PD's much before mine since i am training and working longer and the J1 holds me back. 12 years here and no where in the line...so i should get a fast track too. let's have a cap for the techies...hey it looks great from my side of the fence...i'm sure you will agree that i should be pushed up the line."
--Precisely why I said your viewpoint would differ depending on which side of the fence you are.
"either it's wrong or right. the caste system is wrong, from every side of the fence. it may benefit some and hurt others. but it's wrong, wrong and wrong.
same for this country quota. sure it helps some, and looks good from "their side of the fence". that does not change the fact that it is wrong."
--You are opining that it is wrong. You cannot state that it is a fact.
"none of this is an argument for a legal approach. just responding to stuff here."
--Same here. I appreciate your response though.
--Any country's immigration policy has to have some control measures built into it. I cannot imagine any country opening its gates wide open for the entire world to migrate into her without any limitations. So the question is, whom to "restrict" and whom to allow? This leads to the same argument, do you see this "restriction" as discrimination? There are others who see as fair "reservation" for them.
"Diversity is the nice sounding cloak."
--True. Every concept has been used and abused.
"There is a definite fear that FB will bring in many mexican migrants ( "chain migration") and the country quota holds that back imho. you think it's because of indian programmers? It was made long before those existed. remember we are a minuscule number- don't feel so important- the programmers are about 2% of all immigrants. 11% is all EB, half are families, half again are techies- not all those are programmers. do the math."
--I did not say EB quota system was framed due to high influx of indian programmers. You missed the whole point.
"Also remember that 50,000 Gc are given a year by lottery for "diversity". as a result more bangladeshis get Gc in a year than indians on EB. so why do we need the country quota in EB again?"
--Good question. If we look at what qualifies a country to be included in the lottery program (oversubscription etc?), it would again lead to the "balancing" intent with regards to immigration.
"To the person bringing up caste system and fences, here is my proposal.
i am a physician, i am being held behind hoardes of techies who can easily have PD's much before mine since i am training and working longer and the J1 holds me back. 12 years here and no where in the line...so i should get a fast track too. let's have a cap for the techies...hey it looks great from my side of the fence...i'm sure you will agree that i should be pushed up the line."
--Precisely why I said your viewpoint would differ depending on which side of the fence you are.
"either it's wrong or right. the caste system is wrong, from every side of the fence. it may benefit some and hurt others. but it's wrong, wrong and wrong.
same for this country quota. sure it helps some, and looks good from "their side of the fence". that does not change the fact that it is wrong."
--You are opining that it is wrong. You cannot state that it is a fact.
"none of this is an argument for a legal approach. just responding to stuff here."
--Same here. I appreciate your response though.
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
snathan
03-30 05:46 PM
Problem is we Indians see Indira Gandhi Airport, Jawaharlal Mission, Rajiv Gandhi Electricity Yojna, Indira Gandhi University, Jawahar Lal Uniiversity, Rajiv Gandhi Jal Sansthan, Rajiv Gandhi This Indira Gandhi that, so we get a feeling as if we are breathing just because of these 3 individuals. They are too good at advertising their Netas, that you just forget if anybody else ever existed...
Don�t you see Washington Bridge or President George W Bush High way here...what do you call that.
Dont you see a state called Washington...May I ask you who is that and why do they call by person's name.
Don�t you see Washington Bridge or President George W Bush High way here...what do you call that.
Dont you see a state called Washington...May I ask you who is that and why do they call by person's name.
more...
Caliber
09-04 01:41 PM
You dont even talk about my village even in your dreams.. Our village is much happier than before 5 years.. Its all becuase of YSR did for our village.
Only the people that were part of those grabbings are happier. Let the poor people get back all their lands first and then you guys talk.
How about all the "Anna's" that were killed by him who came to him when he invited and then killed them mercilessly.
So, did you mourn when he killed all the "Anna's"? I am sure you would have distributed Sweets when "Anna's" were killed. Right?
Isn't it Jesus Christ right? Jesus is God and he punished YSR with such a worst killing. Even face could not be recognized.
Only the people that were part of those grabbings are happier. Let the poor people get back all their lands first and then you guys talk.
How about all the "Anna's" that were killed by him who came to him when he invited and then killed them mercilessly.
So, did you mourn when he killed all the "Anna's"? I am sure you would have distributed Sweets when "Anna's" were killed. Right?
Isn't it Jesus Christ right? Jesus is God and he punished YSR with such a worst killing. Even face could not be recognized.
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
PlainSpeak
01-14 01:16 PM
PlainSpeak,
I say this in the nicest way possible.
