himu73
03-29 10:46 AM
there a plan to meet/call NJ senators
wallpaper Art Nouveau Artist Alfons
nat23
06-12 03:01 PM
I think the whole discussion can be summed up in the following manner: The CIR in its present form does more harm to us than good. If we can manage to get a favourable amendment attached then we are in good shape else we are in trouble.
People might approach the issue in different ways:some might want to take a chance and work on it to get an admendment and some might not want to support it fearing an amendment wont be possible.
People might approach the issue in different ways:some might want to take a chance and work on it to get an admendment and some might not want to support it fearing an amendment wont be possible.
alisa
01-18 08:40 PM
I am fed up of the blissful ignorance that is so characteristic of so many EB-based retrogressed folks.
Why should I care about this forum? Why should I contribute? Tell me what is wrong with me just sitting on my butt, and looking at Visa bulletins every month if
1) I am an Indian with EB-3 PD of Jun 2002 or later
2) I am an Indian with EB-2 PD after Jan 2005.
3) I am ROW with EB-3 PD of 2003
4) I am ROW with EB-2. (Ok. Here you can't convince me.)
Any other categories I am missing.
Post numbers, facts, figures, analysis. We will condense it to something marketable, so I can send it to people like us, and get them to participate.
BTW, I am ROW EB-3 with an expected, I am hoping, PD of 1Q 2007.
Why should I care about this forum? Why should I contribute? Tell me what is wrong with me just sitting on my butt, and looking at Visa bulletins every month if
1) I am an Indian with EB-3 PD of Jun 2002 or later
2) I am an Indian with EB-2 PD after Jan 2005.
3) I am ROW with EB-3 PD of 2003
4) I am ROW with EB-2. (Ok. Here you can't convince me.)
Any other categories I am missing.
Post numbers, facts, figures, analysis. We will condense it to something marketable, so I can send it to people like us, and get them to participate.
BTW, I am ROW EB-3 with an expected, I am hoping, PD of 1Q 2007.
2011 Likes include, art nouveau,
spicy_guy
07-12 05:56 PM
:)Anything can be done without an attorney....the issue arises if USCIS or DOl comes back with a question. Best thing is to put in some money, pay an attorney and let them handle it.
Most of the immigration stuff is simple if everything is clean....but you never know.
Why pay for an attorney unless your case is complicated?
Its straightforward and you can do it on your own.
Again, if your case is a bit different and needs a lot of documentation, you would need an attorney.
Most of the immigration stuff is simple if everything is clean....but you never know.
Why pay for an attorney unless your case is complicated?
Its straightforward and you can do it on your own.
Again, if your case is a bit different and needs a lot of documentation, you would need an attorney.
more...
newuser
03-12 08:34 AM
Disappointed and hope the bench sitters will start reaching out the law makers
feedfront
11-09 12:20 PM
Congrats ! How long did it take for CPO email since u recieved the 485 , I-797 and which service center
Well, my case is with TSC. But, it is not yet approved. That email was sent by mistake. I've responded to RFE in Sept's end. Waiting for .....
Well, my case is with TSC. But, it is not yet approved. That email was sent by mistake. I've responded to RFE in Sept's end. Waiting for .....
more...
CSPAvictim
07-09 06:30 PM
I came across this law about the departmental control of numerical limitations, and I'd appreciate it if you all could post your interpretations of the same.
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
2010 finest art nouveau artists
DUNBAR
09-10 01:50 PM
EB3 India is in the year 2002. For the applicaiton process, the Perm certifications expire if there is no I-140 filed with a speculated amount of time, I think it is 90 days. For EB3 I with a 2010 priority date now, how does this system justify filing I-485 so many years down the line, when the PERM certification itself was validated so many years back. This process just doesn't make any sense.
more...
chanduv23
07-13 07:18 AM
That is America my friends - people tend to move towards the direction of the wind.
A typical example - my wife was stressing out to get into a residency and was seeking help from contacts - everyone told "it is not easy for immigrants" it is a challenge, it is difficult." When she got into residency, the same people say that America is a land of opportunities, and your wife is intelligent ......
