Hope_GC
07-16 08:02 PM
I agree with you..
I've so many hard working American friends... it really make me want to work harder to compete with them, but these bunch of cry babies at Numbers are scared of skilled workers, they don't want to upgrade their skills, they want to work 9-5 and get paid for their incompetencies.
I've so many hard working American friends... it really make me want to work harder to compete with them, but these bunch of cry babies at Numbers are scared of skilled workers, they don't want to upgrade their skills, they want to work 9-5 and get paid for their incompetencies.
wallpaper kate and william kissing. kate
Dhundhun
01-19 03:50 AM
The reason I am asking is, in FL, recently I tried to take color copies of my passport in Staples, where I was not allowed to take photocopies of passport which was clearly labeled on copy machine and same thing at Kinko's and I wonder how you managed to get color copies.. (sorry folks my questions was way out from the main topic of this post).
Color photocopy of passport, immigration documents, currency notes, etc. (a list of 8-10 items) are totally illegal in USA. You may face legal consequences. I have color copiers both photo and laser. User manual clearly states that.
I am not sure why B/W copy could be illegal. Most of univerisities recommend students to keep a photocopy of immigration documents safely. See these sites
http://www.beloit.edu/~oie/int_students/f-1_maintain_status.html.
http://www.isso.cornell.edu/immigration/f1/f1.php
http://www.beloit.edu/~oie/int_students/f-1_maintain_status.html
http://iso.truman.edu/index.php?type=current&id=f1
These photocopies are supposed to be kept safely and seperately from originals and supposed be used for requesting replacement while originals are lost. These photocopies are not supposed to be shown to anybody else otherwise. Trying showing photocopies to govt. officials such as police, dmv, immigration officers, etc. - there will be questions on this. But when requesting replacement of a lost I20 or a lost passport by providing a photocopy of original, question related to photocopy (B/W) will not be asked.
Color photocopy of passport, immigration documents, currency notes, etc. (a list of 8-10 items) are totally illegal in USA. You may face legal consequences. I have color copiers both photo and laser. User manual clearly states that.
I am not sure why B/W copy could be illegal. Most of univerisities recommend students to keep a photocopy of immigration documents safely. See these sites
http://www.beloit.edu/~oie/int_students/f-1_maintain_status.html.
http://www.isso.cornell.edu/immigration/f1/f1.php
http://www.beloit.edu/~oie/int_students/f-1_maintain_status.html
http://iso.truman.edu/index.php?type=current&id=f1
These photocopies are supposed to be kept safely and seperately from originals and supposed be used for requesting replacement while originals are lost. These photocopies are not supposed to be shown to anybody else otherwise. Trying showing photocopies to govt. officials such as police, dmv, immigration officers, etc. - there will be questions on this. But when requesting replacement of a lost I20 or a lost passport by providing a photocopy of original, question related to photocopy (B/W) will not be asked.
tomchi007
02-21 05:12 PM
Pardon my ignorance and pls help me understand, how does PD impact the mass 485 applications sent July/August 2007?
I thought the PD is only relevant for being able to apply for 485 and didnt matter if your 485 application had been received. Am I wrong?
I thought the PD is only relevant for being able to apply for 485 and didnt matter if your 485 application had been received. Am I wrong?
2011 Kate and Prince William
santosh08872
03-17 04:29 PM
Mine is EB3, 17th June 2002
more...
pcs
07-02 07:42 PM
I put in $100 today to fight for our cause
god_bless_you
12-13 07:40 AM
Whats the advice on this from core group?
can we start mass web faxing USCIS for rule change?
can we start mass web faxing USCIS for rule change?
more...
bheemi123
10-03 01:31 PM
I am in a very Bad situation it seems, please help.
I am working in US on L1B visa and Wife on L2. then Wife got a Job and her employer filled her 485.
In the mean time I applied for H1 (through a consultant, to get out of the L1B company). Looks like the H1 Got Approved. Now, I think the problem is, If I switch to H1, then she will loose her job and our chance of Getting EAD will go.