1. Instead of wasting time by answering here on the post, do something constructive for your own gc (whatever that may be).
2. If you do not believe in IV and what it does, you are truly wasting your time. Second, which IV provision do you not believe in - visa recapture? excluding dependents from being counted? removal of country caps? which one of these hurts your prospects of getting the gc?
3. Watching cspan definitely gives a person a better understanding of what is happening. No questions about it. But it is a passive exercise, as there is nothing you have done or can do or will do to change the outcome of what is happening.
4. Let us hope that this DV bill goes somewhere - what kind of activities do you suggest we should do to prepare for it? With specific details, you may be able to persuade people.
Ahh my friend willgetgc you are back and thanks for asking nicely. That is really appreciated. Ahh i see that you still have a tinge of anger but no problem. this is progress
1. Instead of wasting time by answering here on the post, do something constructive for your own gc (whatever that may be).
Some one has to make it clear and by that i mean explicityly clear to you all that the fact is you people are not the only ones who can write eloquontly and articulate and idea. And that your mob mentality ganging will not work anymore, There are other peoples out there and they also have idea and this is the one way to make sure all you people read what is going on becasue my friend you all are reading. This is the first step. The next step would be discussion of an idea and so one
2. If you do not believe in IV and what it does, you are truly wasting your time. Second, which IV provision do you not believe in - visa recapture? excluding dependents from being counted? removal of country caps? which one of these hurts your prospects of getting the gc?
None hurt my prcopect instal All are good for my prospect but my simple statement is that nothing small has passed in congress so there is no gaurentee that anything big will pass so instead of hangng on to the same old ideas (We can all can go back to them when there is mommentum on it) it is time to think about new out of box ideas
3. Watching cspan definitely gives a person a better understanding of what is happening. No questions about it. But it is a passive exercise, as there is nothing you have done or can do or will do to change the outcome of what is happening.
It seems that you are way behind the curve here my friend. That was written a long time agao but no matter you read it that is important. To your question yes watching CPAN is a start, i agree a passive start but a start. The next step is active participation but looks like that is something which will not be allowed to happen by all the senior members and donors of IV
4. Let us hope that this DV bill goes somewhere - what kind of activities do you suggest we should do to prepare for it? With specific details, you may be able to persuade people.
Ok my friend this is being asked so many times and it is painfull (Physcially) to type it again and again and so i will do it just once more and i would request all IV members donors to read about it here not ask the qeustion again and again but refer to this section which i have highlighted
I have some plans and ideas. I am sure it would be duplicates of what you intelligent people people have already talked about and maybe implemented in full. Now for me to talk about my ideas (which you ask because you doubt my intentions) i would say i also doubt you guys intentions. I get abuses and specially i have MINUS 2000 points (That many people hated my idea), so for me to talk about it i need some questionable action from you guys who gave me reds because you beleive i am wrong and now want me to explain myself but you yourselves will not change you attitude or hostility
I say this in the nicest way possible.
1. Instead of wasting time by answering here on the post, do something constructive for your own gc (whatever that may be).
2. If you do not believe in IV and what it does, you are truly wasting your time. Second, which IV provision do you not believe in - visa recapture? excluding dependents from being counted? removal of country caps? which one of these hurts your prospects of getting the gc?
3. Watching cspan definitely gives a person a better understanding of what is happening. No questions about it. But it is a passive exercise, as there is nothing you have done or can do or will do to change the outcome of what is happening.
4. Let us hope that this DV bill goes somewhere - what kind of activities do you suggest we should do to prepare for it? With specific details, you may be able to persuade people.
Ahh my friend willgetgc you are back and thanks for asking nicely. That is really appreciated. Ahh i see that you still have a tinge of anger but no problem. this is progress
1. Instead of wasting time by answering here on the post, do something constructive for your own gc (whatever that may be).
Some one has to make it clear and by that i mean explicityly clear to you all that the fact is you people are not the only ones who can write eloquontly and articulate and idea. And that your mob mentality ganging will not work anymore, There are other peoples out there and they also have idea and this is the one way to make sure all you people read what is going on becasue my friend you all are reading. This is the first step. The next step would be discussion of an idea and so one
2. If you do not believe in IV and what it does, you are truly wasting your time. Second, which IV provision do you not believe in - visa recapture? excluding dependents from being counted? removal of country caps? which one of these hurts your prospects of getting the gc?