Thats how this Sheela Murthy is. Cannot initiate anything, but will want to take credit for participating in success.
A lot of Attorneys currently have no clue what is going on in the background.
A typical example - my wife was stressing out to get into a residency and was seeking help from contacts - everyone told "it is not easy for immigrants" it is a challenge, it is difficult." When she got into residency, the same people say that America is a land of opportunities, and your wife is intelligent ......
Thats how this Sheela Murthy is. Cannot initiate anything, but will want to take credit for participating in success.
A lot of Attorneys currently have no clue what is going on in the background.
hair with French Art Nouveau.
msgrewal81
02-19 02:44 PM
Looks like lots of >5 years people here. :D
It is my feeling that "Illegals>5 years" should not be preferred over "legals<5 years". I also think that this bill makes things tough for<5 years except temporarily reducing backlog(that too is a big 'maybe') . I am not arguing. You do what you do and I do what I do. I dont know what IV will do.
Thanks and good luck.
It is my feeling that "Illegals>5 years" should not be preferred over "legals<5 years". I also think that this bill makes things tough for<5 years except temporarily reducing backlog(that too is a big 'maybe') . I am not arguing. You do what you do and I do what I do. I dont know what IV will do.
Thanks and good luck.
more...
desi3933
01-31 07:55 AM
So does this mean that pending AOS has no meaning?
How about EAD.......if she switches to EAD in Feb with same employer and does not work from Mrach onward then?
My (mis)understanding was that as long as one has a pending AOS one can be in US without a job and paystub as long as one has a pending AOS.
Thanks for your help.
Well, you did not disclose before that she has pending I-485. That changes the whole scenario and provides lot more options.
She should change her status to AOS only by filing a new I-9 (provide EAD details) with her employer ASAP. This will cover her any period of unpaid leave (or benching). She can get back to H1 status by re-entering on H1 visa.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
How about EAD.......if she switches to EAD in Feb with same employer and does not work from Mrach onward then?
My (mis)understanding was that as long as one has a pending AOS one can be in US without a job and paystub as long as one has a pending AOS.
Thanks for your help.
Well, you did not disclose before that she has pending I-485. That changes the whole scenario and provides lot more options.
She should change her status to AOS only by filing a new I-9 (provide EAD details) with her employer ASAP. This will cover her any period of unpaid leave (or benching). She can get back to H1 status by re-entering on H1 visa.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
hot as an Art Nouveau artist.
waitingGC
01-18 11:15 AM
"This account has been permanently locked with a $0.00 USD balance. All information associated with this account has been blocked from the PayPal system and cannot be registered with another account."
When I was trying to make a monthly contribution, the above message was shown to me. I tried several times and got the same result. Can anyone tell me what happened and what I can do to fix it? Thanks.
I wonder if there were any other members who met the same problem. People may give up because of the trouble.
When I was trying to make a monthly contribution, the above message was shown to me. I tried several times and got the same result. Can anyone tell me what happened and what I can do to fix it? Thanks.
I wonder if there were any other members who met the same problem. People may give up because of the trouble.
more...
house ArtNouveauPoster.jpg
Jaime
09-10 04:13 PM
thx for catching that.. i m sending it now to my school
Great! Let's all do the same!!!
Great! Let's all do the same!!!
tattoo Manga, and art Nouveau,
desperatedesi
07-23 08:18 PM
Hi,
I am in the same boat and have lost my sleep. This is a once in a lifetime opportunity and my lawyer definitely did not have time to get the employment letter from my wife's employer.
Our attorney has also signed on our behalf in rush to file the 485 before the July 2nd deadline :mad:
Please can someone say with authority whether it is needed or not needed?
Man this is really killing me! I don't to thank or yell at my attorney for the mad rush and filing of 485 for July 2nd deadline.
I am in the same boat and have lost my sleep. This is a once in a lifetime opportunity and my lawyer definitely did not have time to get the employment letter from my wife's employer.
Our attorney has also signed on our behalf in rush to file the 485 before the July 2nd deadline :mad:
Please can someone say with authority whether it is needed or not needed?
