chetanjumani
04-23 11:03 PM
Congrats Googler.
Enjoy your GC
Enjoy your GC
wallpaper Pictures of 1986 chevy
rpulipati
09-26 11:06 AM
I'm sorry if I sounded like a hypocrite. My interpretation was not to participate in FSB debate for PR visas as the debate was concentrated on H1-B visas.
I support H1-B's and please continue in the debate for H1-B's.
Actually, I think participating in the debate to present the other point of view (as in 'foreign workers are good for the US economy') is a good thing to do. Giving the forum out to the antis is a good way to make sure Durbin gets his message reaffirmed. Well, that's all true, unless you are one of those people who likes to yell 'Close the door!' right after they get in.
I support H1-B's and please continue in the debate for H1-B's.
Actually, I think participating in the debate to present the other point of view (as in 'foreign workers are good for the US economy') is a good thing to do. Giving the forum out to the antis is a good way to make sure Durbin gets his message reaffirmed. Well, that's all true, unless you are one of those people who likes to yell 'Close the door!' right after they get in.
kutra
07-21 10:03 AM
once you get past the I-140, the typical reasons for denial of I-485 are some criminal background, out of status >180 days, mistakes on forms etc.
IMO a simple case would be someone who:
- has never changed employers
- was employed with a large US corporation which is more likely to have paid him his salary every month (as opposed to a 3-4 person company where getting hold of the W-2 is the only way to confirm).
- was never denied any application (change of status / entry to US)
- has clear medical records
- has clear documents related to birth certificate
Complicated cases are when:
- someone has repeatedly changed and employers since entering the US. The IO will need to make sure status was maintained throughout all those transitions.
- some document was not submitted, or not submitted with transalations/affidavits etc. Commonly birth certificate issues.
You are correct. Unfortuantely, they are not looking for these "ripe" or "low hanging fruits" cases in a FIFO order. It can be highly exasperating when a "ripe" case with a March 2006 PD gets approved when "ripe" cases with PDs earlier than 2003 are languishing! That really makes the whole system even more unjust.
IMO a simple case would be someone who:
- has never changed employers
- was employed with a large US corporation which is more likely to have paid him his salary every month (as opposed to a 3-4 person company where getting hold of the W-2 is the only way to confirm).
- was never denied any application (change of status / entry to US)
- has clear medical records
- has clear documents related to birth certificate
Complicated cases are when:
- someone has repeatedly changed and employers since entering the US. The IO will need to make sure status was maintained throughout all those transitions.
- some document was not submitted, or not submitted with transalations/affidavits etc. Commonly birth certificate issues.
You are correct. Unfortuantely, they are not looking for these "ripe" or "low hanging fruits" cases in a FIFO order. It can be highly exasperating when a "ripe" case with a March 2006 PD gets approved when "ripe" cases with PDs earlier than 2003 are languishing! That really makes the whole system even more unjust.
2011 picz18002.jpg 86 chevy truck
gc_wow
03-09 12:37 PM
why did row eb3 gone back 2 years?
more...
Administrator2
04-20 05:33 PM
I have already called seven members who have been active lately. I don't have other phone numbers. If you still need people to call. Let me know. You can PM me
Thank you gsc999. I will be emailing you contact information of more members.
Thank you gsc999. I will be emailing you contact information of more members.
andycool
03-16 02:04 PM
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.
Hello Desi,
"Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by documentarily qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation, that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may require the establishment of an earlier cut-off date than that which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
Furthermore, Section 202(a)(2) reads, �2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. Subject to paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed seven percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or two percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.� The seven percent per-country limit specified in INA 202(a)(2) is considered to be for both Family-sponsored and Employment-based numbers combined.
Allocation of visa numbers under Section 202(e) is accomplished as follows:
1. If based on historical patterns or current demand it appears that during a fiscal year number use by aliens chargeable to a particular country will exceed the per-country numerical limit for both the Family and Employment preferences combined, that country would be considered oversubscribed. Both the Family and Employment preferences would be subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1).