None hurt my prcopect instal All are good for my prospect but my simple statement is that nothing small has passed in congress so there is no gaurentee that anything big will pass so instead of hangng on to the same old ideas (We can all can go back to them when there is mommentum on it) it is time to think about new out of box ideas
3. Watching cspan definitely gives a person a better understanding of what is happening. No questions about it. But it is a passive exercise, as there is nothing you have done or can do or will do to change the outcome of what is happening.
It seems that you are way behind the curve here my friend. That was written a long time agao but no matter you read it that is important. To your question yes watching CPAN is a start, i agree a passive start but a start. The next step is active participation but looks like that is something which will not be allowed to happen by all the senior members and donors of IV
4. Let us hope that this DV bill goes somewhere - what kind of activities do you suggest we should do to prepare for it? With specific details, you may be able to persuade people.
Ok my friend this is being asked so many times and it is painfull (Physcially) to type it again and again and so i will do it just once more and i would request all IV members donors to read about it here not ask the qeustion again and again but refer to this section which i have highlighted
I have some plans and ideas. I am sure it would be duplicates of what you intelligent people people have already talked about and maybe implemented in full. Now for me to talk about my ideas (which you ask because you doubt my intentions) i would say i also doubt you guys intentions. I get abuses and specially i have MINUS 2000 points (That many people hated my idea), so for me to talk about it i need some questionable action from you guys who gave me reds because you beleive i am wrong and now want me to explain myself but you yourselves will not change you attitude or hostility
more...
gondalguru
07-15 11:09 PM
Some one has done a very good analysis in this thread.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=4285&page=107
Here is copy and paste of the post by gcobessesed
----------------------------------
Reading this post and the Ron Gotcher numbers, I see some answers for the pending India backlog number question and a silver lining for EB2.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drirshad View Post
(Quoting Ron Gotcher) The CIS backlog does not appear to be as serious as I had been told previously. Rather than 600,000 pending employment based AOS cases, it is likely less than 400,000 pending cases.
Quote:
Indian applicants make up approximately 40 to 45 per cent of the entire employment based quota backlog
Therefore, about 160,000 applications are pending for India!
As we have seen before, EB3 and EB2 are almost the same proportion for India with EB3 being slightly higher. So, about 85,000 for EB3 and 75,000 for EB2 are pending.
Quote:
Mr. Oppenheim explained that while the Visa Office initially took the view that visa numbers had to fall down into employment third preference before the could fall across to the individual country quotas, but after further review, additional legislation, and consultation with Congress, they concluded that they have to allocate the fall across within individual preference petitions first.
This means, EB2 will get all unused EB1 visas and EB3 will only get 1/3 of the total 140,000 employment based visas (and 7% per country) until EB2 becomes current.
Also, because 40-45% of the applications are from India, we can assume 40% of the yearly EB1+EB2 *may* be applied to EB2 India. i.e. approximately 35,000 visas per year for India EB2!!!
Putting this in perspective with the pending 75,000 EB2 India applications, we should see all of them approved in the next 3 years. i.e. If your EB2 India priority date is in early 2007, then your I-485 will be approved by 2011, which is fantastic!
If you assume a uniform distribution of applications between Apr 2004 and Apr 2007 (say), it is straightforward to calculate when your date might become current in the next 3 years.
So, according to this, the cut-off date for EB2 India should move towards end of 2004 in the Oct/Nov bulletin. If that happens, then the above argument will be validated.
__________________
I am very confident that EB-2 india will become current in about 14-18 months.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=4285&page=107
Here is copy and paste of the post by gcobessesed
----------------------------------
Reading this post and the Ron Gotcher numbers, I see some answers for the pending India backlog number question and a silver lining for EB2.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drirshad View Post
(Quoting Ron Gotcher) The CIS backlog does not appear to be as serious as I had been told previously. Rather than 600,000 pending employment based AOS cases, it is likely less than 400,000 pending cases.
Quote:
Indian applicants make up approximately 40 to 45 per cent of the entire employment based quota backlog
Therefore, about 160,000 applications are pending for India!
As we have seen before, EB3 and EB2 are almost the same proportion for India with EB3 being slightly higher. So, about 85,000 for EB3 and 75,000 for EB2 are pending.
Quote:
Mr. Oppenheim explained that while the Visa Office initially took the view that visa numbers had to fall down into employment third preference before the could fall across to the individual country quotas, but after further review, additional legislation, and consultation with Congress, they concluded that they have to allocate the fall across within individual preference petitions first.
This means, EB2 will get all unused EB1 visas and EB3 will only get 1/3 of the total 140,000 employment based visas (and 7% per country) until EB2 becomes current.