I do NOT want to go for H1, but EAD Is important to me. Is there a Way I can keep my L1? (so that my wife can keep her job)
Please help
Just go out of the country and enter on l1 again..u r h1b autoamtically be go out ..and u will continue to stay on l1 visa..but make sure u r wife gets advance parole to retunr to contry..
I am working in US on L1B visa and Wife on L2. then Wife got a Job and her employer filled her 485.
In the mean time I applied for H1 (through a consultant, to get out of the L1B company). Looks like the H1 Got Approved. Now, I think the problem is, If I switch to H1, then she will loose her job and our chance of Getting EAD will go.
I do NOT want to go for H1, but EAD Is important to me. Is there a Way I can keep my L1? (so that my wife can keep her job)
Please help
Just go out of the country and enter on l1 again..u r h1b autoamtically be go out ..and u will continue to stay on l1 visa..but make sure u r wife gets advance parole to retunr to contry..
2010 quot;Kate and Williamquot; Royal
paulavijit
03-17 09:03 AM
Guy you are forgetting the 7% per country quota for issuing GC. Applicants from a particular country can only get 7% of the total GC available in a year.
Total employment based quota per year is 140,000 and 7% of it is 9800. So at the most only 9800 Indians can get GC per year. This count also includes the dependents.
So even if your PD is current and you have filed your I-485 but there may be more than 9800 Indians with the same status and hence only the first 9800 will get GC that year.
There are more than 100,000 primary Indian applicants who have filed their I-485 and assuming a average Indian family size of 3, there are 300,000 who are waiting for GC. Only 9800 can get in a year. So if the law does not change this backlog will finish in more than 30 years.
Total employment based quota per year is 140,000 and 7% of it is 9800. So at the most only 9800 Indians can get GC per year. This count also includes the dependents.
So even if your PD is current and you have filed your I-485 but there may be more than 9800 Indians with the same status and hence only the first 9800 will get GC that year.
There are more than 100,000 primary Indian applicants who have filed their I-485 and assuming a average Indian family size of 3, there are 300,000 who are waiting for GC. Only 9800 can get in a year. So if the law does not change this backlog will finish in more than 30 years.
more...
new_horizon
10-21 12:03 AM
reasoning with you. I can easily refute all your claims, and also prove my point. but I think it'll be a waste of my time. 'coz I am not trying to convert anybody to vote for the repubs. just can't help it, never heard anybody hiring a CEO just because he has experience organizing the company picnic :D . peace.
hair Husband and kate kissing kate
Kodi
04-01 11:36 AM
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.
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.
more...
leoindiano
02-19 09:33 AM
This bill has no hope to pass as long as it has that free pass for ANYBODY > 5 years.
Its amnesty when it comes to voting. Who will vote in this tough economy for amnesty....
Its amnesty when it comes to voting. Who will vote in this tough economy for amnesty....
hot of Prince William and Kate
namecheck3yr
02-21 11:32 AM
I am trying to immigrate to this country. I feel that I have my own responsibility to make this country a better place. From my own experience, I know that the namecheck is the most ridiculous process, needs immediate fix:
1. What is the legal base? No legal base makes it become such a black hole.
2. No time frame, they can use �case by case�, �national security� as excuses to randomly delay your cases.
3. It�s a lottery, we can only pray, some people get it cleared in one month, some more than 3 yrs.
4. Case by case? We�ve got a lottery program. Where is the justice, the fairness? How should those affected people plan their living and become a productive citizen?
5. National security? You should not give those �terrorist suspects� more that 3 yrs of freedom! Should it be done earlier before they enter this country?
6. The 911 terrorist attacks did not directly affect most people, but name checking makes many people very anxious. They are amplifying the effect of the terrorist attacks and that is what the terrorist wants. What is the efficiency of this measure?
