WeldonSprings
05-02 04:15 PM
I know everyone has looked at the Visa Bulletin. Here is a quote from it-
2. Section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets an annual minimum family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000. The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 202 prescribes that the per-country limit for preference immigrants is set at 7% of the total annual family-sponsored and employment-based preference limits, i.e., 25,620. The dependent area limit is set at 2%, or 7,320.
So, don't you guys think that there more than 140,000 visas can be given away, if need me as it is this moment. So, I don't understand the retrogression???
It really appeared to me that by the way lofgren asked the questions, and her comments (So recapturing is first step, She mentions "i will let the co-author know that you like the bill to uscis/state dept officials" etc. See the video again if u missed it out) makes me think they will go ahead and introduce in house for voting. What happens in the house is upto your speculation. Lets cross the fingers and wait for updates.
by the way they have 5 business days to ask any questions or clarifications which will end on Wednesday, So until then lets sit tight.
2. Section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets an annual minimum family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000. The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 202 prescribes that the per-country limit for preference immigrants is set at 7% of the total annual family-sponsored and employment-based preference limits, i.e., 25,620. The dependent area limit is set at 2%, or 7,320.
So, don't you guys think that there more than 140,000 visas can be given away, if need me as it is this moment. So, I don't understand the retrogression???
It really appeared to me that by the way lofgren asked the questions, and her comments (So recapturing is first step, She mentions "i will let the co-author know that you like the bill to uscis/state dept officials" etc. See the video again if u missed it out) makes me think they will go ahead and introduce in house for voting. What happens in the house is upto your speculation. Lets cross the fingers and wait for updates.
by the way they have 5 business days to ask any questions or clarifications which will end on Wednesday, So until then lets sit tight.
wallpaper Subaru B9 Tribeca
sps1
08-04 01:07 PM
I have applied for labor certification in Dec 2006. In may 2007 I got a denail stating that the company is not "bonafide". It is a new company and I am the 1st applicant for labor. We sent all the supporting documents and requested for review/appleal in May 2007. Since then we did not get any status from them. My attorney called them last week and made an inquiry. DOL Atlanta said that they need to do the "central check" of teh company. They do this for every new company. Does anybody aware of this "central check". How long it will take?
ashutrip
06-19 08:24 AM
NO , Atlanta handles all the traffic for East coast and South , whereas Chicao handles the traffic for the West and the Midwest .
Anybody on forum...whose labor was certified off late!!:confused:
Anybody on forum...whose labor was certified off late!!:confused:
2011 Subaru Tribeca B9 - kukarabati
eb3_nepa
07-14 06:59 PM
Heck all I am asking for is $5.00 ;) A meal at Burger King these days will cost you more :)
more...
ychousa
07-18 07:25 PM
Ofcourse PD is considered for VISA numbers, not the RD. RD is good for portability issues like AC21/180 days rule.
How do you check the current or eligible PD of VISA numbers after you've filed I-485?
How do you check the current or eligible PD of VISA numbers after you've filed I-485?
Michael chertoff
12-14 06:40 PM
Dear Friends,
What about if some of us will go for hunger strike in front of USCIC building? may be the will listen to us then.
please dont give reds if you dont like it, just ignore it. man I am very frustrated with the situation.
MC
What about if some of us will go for hunger strike in front of USCIC building? may be the will listen to us then.
please dont give reds if you dont like it, just ignore it. man I am very frustrated with the situation.
MC
more...
makemygc
10-25 11:59 PM
I've sent the mails and strongly encourage everyone to come out and take an early action before this gets worse. Even if you are not affected right now, support the cause to make sure that you will not be affected in the future.
Also, just wanted to point out some notes that letter says that Yates memo is attached, so if you are blindly copy and pasting make sure that you attach the Memo to your email or a copy to your letter.
I would suggest OP to add the copy of yates memo and the follow up memo to the posting.