2. Sometimes during a fiscal year it may become apparent that because of a lack of demand in the Family preferences, number use by aliens chargeable to an oversubscribed country will be well within the per-country numerical limit. In such case the excess Family numbers would be made available to the Employment preferences subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1). Each of the first three Employment categories would receive 28.6% of the excess numbers, and each of the Fourth and Fifth preference categories 7.1%. (Fall-across would likewise apply if an oversubscribed country lacked sufficient demand in the Employment preferences but had excess demand in the Family preferences.)
If a foreign state other than an oversubscribed country has little Family preference demand but considerable Employment preference demand, the otherwise unused Family numbers fall across to Employment (and vice versa) for purposes of that foreign state�s annual numerical limit. For example, in FY-2009 South Korea used a grand total of 15,899 Family and Employment preference numbers, of which 1,688 were Family numbers and 14,211 were Employment numbers. This grand total was well within the FY-2009 per-country numerical limit of 25,620 Family and Employment numbers combined, so South Korea was not oversubscribed. The unused Family numbers were distributed within the Employment categories, allowing South Korea to be considerably over the 9,800 Employment limit which would have been in effect had it been an oversubscribed country.
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
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.
Hello Desi,
"Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by documentarily qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation, that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may require the establishment of an earlier cut-off date than that which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
Furthermore, Section 202(a)(2) reads, �2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. Subject to paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed seven percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or two percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.� The seven percent per-country limit specified in INA 202(a)(2) is considered to be for both Family-sponsored and Employment-based numbers combined.
Allocation of visa numbers under Section 202(e) is accomplished as follows:
1. If based on historical patterns or current demand it appears that during a fiscal year number use by aliens chargeable to a particular country will exceed the per-country numerical limit for both the Family and Employment preferences combined, that country would be considered oversubscribed. Both the Family and Employment preferences would be subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1).
2. Sometimes during a fiscal year it may become apparent that because of a lack of demand in the Family preferences, number use by aliens chargeable to an oversubscribed country will be well within the per-country numerical limit. In such case the excess Family numbers would be made available to the Employment preferences subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1). Each of the first three Employment categories would receive 28.6% of the excess numbers, and each of the Fourth and Fifth preference categories 7.1%. (Fall-across would likewise apply if an oversubscribed country lacked sufficient demand in the Employment preferences but had excess demand in the Family preferences.)
If a foreign state other than an oversubscribed country has little Family preference demand but considerable Employment preference demand, the otherwise unused Family numbers fall across to Employment (and vice versa) for purposes of that foreign state�s annual numerical limit. For example, in FY-2009 South Korea used a grand total of 15,899 Family and Employment preference numbers, of which 1,688 were Family numbers and 14,211 were Employment numbers. This grand total was well within the FY-2009 per-country numerical limit of 25,620 Family and Employment numbers combined, so South Korea was not oversubscribed. The unused Family numbers were distributed within the Employment categories, allowing South Korea to be considerably over the 9,800 Employment limit which would have been in effect had it been an oversubscribed country.
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 ;)
more...
my2239
06-11 08:38 AM
sent message
Thank you for creating the easy to use interface
Thank you for creating the easy to use interface
2010 1986 Chevy C30 Crew Cab Right
shiva7
05-26 11:54 PM
It was Sunday when I got off the bus in Phoenix and CBP asked me for the papers. I was not carrying any leagal document with me at that time. They tried to get my info on their computer based on the info I gave them about me but they could not for misterious reasons. Ultimately they arrested me for not carrying papers with me and put me in jail. I spent horrible night in jail that Sunday. The next day Judge asked me more details and could find my data. They released me and warned me to carry such papers with me all the time.I never knew that I was supposed to keep a copy of the papers with me. I am just wondering who is supposed to notify us that we need to carry papers with us at all the times ?
more...
danu2007
11-20 10:54 PM
Today I got the second letter from USCIS regarding this request. The letter says they accepted the request and put in the pending que.