Man this is really killing me! I don't to thank or yell at my attorney for the mad rush and filing of 485 for July 2nd deadline.
more...
pictures from art nouveau-styled
Jaime
09-10 04:32 PM
We love the U.S. We won't allow bad immigration policy to continue to hurt our country with a self-inflicted Reverse Brain Drain. Already 100,000 of us highly-skilled immigrants have left in frustration! We won't allow this to continue!!! We are going to stop this madness, AND IT ALL STARTS IN WASHINGTON ON THE 18th!!!! This is not only for ourselves, we are doing this for America!!!!!!!!!!!!
dresses The Tarot Art Nouveau was
CSPAvictim
07-09 07:17 PM
I'm not sure I totally understand what you said, but
a. The 27% limitation doesn't apply to the last quarter(July,August, Sept)
b. However, June falls in the third quarter for which the limitation DOES apply.
c.
text in bold has a GREY area....'plus remaining balance from previous months.'
They can always say the additional approvals were left over from previous months...
Like jonty_11 pointed out, Clause B states that numbers from previous months can be requested. Since it is a grey area, the USCIS may claim that in June (if they used up X number of visas) then (X-14,000) visas were balance numbers from previous months. And yet, it has to account for the 27% limitation for the third quarter.
It'll be interesting to see how USCIS explains itself in court.
Clause B is not the only thing. In any quarter they are not supposed to issue any more than 27% of 140,000(100%) = 37800. according to Clause A. After June 15th they issued 140,000 - 66000 = 74000. What about the last quarter quota of 37800? Where did it go? It was not supposed to be used before July.
a. The 27% limitation doesn't apply to the last quarter(July,August, Sept)
b. However, June falls in the third quarter for which the limitation DOES apply.
c.
text in bold has a GREY area....'plus remaining balance from previous months.'
They can always say the additional approvals were left over from previous months...
Like jonty_11 pointed out, Clause B states that numbers from previous months can be requested. Since it is a grey area, the USCIS may claim that in June (if they used up X number of visas) then (X-14,000) visas were balance numbers from previous months. And yet, it has to account for the 27% limitation for the third quarter.
It'll be interesting to see how USCIS explains itself in court.
Clause B is not the only thing. In any quarter they are not supposed to issue any more than 27% of 140,000(100%) = 37800. according to Clause A. After June 15th they issued 140,000 - 66000 = 74000. What about the last quarter quota of 37800? Where did it go? It was not supposed to be used before July.
more...
makeup Art Nouveau inspired man
bskrishna
07-03 01:32 PM
AFAIK, this does not work for people who are already in the US. One has to work in their native or different county to be eligible for the EB1 managerial position here. Some one might have sneaked away this way at some time. But this is definitely not happening on a large scale as EB1 is current for all countries for quite some time. If a lot of folks are getting away, EB1 cannot be current for long time.
Agree that there are not many. The companies that do them, typically do not sponsor for GC that often (comparing the H,L nos to their GC nos).
Agree that there are not many. The companies that do them, typically do not sponsor for GC that often (comparing the H,L nos to their GC nos).
girlfriend “The Art Nouveau Glory of
andycool
09-10 02:33 PM
What are the hopes for EB3-I?
ZERO
Till we spend our time in predictions and tracking, till the time we stop jumping the gun in calling for lawsuits, till the time we stop interpreting the INA to find a smoking gun, till the time we stop calling names for USCIS and DOS, till the time we stop blaming 245(i), till the time we stop engaging in eb2 v/s eb3 fight, till the time we stop fighting with each other over irrelevant things, till the time we stop creating these stupid polls, till the time we stop engaging in "number crunching" whatever that means, until that time there is ZERO hope for Eb3-I. Once we stop wasting our time on all these irrelevant things, we will then start spending our time on more meaningful things like speaking with the members of Congress. Then, and only then, there will be a chance of anything good happening for EB3-I.
Port to EB-2 ......