Thanks
MakeMyGC
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
Also, just wanted to point out some notes that letter says that Yates memo is attached, so if you are blindly copy and pasting make sure that you attach the Memo to your email or a copy to your letter.
I would suggest OP to add the copy of yates memo and the follow up memo to the posting.
Thanks
MakeMyGC
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
2010 2006 Subaru B9 Tribeca - Front
gcadream
03-01 04:09 PM
There is a link on immigrationvoie.org website "when can I get my GreenCard" and to my utter shock when I clicked that I got the message that I will get my GC around 2026.
There is a checkbox for spill over visas also, and I selected that thinking that it will move my dates before...but it got moved only till 2024.
So does it really mean that I will get the GC around 2024 or is it just plain maths which doesn't goes practically with the changing scenarios.
Because right now the current PD is Feb'2005 and it looks like withing 2,3 yrs it should reach Dec'2007, but this data is just my guess OR more of intuition, I'm not sure what will happen.
In this forum there are many experienced people, if they can throw some light on this, it would really help. Otherwise things are sounding very depressing !!
There is a checkbox for spill over visas also, and I selected that thinking that it will move my dates before...but it got moved only till 2024.
So does it really mean that I will get the GC around 2024 or is it just plain maths which doesn't goes practically with the changing scenarios.
Because right now the current PD is Feb'2005 and it looks like withing 2,3 yrs it should reach Dec'2007, but this data is just my guess OR more of intuition, I'm not sure what will happen.
In this forum there are many experienced people, if they can throw some light on this, it would really help. Otherwise things are sounding very depressing !!
more...
hemkant
09-11 01:50 PM
Google Order #673393592214008
hair a Subaru Tribeca passed
texanmom
09-12 01:35 PM
Macaca-
If only wait times were as little as 2 yrs and 7 yrs...I might not even be fighting!!!
"Currently it takes 7+ years (after 2+ years on student visa) to become a resident."
This is not true in most cases. The F1 might be for 2 yrs minimum + 1 year EAD + at least 2 yrs on H1B before the GC process starts. Then its 7+ years...
So overall, we are talking 10+ years to get permanant residency in a majority of cases.
"Skilled immigrants have waited patiently for 2+ years"
Are we just talking about 2 yrs to see if there is going to be some reform?
If you don't want to get into the trouble of debating how many years, just say that it is unreasonable....
If only wait times were as little as 2 yrs and 7 yrs...I might not even be fighting!!!
"Currently it takes 7+ years (after 2+ years on student visa) to become a resident."
This is not true in most cases. The F1 might be for 2 yrs minimum + 1 year EAD + at least 2 yrs on H1B before the GC process starts. Then its 7+ years...
So overall, we are talking 10+ years to get permanant residency in a majority of cases.
"Skilled immigrants have waited patiently for 2+ years"
Are we just talking about 2 yrs to see if there is going to be some reform?
If you don't want to get into the trouble of debating how many years, just say that it is unreasonable....
more...
arkrish68
03-04 03:08 PM
There was LUD update on my i-485 on 02/05/2009 and 02/10/2009 with no change in the content of the message. Not sure what the update is for. Similarly there was LUD update on my wife's I-485 on 02/10/2009 and 02/11/2009 without any change in the content of the message.
hot Subaru B9 Tribeca Limited -
punjabi
09-10 08:59 PM
Its shocking!!! They've foolishly approved many 2006 cases and dont tell me it was unpredictable and now ppl with 2003 r still waiting....how logical is this? A bunch of A** H**** working there or what?
I know, this is very illogical. And very upsetting for the people who are waiting for a long long time. Hopefully, we'll see a shine in the clouds this year. A lot of people are aware now and have stood up against the "injustice" since last year, mainly through the efforts of IV.
And I strongly believe that higher is the volume of the prayers, sooner they get answered.
