singhsa3
03-04 01:30 PM
Done, thanks for your comments
perhaps you want to make it even simpler?
- Remove all the LC/I-140 details, just say that we are at the last stage of a long and arduous process, and are stuck waiting because of very small immigration quota's that were set decades ago which are completely out of line with real supply-demand for the size of todays high-tech workforce. In addition USCIS inefficiency has resulted in them not utilizing even this tiny quota fully, in the past few years.
- instead of EAD and validity just say getting a mortage is a lot easier if your immigration status is permanent. In this final stage of immigration most of us have work authorization that needs to be renewed every year, and mortgage companies dont accept that.
copy paste the suggested fixes there (or add a link to the administrative fixes campaign post)
perhaps you want to make it even simpler?
- Remove all the LC/I-140 details, just say that we are at the last stage of a long and arduous process, and are stuck waiting because of very small immigration quota's that were set decades ago which are completely out of line with real supply-demand for the size of todays high-tech workforce. In addition USCIS inefficiency has resulted in them not utilizing even this tiny quota fully, in the past few years.
- instead of EAD and validity just say getting a mortage is a lot easier if your immigration status is permanent. In this final stage of immigration most of us have work authorization that needs to be renewed every year, and mortgage companies dont accept that.
copy paste the suggested fixes there (or add a link to the administrative fixes campaign post)
wallpaper mitsubishi radio wiring
zuhail
03-10 11:25 PM
Hello,
I really think that if we just pursue aggressively on one and only item: Recapturing visa numbers, we would succeed.
The moment you add anything to the bill that is to related to H1B revaildation inside US, eliminating per country quota limits or filing I485 when the dates are not current etc, the bill would be definitely doomed. Strictly no mention of anything else in the bill.
Also most importantly the visa recapture efforts have to be concentrated for the Employment Based Categories ONLY. If we include the Family Based Category, we would lose the debate due to current high unemployment rate.
I think that this is the only way to solve the retrogression issue -- to focus on only re-capturing visa numbers for use in Employment-Based Categories for educated foreign born professionals already employed in US.
I sincerely hope that IV administrative team considers this item seriously and assign the highest priority and start fund raising immediately.
By the way as for Mr.coopheal, I am not sure how updating my personal profile with all the filing dates accurately would matter at all for our discussion. Who gives a rat's ass about my filing dates anyway?.
I really think that if we just pursue aggressively on one and only item: Recapturing visa numbers, we would succeed.
The moment you add anything to the bill that is to related to H1B revaildation inside US, eliminating per country quota limits or filing I485 when the dates are not current etc, the bill would be definitely doomed. Strictly no mention of anything else in the bill.
Also most importantly the visa recapture efforts have to be concentrated for the Employment Based Categories ONLY. If we include the Family Based Category, we would lose the debate due to current high unemployment rate.
I think that this is the only way to solve the retrogression issue -- to focus on only re-capturing visa numbers for use in Employment-Based Categories for educated foreign born professionals already employed in US.
I sincerely hope that IV administrative team considers this item seriously and assign the highest priority and start fund raising immediately.
By the way as for Mr.coopheal, I am not sure how updating my personal profile with all the filing dates accurately would matter at all for our discussion. Who gives a rat's ass about my filing dates anyway?.
centaur
08-15 05:34 PM
I think its not going to budge after this for 3 months or so, till they calculate all the applications received and do the math. Hopefully it will move forwards then, however (less likely) it can move backwards too ( I have seen strangest patterns with the bulletins)
2011 lexus radio wiring diagram
.soulty
03-19 11:02 PM
moved it, status closed now.. ;)
more...
desi3933
02-11 03:52 PM
Finally, per Ron unused is not same as wasted. Unused is unassigned. Wasted is .... assigned but action is not taken to close the case. If that is the case then wasted visas won't be available ....
So, according to you, what happens when no action is taken for assigned visa number?
What matters is number of visas used. Have you looked at the numbers?
So, according to you, what happens when no action is taken for assigned visa number?
What matters is number of visas used. Have you looked at the numbers?
meridiani.planum
03-07 05:32 PM
Until last year, it was important to announce a job change via AC21 to USCIS. This was because many sponsoring employers would revoke the 140 (even after 180 days) so that they could reuse the Labor for someone else.