Also the letter says, "your request is deemed to constitute an agreement to pay any fees that may be chargeable up to $25.00" and continues and finally it says "most requests do not require any fees and if fees in excess of $25.00 are required, we will notify you beforehand"
Jusy wondering any one got this reply..
Also the letter says, "your request is deemed to constitute an agreement to pay any fees that may be chargeable up to $25.00" and continues and finally it says "most requests do not require any fees and if fees in excess of $25.00 are required, we will notify you beforehand"
Jusy wondering any one got this reply..
hair 1986 Chevy 4X4 Drivers Side
kaisersose
03-18 03:36 PM
At a minimum, EB3 ROW will advance sginficantly which is good for all those who were stuck in BEC.
It is believed country cap does not exist during the final quarter. If that is true, then some India EB2 (2004 and earlier) may also benefit.
It is believed country cap does not exist during the final quarter. If that is true, then some India EB2 (2004 and earlier) may also benefit.
more...
Libra
09-27 11:20 AM
thats true, it will take a while to adjust in home country once you move back, but after a while you feel so good that you never think of leaving the country. My family forcing me to look for a job in India.
hot Bill Hankinson - 86 Chevy 4x4
gbof
01-17 11:02 AM
I read your story (every line and every word) and portray my self in that but few small changes.
Very recently even I have learn't that GC is important, but not that important than your life, kids, parents,...
but I would certainly pray for you to get a job ASAP. I know the pain.
Read the post well before concluding and offer prayers
Very recently even I have learn't that GC is important, but not that important than your life, kids, parents,...
but I would certainly pray for you to get a job ASAP. I know the pain.
Read the post well before concluding and offer prayers
more...
house Fred Williams 1986 Chevy Truck
grinch
02-17 01:39 PM
for free applications, I like gmax.
tattoo picz18003.jpg 86 chevy truck
Pineapple
06-13 04:15 PM
I apologize for being rude earlier to Senthil. That was perhaps out of line.
What annoys me is the misconception many have regarding hiring a non-American, and what annoys me further is the fact that many H1Bs fall for the same facile arguments made by you-know-who.
Fact is, if we define displacement as "not hiring", then ANY hiring is, by definition, a displacement of one who is not hired.
For example: Say Jane is hired for X dollars per year, because John, who is equally qualified is not interested in working at that salary. Can John claim he was displaced by someone willing to work at a lower salary? Of course he can. But here is the deal: No matter how high you peg $ X (Say 120K), or how unique Jane is (Say Jane is the only person the company could find). Now keep increasing X, and at some point a John will walk in through the door since the money is good.
Bottom line? You may think you are not displacing anyone, but you ARE unless you are the only person on the planet who can do that job. For every Jane, one can find a disgruntled John. It makes not one jot of difference if you are American or Ethiopian. The Jane/John example I gave stands regardless.
What annoys me is the misconception many have regarding hiring a non-American, and what annoys me further is the fact that many H1Bs fall for the same facile arguments made by you-know-who.
Fact is, if we define displacement as "not hiring", then ANY hiring is, by definition, a displacement of one who is not hired.
For example: Say Jane is hired for X dollars per year, because John, who is equally qualified is not interested in working at that salary. Can John claim he was displaced by someone willing to work at a lower salary? Of course he can. But here is the deal: No matter how high you peg $ X (Say 120K), or how unique Jane is (Say Jane is the only person the company could find). Now keep increasing X, and at some point a John will walk in through the door since the money is good.
Bottom line? You may think you are not displacing anyone, but you ARE unless you are the only person on the planet who can do that job. For every Jane, one can find a disgruntled John. It makes not one jot of difference if you are American or Ethiopian. The Jane/John example I gave stands regardless.
more...
pictures 1986 Chevrolet K30 Pickup
chmur
03-23 08:56 PM
After arriving in US , typically It takes about a year or two before you start ur GC process.(Initial job/city jumping )
So most of the applicants in 01-02 arrived during the halcyon days of 99-00.
with this analogy, I don't expect too many applicant in 03-04
So most of the applicants in 01-02 arrived during the halcyon days of 99-00.
with this analogy, I don't expect too many applicant in 03-04
dresses a 1986 Chevy Astro 4x4 Van
kaisersose
08-09 03:25 PM
My wife is on L-1 currently and has an approved H-1b petition from company B which is a "change of status" effective October 01.