I know, this is very illogical. And very upsetting for the people who are waiting for a long long time. Hopefully, we'll see a shine in the clouds this year. A lot of people are aware now and have stood up against the "injustice" since last year, mainly through the efforts of IV.
And I strongly believe that higher is the volume of the prayers, sooner they get answered.
more...
house opinion on buying Audi+9
Jaime
09-13 12:36 AM
bump
tattoo Subaru B9 Tribeca: Neuer
punjabi
08-13 04:52 PM
Hi buddyinus,
We all are going through hard time, but we do not need to display our hard feelings for someone through the forum! If you are upset at someone or if you have complains, email the Admin or a Super Moderator.
Do not write rude. Be a little professional at your behavior and communicate professionally.
Now, the fool is trying to change the subject by asking ppl to join the rally. Why in the world wud ppl trust him? The thread is barely 10 pages and after realizing that therez no point in discussing about what this thread is all about, he has shifted subject loyalites. How lame and insane is this guy? Pappu, LogicLife where r u guyz? Why dont u ban him?
We all are going through hard time, but we do not need to display our hard feelings for someone through the forum! If you are upset at someone or if you have complains, email the Admin or a Super Moderator.
Do not write rude. Be a little professional at your behavior and communicate professionally.
Now, the fool is trying to change the subject by asking ppl to join the rally. Why in the world wud ppl trust him? The thread is barely 10 pages and after realizing that therez no point in discussing about what this thread is all about, he has shifted subject loyalites. How lame and insane is this guy? Pappu, LogicLife where r u guyz? Why dont u ban him?
more...
pictures subaru tribeca b9 limited
amitjoey
07-05 02:13 PM
The following write-up appears here courtesy of ChanduV23, one of our members. This has been edited for content and messaging:
Thank you ChanduV23
- On behalf of the Core IV Team
I am a highly-skilled professional who entered this country legally. I�ve been waiting for my US permanent resident visa -also known as "Green Card" for the past several years along with 500,000 other educated, highly skilled employment based (EB) immigrants. Many of us have been waiting for our turn to get Green Cards for 5-10 years while consistently abiding by all the laws of this country. Such long delays are due to tortuous and confusing paper work, backlogs due to various quotas and processing delays at US Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) and other allied state and federal agencies.
Several categories of EB immigrant visa (Green Card) numbers have been unavailable (�retrogressed�) since the fall of 2005. Because our immigrant petitions are tied to the sponsoring employer, these delays have led to indentured servitude for several of us. Our professional prospects, job mobility and potential opportunities for entrepreneurship have been compromised.
For the past several decades, the US Department of State (DOS) has been publishing advisories known as visa bulletins once a month to announce the availability of immigrant visa numbers. On June 13, 2007, after a gap of nearly two years, DOS announced that all EB visa numbers would be �current� for the month of July. This meant, irrespective of our �priority date� (date assigned to us for our turn in the line for Green Cards), all of us were made eligible to apply for some interim immigration benefits. This �priority date� refers to the date when our labor certification (documentation verifying no US citizen worker was available for a given job) had been filed.
Please note that 6/13 DOS announcement would not have led to immediate green card for most of us; but at least it would have ensured us interim benefits such as the right to travel and right to work- this was still a welcome change. Especially, for dependent spouses who have been otherwise unable to work, this would have translated into right to travel and work without restriction and thus channel their energies positively. TSeveral dependent spouses are also highly-skilled. This would provide them an opportunity to realize their technical and entrepreneurial expression and add to tax dollars. Additionally, this would have greatly reduced the paperwork burden on our sponsoring US employers.
Tens of thousands of applicants spent thousands of dollars in legal fees, immigration medical exams & vaccinations & getting various supporting documents ready to file our immigrant petitions to USCIS, at times inconveniencing our old parents in our home countries as well. It has been an agonizing two weeks for us. Some of us to had to fly in our spouses from our home countries or have had to cut short business trips. To our shock and dismay, on the morning of July 2nd 2007, USCIS announced that EB visa numbers were not available and all petitions filed in July would be rejected.