When that happened and there was no AC21 letter from the applicant, some IOs would deny the 485 even without a NOID. This would mean MTR and a lot of unnecessary work.
This problem no longer exists as Labot substitution has been removed. The employer has no incentive to revoke the 140 and so the chances of goofup from USCIS has been lowered.
Employer still has two incentives to revoke I-140:
* outstanding I-140s get counted in ability-to-pay issues of future I-140s. Better to clear out older ones.
* leaving an approved but unused I-140 is essentially leaving files open with USCIS as well as at your attorneys office. Expect the attorneys to revoke them (my own attorney of a big company asks the employer to close the files with USCIS by revoking the I-140). In addition to opened files, the attorneys get some fees atleast for doing this, so thats another motivation for them.
When that happened and there was no AC21 letter from the applicant, some IOs would deny the 485 even without a NOID. This would mean MTR and a lot of unnecessary work.
This problem no longer exists as Labot substitution has been removed. The employer has no incentive to revoke the 140 and so the chances of goofup from USCIS has been lowered.
Employer still has two incentives to revoke I-140:
* outstanding I-140s get counted in ability-to-pay issues of future I-140s. Better to clear out older ones.
* leaving an approved but unused I-140 is essentially leaving files open with USCIS as well as at your attorneys office. Expect the attorneys to revoke them (my own attorney of a big company asks the employer to close the files with USCIS by revoking the I-140). In addition to opened files, the attorneys get some fees atleast for doing this, so thats another motivation for them.
more...
furiouspride
08-10 01:59 PM
I would be more than happy to help with whatever ideas you have on mind. Even if IV decides to create an exclusive EB3 fund, count me in for any monetary contribution.
2010 mitsubishi radio wiring
snathan
06-10 01:44 PM
@eastindia: I doubt if that 's required - "Basically a letter from employer". You definitely include your I-485 notice that shows that a AOS in pending.
Remember the GC is for future employement. USCIS can anytime ask the letter to prove the job offer is still there. I know coupld of guys got RFE for the same.
If there is no job, the underlaying I-485 become invalid and so there is no AOS.
Remember the GC is for future employement. USCIS can anytime ask the letter to prove the job offer is still there. I know coupld of guys got RFE for the same.
If there is no job, the underlaying I-485 become invalid and so there is no AOS.
more...
StarSun
02-18 11:04 AM
Sukhwinder is coordinating the efforts on carpool and hosting options.
Members who wish to carpool please post on the thread as well as send an email to Sukhwinder - 2011carpool@gmail.com
Vinay is coordinating the efforts on airmiles, people wishing to donate air miles or request help for using the air miles, please PM vin13.
Thank you.
Members who wish to carpool please post on the thread as well as send an email to Sukhwinder - 2011carpool@gmail.com
Vinay is coordinating the efforts on airmiles, people wishing to donate air miles or request help for using the air miles, please PM vin13.
Thank you.
hair mitsubishi radio wiring
jkays94
07-10 02:39 AM
It seems several persons are already discrediting the lawsuit and from the comments I have seen, it is apparent that some have not read the entire complaint.
In order to understand how a civil lawsuit works one needs to understand that in a complaint, one makes no legal arguments, does not cite case or precedent law but only cites the simple facts. The other side can respond to the complaint and deny or accept the allegations in part or in whole. Many cases do not go to trial, they end up in settlements or are decided through summary judgement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_judgment) (for the plaintiff or the defendants) if the case has undisputable matters of facts and one of the parties petitions for it. Several processes also take place ie Discovery long before an actual trial. I recommend reading the following wikipedia entry to familiarize one at a high level with the processes and rules involved:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Rule_of_Civil_Procedure
To get to the core legal arguments behind the case, one needs to read the counts (they are only stated and not argued/expounded on starting pg 13). Namely those are:
COUNT I: VIOLATION OF THE FIFTH AMENDMENT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution) (constitutional rights issue)
COUNT II: VIOLATION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_Procedures_Act)
COUNT III: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ACT (http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title4/civ00036.htm)
COUNT IV: EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT (http://www.hhs.gov/dab/guidelines/eaja.html)
COUNT V: PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promissory_estoppel#Promissory_estoppel)
There are several laws cited above, its thus puzzling to see requests for one to cite the laws USCIS/DOS is accused of violating when its all there in the lawsuit. The plaintiff has the burden of proving the counts they have stated at the appropriate time and not in the complaint. One does not play all their cards in the initial complaint.