7. No transparency, nobody knows how they do it.
8. Not responsive, you cannot get any meaningful response except those excuses.
9. You are guilty first, you do not have any chance to provide any assistance to them, and they won�t request any either.
1. What is the legal base? No legal base makes it become such a black hole.
2. No time frame, they can use �case by case�, �national security� as excuses to randomly delay your cases.
3. It�s a lottery, we can only pray, some people get it cleared in one month, some more than 3 yrs.
4. Case by case? We�ve got a lottery program. Where is the justice, the fairness? How should those affected people plan their living and become a productive citizen?
5. National security? You should not give those �terrorist suspects� more that 3 yrs of freedom! Should it be done earlier before they enter this country?
6. The 911 terrorist attacks did not directly affect most people, but name checking makes many people very anxious. They are amplifying the effect of the terrorist attacks and that is what the terrorist wants. What is the efficiency of this measure?
7. No transparency, nobody knows how they do it.
8. Not responsive, you cannot get any meaningful response except those excuses.
9. You are guilty first, you do not have any chance to provide any assistance to them, and they won�t request any either.
more...
house kate kissing. william kate
eb3India
06-12 08:08 AM
Pitha (shree)
if you read previous discussion and particulary logiclife post, you will find, any immigration reform bill will not be discussed let alone passed until it resolves illegal immigration issue
gone are the days where h1b increase use to be part of some budget bill.
you just can't do that any more
only chance SKILL has is thru CIR or other forum where it address illegal issue,
my point is we don't need any legislative change at this point,
IV is for legals who are already here legally and our demands are very simple, such as if they allow use to file I485 with being current and if they use unused visa numbers and allocate them to over subscribed countries our life will be lot better,
we need to rethink our stratergy and stop knocking these law makers, who cares only about illegals, either they are against them or far them, but they just don't really care about legals
if you read previous discussion and particulary logiclife post, you will find, any immigration reform bill will not be discussed let alone passed until it resolves illegal immigration issue
gone are the days where h1b increase use to be part of some budget bill.
you just can't do that any more
only chance SKILL has is thru CIR or other forum where it address illegal issue,
my point is we don't need any legislative change at this point,
IV is for legals who are already here legally and our demands are very simple, such as if they allow use to file I485 with being current and if they use unused visa numbers and allocate them to over subscribed countries our life will be lot better,
we need to rethink our stratergy and stop knocking these law makers, who cares only about illegals, either they are against them or far them, but they just don't really care about legals
tattoo hair kate and william kiss.
desi3933
02-10 12:22 PM
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:
>> I believed we get at least 7% (cap) + any unused numbers.
Two things -
1. Since EB3 Row is not current, eb-3 India will not get any unused numbers.
2. 7% is the country-cap, and this is not quota. In other words, no more than 7%.
On a practical note, since there is high demand for immigrant visa numbers for eb-3 India category, the visa allocation should be close to 7%.
In short, 7% is just a maximum cap, not the minimum quota.
__________________
Not a legal advice.
I did not know of getting less than 7% when there is high demand. :confused:
>> I believed we get at least 7% (cap) + any unused numbers.
Two things -
1. Since EB3 Row is not current, eb-3 India will not get any unused numbers.
2. 7% is the country-cap, and this is not quota. In other words, no more than 7%.
On a practical note, since there is high demand for immigrant visa numbers for eb-3 India category, the visa allocation should be close to 7%.
In short, 7% is just a maximum cap, not the minimum quota.
__________________
Not a legal advice.
more...
pictures william kissing. kate
mhathi
03-03 04:51 PM
You need an option: My home buying decision is independent of green card process.
dresses prince william kate middleton
GCDream
02-09 04:23 PM
They wasted 580 EB3 India visas last year (2009).
Total available EB3 India GC Visas per year: 2802
Used: 2222
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV_2.pdf
Total available EB3 India GC Visas per year: 2802
Used: 2222
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV_2.pdf
more...
makeup prince william kate middleton
BharatPremi
03-12 12:02 PM
I am worried about this financial reports. I am not sure many consulting companies will give those to employee who is leaving
Yes, I believe, most companies (new employers - mid level) would not even ask and if requested and you can not provide then generally they may not make a big deal but underlying result for asking is to check if financial strength is "Good" and I-140 is approved then no problem hiring an EAD holder.