For the legal skilled immigrants this has been a rather traumatizing and disheartening experience.
We sincerely seek immediate congressional/ legislative remedial measures which would
(1)Reduce the enormous backlogs of green card petitions of legal skilled immigrants
(2)Ensure and request USCIS not to reject our immigrant visa petitions filed in July and provide us interim benefits of a pending immigrant visa petition. We make this sincere request on this Independence Day with the hope that people who played by the rules will be rewarded.
Thank you ChanduV23
- On behalf of the Core IV Team
I am a highly-skilled professional who entered this country legally. I�ve been waiting for my US permanent resident visa -also known as "Green Card" for the past several years along with 500,000 other educated, highly skilled employment based (EB) immigrants. Many of us have been waiting for our turn to get Green Cards for 5-10 years while consistently abiding by all the laws of this country. Such long delays are due to tortuous and confusing paper work, backlogs due to various quotas and processing delays at US Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) and other allied state and federal agencies.
Several categories of EB immigrant visa (Green Card) numbers have been unavailable (�retrogressed�) since the fall of 2005. Because our immigrant petitions are tied to the sponsoring employer, these delays have led to indentured servitude for several of us. Our professional prospects, job mobility and potential opportunities for entrepreneurship have been compromised.
For the past several decades, the US Department of State (DOS) has been publishing advisories known as visa bulletins once a month to announce the availability of immigrant visa numbers. On June 13, 2007, after a gap of nearly two years, DOS announced that all EB visa numbers would be �current� for the month of July. This meant, irrespective of our �priority date� (date assigned to us for our turn in the line for Green Cards), all of us were made eligible to apply for some interim immigration benefits. This �priority date� refers to the date when our labor certification (documentation verifying no US citizen worker was available for a given job) had been filed.
Please note that 6/13 DOS announcement would not have led to immediate green card for most of us; but at least it would have ensured us interim benefits such as the right to travel and right to work- this was still a welcome change. Especially, for dependent spouses who have been otherwise unable to work, this would have translated into right to travel and work without restriction and thus channel their energies positively. TSeveral dependent spouses are also highly-skilled. This would provide them an opportunity to realize their technical and entrepreneurial expression and add to tax dollars. Additionally, this would have greatly reduced the paperwork burden on our sponsoring US employers.
Tens of thousands of applicants spent thousands of dollars in legal fees, immigration medical exams & vaccinations & getting various supporting documents ready to file our immigrant petitions to USCIS, at times inconveniencing our old parents in our home countries as well. It has been an agonizing two weeks for us. Some of us to had to fly in our spouses from our home countries or have had to cut short business trips. To our shock and dismay, on the morning of July 2nd 2007, USCIS announced that EB visa numbers were not available and all petitions filed in July would be rejected.
For the legal skilled immigrants this has been a rather traumatizing and disheartening experience.
We sincerely seek immediate congressional/ legislative remedial measures which would
(1)Reduce the enormous backlogs of green card petitions of legal skilled immigrants
(2)Ensure and request USCIS not to reject our immigrant visa petitions filed in July and provide us interim benefits of a pending immigrant visa petition. We make this sincere request on this Independence Day with the hope that people who played by the rules will be rewarded.
dresses Antislip Boot Liner Mat Subaru Tribeca B9 4x4 06 On (ANTI192810)
485Mbe4001
08-14 07:54 PM
I doubt that USCIS can talk cryptic like Alan Greenspan, they probably meant that the PD will be back to what it was in june 08. There are only 3k visas per category and thousands of applicants, i dont see a logical reason why the dates will move 2-3 years. If they do, i too will buy you dinner. nothing is logical with USCIS... during the last couple of weeks of September you will see significant numbers of EB 2 approvals and then its back to square one for another year.