Also, because 40-45% of the applications are from India, we can assume 40% of the yearly EB1+EB2 *may* be applied to EB2 India. i.e. approximately 35,000 visas per year for India EB2!!!
Putting this in perspective with the pending 75,000 EB2 India applications, we should see all of them approved in the next 3 years. i.e. If your EB2 India priority date is in early 2007, then your I-485 will be approved by 2011, which is fantastic!
If you assume a uniform distribution of applications between Apr 2004 and Apr 2007 (say), it is straightforward to calculate when your date might become current in the next 3 years.
So, according to this, the cut-off date for EB2 India should move towards end of 2004 in the Oct/Nov bulletin. If that happens, then the above argument will be validated.
__________________
I am very confident that EB-2 india will become current in about 14-18 months.
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
gc_lover
06-27 03:43 PM
I am sorry to say that all EB-3 and EB-2 dates have gone back to 2001. Please check DOS site.
*******You want rumor.....I will give you rumor ************
We want rumor not heartattack. ;)
*******You want rumor.....I will give you rumor ************
We want rumor not heartattack. ;)
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
sriramkalyan
01-13 07:55 PM
My take is BODY SHOPPING is killed.
H1Bs can work at direct employer or as an employee of direct vendor at off site.
No more small consulting firms sending resumes to direct vendors. May be in long term its good for H1Bs.
Mostly Desi consulting firms will get hit. Outsourcing companies like TCS,Infosys are direct vendors to big clients. They will OK ..
H1Bs can work at direct employer or as an employee of direct vendor at off site.
No more small consulting firms sending resumes to direct vendors. May be in long term its good for H1Bs.
Mostly Desi consulting firms will get hit. Outsourcing companies like TCS,Infosys are direct vendors to big clients. They will OK ..
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
akkakarla
04-28 04:23 PM
When will they register and when will this abuse of labor sub stop?
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
chanduv23
06-26 08:06 PM
DOS allocates GC numbers to USCIS adjustment cases only as the point of approval is reached. DOS can set/move/retrogress PD based on info provided by USCIS about number of cases at point of approval.
USCIS is not able to provide a good estimate of this number because
it can not calculate this number based on USCISs workload, and
it does not know the number of cases DOL will send to them. DOL again can not calculate the number of cases (it will send to USCIS) based on DOLs worload.
The following are from page 35 and beginning of page 36
The key to addressing this management issue at USCIS is to understand the dynamic interplay of priority dates and shifting workloads of three departments, and to know with greater precision and accuracy the size and details of USCIS� workloads.
The tri-agency meetings seek to expand inter-agency communication regarding expected new demands and surges, workflows, and priority dates. During the meetings, there is an examination of the case management systems and data collection processes used to assess workflows through each entity, particularly USCIS.
Although USCIS stated in its 2006 Annual Report Response (at p. 8) that it provides detailed data to DOS, the tri-agency group identified gaps in USCIS� data.
So "At the point of Approval" DOS can actually set/move/retrogress dates. Based on USCIS input. As USCIS is not able to handle this accurately, chances are that at a particular stage USCIS may alert DOS and DOS may retrogress dates - chances are there (though I personally feel this will not happen in July)
Which means what some of these lawyers are saying is not speculation but a definite possibility.
USCIS is not able to provide a good estimate of this number because
it can not calculate this number based on USCISs workload, and
it does not know the number of cases DOL will send to them. DOL again can not calculate the number of cases (it will send to USCIS) based on DOLs worload.
The following are from page 35 and beginning of page 36
The key to addressing this management issue at USCIS is to understand the dynamic interplay of priority dates and shifting workloads of three departments, and to know with greater precision and accuracy the size and details of USCIS� workloads.
The tri-agency meetings seek to expand inter-agency communication regarding expected new demands and surges, workflows, and priority dates. During the meetings, there is an examination of the case management systems and data collection processes used to assess workflows through each entity, particularly USCIS.
Although USCIS stated in its 2006 Annual Report Response (at p. 8) that it provides detailed data to DOS, the tri-agency group identified gaps in USCIS� data.
So "At the point of Approval" DOS can actually set/move/retrogress dates. Based on USCIS input. As USCIS is not able to handle this accurately, chances are that at a particular stage USCIS may alert DOS and DOS may retrogress dates - chances are there (though I personally feel this will not happen in July)
Which means what some of these lawyers are saying is not speculation but a definite possibility.
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
eb3_nepa
06-28 12:54 PM
it is fine to fedex on saturday or not..Please let me know. I have to call my lawyer.