We would like to stick to the L-1 for some more time and from what I gather one way of doing it is for her to travel out of the country and move back in.
What other options do we have?
Thanks
We would like to stick to the L-1 for some more time and from what I gather one way of doing it is for her to travel out of the country and move back in.
What other options do we have?
Thanks
more...
makeup used #39;86 C20 farm truck.
vin13
02-10 10:59 AM
No disrespect meant but what's this? Faux News? As per the law, there is no quota of 2802 green cards for EB3 India. Its a ceiling not a quota. The difference is with ceiling of 7% USCIS can allocate lower number than 7% of 28.6% of 140,000 to EB3 India. If it would be 7% quota, then it would be fair to ask for our "right" for another 580 more green cards. That's why this is not real information, its Faux news.
desi3933 has correctly mentioned the relevant stats. Just in case you missed it:
This is the reason I do not find that immigration business shop credible any more.
I believed we get atleast 7% (cap) + any unused numbers. As there is a possiblilty of getting more than 7%, it is not considered a quota.
I did not know of getting less than 7% when there is high demand. :confused:
desi3933 has correctly mentioned the relevant stats. Just in case you missed it:
This is the reason I do not find that immigration business shop credible any more.
I believed we get atleast 7% (cap) + any unused numbers. As there is a possiblilty of getting more than 7%, it is not considered a quota.
I did not know of getting less than 7% when there is high demand. :confused:
girlfriend 86 Chevy Truck Lifted.
bharani
11-04 11:31 AM
Nrc2008064195
hairstyles 86 Chevy Truck.
GCNaseeb
03-07 09:45 AM
I got hell out of my sponsoring employer. While I worked for them over 5 years, I had a terrible experience with their HR and some other souls. So I decided to make use of AC21 and changed the job. I feel so much relaxed now and I see light at the end of tunnel. My Green card is around the corner. USCIS has no reason to deny my petition. Afterall, we have just one life to live; how long you can let your career stegnate just for the sake of a piece of paper. Does that makes sense at all?
angelfire76
02-13 06:17 PM
This is ridiculous; no one asked you to come to this country.
Nor are you entitled to anything besides what they chose to bestow.
Remember that.
Can I then go ask your employer as to why he/she is paying you more than what they might think you deserve to get ? :rolleyes:
After all nobody is forcing you to work with the company right?
Nor are you entitled to anything besides what they chose to bestow.
Remember that.
Can I then go ask your employer as to why he/she is paying you more than what they might think you deserve to get ? :rolleyes:
After all nobody is forcing you to work with the company right?
willgetgc2005
04-20 02:37 PM
Logiclife,
If you have contacts in Cisco, Intel etc in bay area , can you please spread the word so morepeople turn out. I am about 8 hours drive form San Jose. will try to make it. This is awesome. We need to get as many people as possible on war footing.
Maybe no banners or signs because this is a town-hall style meeting and not a rally. I'll let you know if its ok to do that.
But surely, it would be good if you bring a sign/banner saying "www.immigrationvoice.org" which would help us get more coverage is its caught by the media.
If you have contacts in Cisco, Intel etc in bay area , can you please spread the word so morepeople turn out. I am about 8 hours drive form San Jose. will try to make it. This is awesome. We need to get as many people as possible on war footing.
Maybe no banners or signs because this is a town-hall style meeting and not a rally. I'll let you know if its ok to do that.
But surely, it would be good if you bring a sign/banner saying "www.immigrationvoice.org" which would help us get more coverage is its caught by the media.
0 comments:
Post a Comment