The main reason for the 2 year movement in june 07 was because they wanted to allocate all unallocated visas for the year, then the July VB came out and the rest is history. They have improved the coordination between DOJ and USICS since. Just want to be realistic, if we start assuming thing people get complacent and stop doing the little activities that help us.
I don't agree with it and hope not ! As latest Visa bulleting states - DOS people had predicted and planned - They will move EB3 dates forward to cover all June applicants - that means moving cut-off dates for EB3 - India to Jun 2003 as per Jun 2007 bulletin. For some reason - they see heavey demand now and it may not be the case in next bulletin. Still they beleive its diffcult to predict any dates for EB3 before mid Sept. They are working and intention are there to help EB3 applicants. That leads to make me believe that dates for EB3 - India would move to somewhere Nov-Dec 2002 to Jan-Feb 2003 in next bulletin.
The main reason for the 2 year movement in june 07 was because they wanted to allocate all unallocated visas for the year, then the July VB came out and the rest is history. They have improved the coordination between DOJ and USICS since. Just want to be realistic, if we start assuming thing people get complacent and stop doing the little activities that help us.
I don't agree with it and hope not ! As latest Visa bulleting states - DOS people had predicted and planned - They will move EB3 dates forward to cover all June applicants - that means moving cut-off dates for EB3 - India to Jun 2003 as per Jun 2007 bulletin. For some reason - they see heavey demand now and it may not be the case in next bulletin. Still they beleive its diffcult to predict any dates for EB3 before mid Sept. They are working and intention are there to help EB3 applicants. That leads to make me believe that dates for EB3 - India would move to somewhere Nov-Dec 2002 to Jan-Feb 2003 in next bulletin.
more...
makeup the Subaru B9 Tribeca.
markandeyan
07-25 05:19 PM
Contributed $100 thru PayPal(Transaction ID: 3X3138428V341142D)
girlfriend 2006 SUBARU B9 TRIBECA 5-PASS
NKR
04-02 08:26 AM
that might be your attitude. some people have a different opinion and dont like to bend over when circumstances try to screw them. If you pay for something and get a lemon you might be ok with living with it and moving on, saying its non-refundable. Many others dont share that view. They'll fight for a replacement, a fix, some solution to the problem.
If all you can do is bend over, then move on, you are wasting your time on IV.
Ouch, that got to hurt. Mr D.E.D. why are you inviting dard. why don't you just disco?.
If all you can do is bend over, then move on, you are wasting your time on IV.
Ouch, that got to hurt. Mr D.E.D. why are you inviting dard. why don't you just disco?.
hairstyles Фотографии Subaru tribeca b9
ashutrip
06-20 01:28 PM
Refer this.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2567
anybody here who got his labor certified from Atlanta off late
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2567
anybody here who got his labor certified from Atlanta off late
rockstart
06-27 03:00 PM
Instead of telling them what they will lose, lets tell them what they gained from us and what they would not have if it were not for the immigrants.
If two thirds of all PhD's are foreign born. And 60% of Masters degree holders are also not US citizens. Now this is the best talent that US corporations need to keep up the competative edge. No infosys wipro can fill this void.
If two thirds of all PhD's are foreign born. And 60% of Masters degree holders are also not US citizens. Now this is the best talent that US corporations need to keep up the competative edge. No infosys wipro can fill this void.
coopheal
08-12 12:34 PM
They could have done this and re-captured visas with additional fees or whatever. And called it greencard fraud fees it that makes them happy. But the fact is they did not want to do anything to give relief to Immigrants. Recapture (hundreds of thousands of visas) would have significantly helped helped retrogressed countries like EB3 India, China, ROW and EB2 India China. They can take additional fees as long as we know the recapture is being done.
Very true. If he really meant what he said (inovating companies use of H1B) in the speach, bill would have something to alleviate employment based GC backlog.
Very true. If he really meant what he said (inovating companies use of H1B) in the speach, bill would have something to alleviate employment based GC backlog.
No comments:
Post a Comment