Even more puzzling is the persistent fear that there would be retributory action from USCIS. Judges do not take kindly to such behavior and USCIS would have no chance defending itself on charges of retaliatory actions.
In order to understand how a civil lawsuit works one needs to understand that in a complaint, one makes no legal arguments, does not cite case or precedent law but only cites the simple facts. The other side can respond to the complaint and deny or accept the allegations in part or in whole. Many cases do not go to trial, they end up in settlements or are decided through summary judgement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_judgment) (for the plaintiff or the defendants) if the case has undisputable matters of facts and one of the parties petitions for it. Several processes also take place ie Discovery long before an actual trial. I recommend reading the following wikipedia entry to familiarize one at a high level with the processes and rules involved:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Rule_of_Civil_Procedure
To get to the core legal arguments behind the case, one needs to read the counts (they are only stated and not argued/expounded on starting pg 13). Namely those are:
COUNT I: VIOLATION OF THE FIFTH AMENDMENT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution) (constitutional rights issue)
COUNT II: VIOLATION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_Procedures_Act)
COUNT III: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ACT (http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title4/civ00036.htm)
COUNT IV: EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT (http://www.hhs.gov/dab/guidelines/eaja.html)
COUNT V: PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promissory_estoppel#Promissory_estoppel)
There are several laws cited above, its thus puzzling to see requests for one to cite the laws USCIS/DOS is accused of violating when its all there in the lawsuit. The plaintiff has the burden of proving the counts they have stated at the appropriate time and not in the complaint. One does not play all their cards in the initial complaint.
Even more puzzling is the persistent fear that there would be retributory action from USCIS. Judges do not take kindly to such behavior and USCIS would have no chance defending itself on charges of retaliatory actions.
more...
meridiani.planum
03-03 01:36 PM
I just sent a request to CNN to take a look at this thread. A formal letter may be sent soon. So please continue to vote and participate.
whats the point? 33 out of 23000 members have voted. Any result here is well beyond all statistical margins of error. Unless atleast 5000 people vote, this poll has no point. The mathematicians among us can derive the exact number, but participation has to be much greater than 33 if this has to be representative of the IV membership.
whats the point? 33 out of 23000 members have voted. Any result here is well beyond all statistical margins of error. Unless atleast 5000 people vote, this poll has no point. The mathematicians among us can derive the exact number, but participation has to be much greater than 33 if this has to be representative of the IV membership.
hot mitsubishi radio wiring
chanduv23
07-29 01:48 PM
In that case, employers should mention the following in the offer letter
" In case, in future, if economy goes bad and recession occurs,we cannot sponsor your green card since it is easy to find american citizens who has minimum qualification."
This should be mentioned on the offer letters given by big comapnies.Then it is up to H1B candidate whenter to take the offer(risk) or not.
Can these companies do this????
Though it is unfortunate, I don't think you are understanding stuff right. If you think you have a case to fight, go ahead and do it. Consult an employment lawyer and see what can be done.
Anywhere in the world, it is always the employer who has the upper hand and you fight only if you are capable of.
It looks to me that you are venting out on the employer on this forum because you feel decieved or cheated, but the reality is that, it is just an unfortunate situation for you and all of us go through bad and frustrating times.
There are some companies who have filed EB1C left and right and employees got GCs in few months, there are companies who file EB3 for most qualified and that too when in 5th year.
A lot of physicians get future offers while they do fellowships etc... and the employer actualy files directly for GC and these folks get GC by the time their fellowships are over and they start work immediately.
Work with the situation, work with your employer, look for options, try to infleunce the system to make process better .... along the way you will see that you can achieve a lot by being positive about things.
Try to "Make things happen" rather than expecting things to happen, because things change and we all know "change is constant"
" In case, in future, if economy goes bad and recession occurs,we cannot sponsor your green card since it is easy to find american citizens who has minimum qualification."
This should be mentioned on the offer letters given by big comapnies.Then it is up to H1B candidate whenter to take the offer(risk) or not.