From what i know,your application will not be accepted if it reaches there before July 1st. Since July 1st is a sunday, the earliest you can send it is Monday july 2nd.
From what i know,your application will not be accepted if it reaches there before July 1st. Since July 1st is a sunday, the earliest you can send it is Monday july 2nd.
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
krishna.ahd
02-18 09:18 PM
This is actually a pretty good argument/statistic. However; it isn't specific to employment base but rather to worldwide level of immigration from all sources.
Even one inch wider gate also will reduce few years of waiting
Even one inch wider gate also will reduce few years of waiting
girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14%
H1BinNY
07-04 09:37 AM
I am not part of this mess but here is my 2 cents contribution. NBC reporter
NBC News Channel 4
Monica Morales
Her email is
monica.morales@nbc.com
NBC News Channel 4
Monica Morales
Her email is
monica.morales@nbc.com
hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11%
satyasaich
03-19 03:06 PM
For the record, when i left one of the Big 5, they still answered for 45 day letter, LC was approved, used for someone else (in Feb/07) who is in need.
How do i know? it's very simple. There were 63 LCs pending in Philadephia BEC, which are EB2s with a priority dates in Jan / Feb2002. Some of my colleagues who were with the same company already filed 140+485 last month.
Since this is a public forum, i can not give the name of the company
My company cancelled my labor process the day I resigned, tell me which big reputed company responded to a 45 day letter even when the candidate was not working with them, so that leaves us with companies like Cybersoft who filed multiple I-140 on one labor approval or there are people who are running parallel processes just to be safe and they are buying the sub. labor,so now even if the companies intention's are good,filling I-140 multiple times creates backlog in the service centers and then it is up to your fate if your file is picked up in the numerical order, in concurrent filling it was a race who got the the GC first the original beneficiary or the person who paid price for the same labor. Who are the people opposing substitution ban or the 45 day rule if you find them you will get your answers.
How do i know? it's very simple. There were 63 LCs pending in Philadephia BEC, which are EB2s with a priority dates in Jan / Feb2002. Some of my colleagues who were with the same company already filed 140+485 last month.
Since this is a public forum, i can not give the name of the company
My company cancelled my labor process the day I resigned, tell me which big reputed company responded to a 45 day letter even when the candidate was not working with them, so that leaves us with companies like Cybersoft who filed multiple I-140 on one labor approval or there are people who are running parallel processes just to be safe and they are buying the sub. labor,so now even if the companies intention's are good,filling I-140 multiple times creates backlog in the service centers and then it is up to your fate if your file is picked up in the numerical order, in concurrent filling it was a race who got the the GC first the original beneficiary or the person who paid price for the same labor. Who are the people opposing substitution ban or the 45 day rule if you find them you will get your answers.
arunmurthy
09-17 03:23 PM
I wish the statement is true.
I think your friends cousin got the card by mistake, that does not mean that it will see a significant moment for EB3 I. The only possibility is if USICIS wants to recapture the unused visa numbers over a period of time, then EB2 I, EB3 I all move together.
I think you are correct. Lets see how the next bulletin turns out to be.
I just pray EB3I moves to June 05.
I think your friends cousin got the card by mistake, that does not mean that it will see a significant moment for EB3 I. The only possibility is if USICIS wants to recapture the unused visa numbers over a period of time, then EB2 I, EB3 I all move together.
I think you are correct. Lets see how the next bulletin turns out to be.
I just pray EB3I moves to June 05.
samay
07-29 10:36 AM
Thanks a lot for your reply.
I had completed my BSc in computer science with 3 years & also completed my Masters(MCA) in computer science with 3 years.(both from India)
Total I have 6 years(3 yrs bachelors + 3 yrs masters) of education/qualification in Computer Science.
My labor has been approved & in that it is mentioned, position requires Masters degree.
Do I qualify for EB2 category?
I already filled I-140 in March 2008 under EB2.
I will really appreciate your response.
Thanks.
To answer your question I will have to go through all your I-140 documents. What did your academic evaluation and experiential evaluation stipulate.
I had completed my BSc in computer science with 3 years & also completed my Masters(MCA) in computer science with 3 years.(both from India)
Total I have 6 years(3 yrs bachelors + 3 yrs masters) of education/qualification in Computer Science.
My labor has been approved & in that it is mentioned, position requires Masters degree.
Do I qualify for EB2 category?
I already filled I-140 in March 2008 under EB2.
I will really appreciate your response.
Thanks.
To answer your question I will have to go through all your I-140 documents. What did your academic evaluation and experiential evaluation stipulate.