ZERO
Till we spend our time in predictions and tracking, till the time we stop jumping the gun in calling for lawsuits, till the time we stop interpreting the INA to find a smoking gun, till the time we stop calling names for USCIS and DOS, till the time we stop blaming 245(i), till the time we stop engaging in eb2 v/s eb3 fight, till the time we stop fighting with each other over irrelevant things, till the time we stop creating these stupid polls, till the time we stop engaging in "number crunching" whatever that means, until that time there is ZERO hope for Eb3-I. Once we stop wasting our time on all these irrelevant things, we will then start spending our time on more meaningful things like speaking with the members of Congress. Then, and only then, there will be a chance of anything good happening for EB3-I.
Port to EB-2 ......
hairstyles SURF ART NOUVEAU at MONTANARO
sathyaraj
03-12 06:20 PM
Hi BharatPremi:
Thank you so much for your reply. I do not have any speeding tickets also. I have clean history so far. I am hoping that this will be cleared by this week so that I can join them by 03/24
Regards
SathyaRaj
I am assuming here that you referred Background Check done by future employer as a part of employment offer before granting you the final offer. In that case mostly your employer might have contracted that to third party. And if that would have been the case then it solely depends upon where you resides now and how many states you have moved so far from the date of first entry in uSA and what kind of new implementation all those states may have. Some states even gives "Red Flag" for traffic violation such as speeding. What happens is that, that third party would see only "red flag" and would not come to know about underlying cause of the "red flag". So as a process that third party first come to your future employer notifying about this " red flag". Then your employer decides to query that further having signature from you and would notify third party to dig further and then third party will go to state police to know the underlying cause and state police will work on that by taking fee and and some point of time it will say " hey he had traffic violation". So it may eat up 3 to 4 months to finish the whole cycle and ball is in your employer's court whether to hire you or wait to hire till then. Most companies hire without wasting time and afterwards if something really serious feedback comes in will boot you otherwise you will be fine.
Thank you so much for your reply. I do not have any speeding tickets also. I have clean history so far. I am hoping that this will be cleared by this week so that I can join them by 03/24
Regards
SathyaRaj
I am assuming here that you referred Background Check done by future employer as a part of employment offer before granting you the final offer. In that case mostly your employer might have contracted that to third party. And if that would have been the case then it solely depends upon where you resides now and how many states you have moved so far from the date of first entry in uSA and what kind of new implementation all those states may have. Some states even gives "Red Flag" for traffic violation such as speeding. What happens is that, that third party would see only "red flag" and would not come to know about underlying cause of the "red flag". So as a process that third party first come to your future employer notifying about this " red flag". Then your employer decides to query that further having signature from you and would notify third party to dig further and then third party will go to state police to know the underlying cause and state police will work on that by taking fee and and some point of time it will say " hey he had traffic violation". So it may eat up 3 to 4 months to finish the whole cycle and ball is in your employer's court whether to hire you or wait to hire till then. Most companies hire without wasting time and afterwards if something really serious feedback comes in will boot you otherwise you will be fine.
vandanaverdia
09-11 04:51 PM
ACT NOW!!
Come now to DC... GO IV!!!
Come now to DC... GO IV!!!
kishdam
03-14 10:15 AM
Can we as IV community do something about this? ie communicate this to USCIS and have them clarify this with a memo and FAQ?
Yes it would be great if IV core can take up this matter with USCIS - please dont wait on administrative reforms to happen - the whole package might take time. But most of us - July07 filers - will be looking at EAD renewals soon and if USCIS delays the processing many of us would be in soup.
It would be great if USCIS clarifies on interim EAD and what the applicant can do if a EAD application remain in pending status.
chandu - can you please bring this up with core (I will try to get it visibility in my state chapter). Thanks.
Yes it would be great if IV core can take up this matter with USCIS - please dont wait on administrative reforms to happen - the whole package might take time. But most of us - July07 filers - will be looking at EAD renewals soon and if USCIS delays the processing many of us would be in soup.
It would be great if USCIS clarifies on interim EAD and what the applicant can do if a EAD application remain in pending status.
chandu - can you please bring this up with core (I will try to get it visibility in my state chapter). Thanks.
No comments:
Post a Comment