Yes, I believe, most companies (new employers - mid level) would not even ask and if requested and you can not provide then generally they may not make a big deal but underlying result for asking is to check if financial strength is "Good" and I-140 is approved then no problem hiring an EAD holder.
girlfriend Prince William kissed his wife
eilsoe
03-08 04:24 PM
right, march 10th :lol:
sorry.. had my head somewhere else at the time... :sure:
sorry.. had my head somewhere else at the time... :sure:
hairstyles prince william kissing kate
transpass
04-10 12:07 PM
Here are the details for last year and years before:
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
Thanks Kondur. That was a very good presentation of the numbers. I very much appreciate it.
Now,
1. Why did EB1 last year needed spillover visas, although it was current all the time? If a category is current, isn't that it has less demand than allocated numbers?
2. As per May bulletin, EB4 might need a cut off. So we cannot expect any spillover from EB4. So that is clear. Now the spillover chances are from EB5, EB2 ROW and EB1(?). I am including EB1 because, given the current economy over the past year, should there be a better possibility of more spillover from EB2 ROW and EB1 compared to last year?
3. Also why are the total EB numbers different in different fiscal years (e.g., 141020 in FY2009, 162949 in FY 2008 and 154497 in FY2007)? In FYs 2007 and 2008 did the extra visas come from Family based while it did not for FY 2009? If so, why is it so?
4. Based on Pending 485 data of March 2010, I barely see few hundred EB4s. And hardly considerable number of EB1s. What's going on? If we go by this data, we should be getting good chunk of spillover numbers...
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Green%20Card/Green%20Card%20Through%20a%20Job/Employment%20Based%20I-485%20Pending%20Inventory-Total%203-8-2010.pdf
Thanks,
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
Thanks Kondur. That was a very good presentation of the numbers. I very much appreciate it.
Now,
1. Why did EB1 last year needed spillover visas, although it was current all the time? If a category is current, isn't that it has less demand than allocated numbers?
2. As per May bulletin, EB4 might need a cut off. So we cannot expect any spillover from EB4. So that is clear. Now the spillover chances are from EB5, EB2 ROW and EB1(?). I am including EB1 because, given the current economy over the past year, should there be a better possibility of more spillover from EB2 ROW and EB1 compared to last year?
3. Also why are the total EB numbers different in different fiscal years (e.g., 141020 in FY2009, 162949 in FY 2008 and 154497 in FY2007)? In FYs 2007 and 2008 did the extra visas come from Family based while it did not for FY 2009? If so, why is it so?
4. Based on Pending 485 data of March 2010, I barely see few hundred EB4s. And hardly considerable number of EB1s. What's going on? If we go by this data, we should be getting good chunk of spillover numbers...
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Green%20Card/Green%20Card%20Through%20a%20Job/Employment%20Based%20I-485%20Pending%20Inventory-Total%203-8-2010.pdf
Thanks,
Ineedsleep
01-29 02:41 PM
at last something Im not embarassed to submit!! like the 25 line code contest :hugegrin:
mbawa2574
02-17 08:56 AM
I am sorry if I offended anyone. I don't recall how.
and by the way, my friend, you really really need a life :-) That's the last thing you'll hear from me on this subject.
peace out
Thanks again for supporting IV. Only point I was against was your support of racism of 40's. Anywaz I understand that you want to convey some other message but probably used the wrong link. Peace and Unity !!
and by the way, my friend, you really really need a life :-) That's the last thing you'll hear from me on this subject.
peace out
Thanks again for supporting IV. Only point I was against was your support of racism of 40's. Anywaz I understand that you want to convey some other message but probably used the wrong link. Peace and Unity !!
0 comments:
Post a Comment