Can these companies do this????
Though it is unfortunate, I don't think you are understanding stuff right. If you think you have a case to fight, go ahead and do it. Consult an employment lawyer and see what can be done.
Anywhere in the world, it is always the employer who has the upper hand and you fight only if you are capable of.
It looks to me that you are venting out on the employer on this forum because you feel decieved or cheated, but the reality is that, it is just an unfortunate situation for you and all of us go through bad and frustrating times.
There are some companies who have filed EB1C left and right and employees got GCs in few months, there are companies who file EB3 for most qualified and that too when in 5th year.
A lot of physicians get future offers while they do fellowships etc... and the employer actualy files directly for GC and these folks get GC by the time their fellowships are over and they start work immediately.
Work with the situation, work with your employer, look for options, try to infleunce the system to make process better .... along the way you will see that you can achieve a lot by being positive about things.
Try to "Make things happen" rather than expecting things to happen, because things change and we all know "change is constant"
more...
house Audio wiring diagram
piyu7444
01-30 04:15 PM
Good. That means you were in-status at the I-485 filing. Submit documents mentioned in RFE and you should be good.
>> My question is - Is the time I haven't been working considered as Out of Status?
No you are not. Like I said out of status UNTIL date of I-485 application is most important.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
I read the thread and have a question for Desi3933 as he seems to have knowledge about how this works..........
I am on h1b with employer B.
Employer A had my h1b and had processed my GC. I applied for 485 in Jul 07 and then in Jun 08 I transfered my h1b to Employer B. I did not notify USCIS about this job change so I did not invoke AC21. (Lawyer suggested to leave it in case we get a RFE)
Now my wife's 485 application is tied with mine. She is on h1b with employer C. Employer C is a consulting agency and her contract will end today Jan 30 2009. Also we are expecting hence she will take a 3 month time off / vacation for the baby (permissible under law) starting End of April 2009. Further she will travel to India on Aug 1 2009 and will return around Nov 15 09.
She has worked only 1 month in 2009 this will be reflected on 2009 w-2. I have couple of questions:
Will she be considered as "out of status" from Feb 1 to April end?
She has h1b valid till 2010 so when she returns back to US in Nov 09 shall she use h1b or enter US on AP given the fact that 485 is pending?
Will you recommend getting paid from Feb thru May to cover the gap? (this could be done with as the employer is willing to help)
Thanks
>> My question is - Is the time I haven't been working considered as Out of Status?
No you are not. Like I said out of status UNTIL date of I-485 application is most important.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
I read the thread and have a question for Desi3933 as he seems to have knowledge about how this works..........
I am on h1b with employer B.
Employer A had my h1b and had processed my GC. I applied for 485 in Jul 07 and then in Jun 08 I transfered my h1b to Employer B. I did not notify USCIS about this job change so I did not invoke AC21. (Lawyer suggested to leave it in case we get a RFE)
Now my wife's 485 application is tied with mine. She is on h1b with employer C. Employer C is a consulting agency and her contract will end today Jan 30 2009. Also we are expecting hence she will take a 3 month time off / vacation for the baby (permissible under law) starting End of April 2009. Further she will travel to India on Aug 1 2009 and will return around Nov 15 09.
She has worked only 1 month in 2009 this will be reflected on 2009 w-2. I have couple of questions:
Will she be considered as "out of status" from Feb 1 to April end?
She has h1b valid till 2010 so when she returns back to US in Nov 09 shall she use h1b or enter US on AP given the fact that 485 is pending?
Will you recommend getting paid from Feb thru May to cover the gap? (this could be done with as the employer is willing to help)
Thanks
tattoo 1994 Mitsubishi Montero
willigetgc?
08-10 10:30 PM
i feel frustrated at some peoples' unwillingness to admit that eb3 needs iv's help now more than ever. They are saying that nothing much can be done for eb3, as ins merely corrected its wrong interpretation in visa allocation
I went to the advocacy days in DC this June, and the biggest push IV was/is making - country cap elimination. The biggest benefactor of this change is EB3 (eb2 will be helped too, but that is how INS preference system works) - again, the biggest benefactor of this legislative change is eb3. IV has been pushing this issue over and over - try reaching out about town hall meetings or any such meetings with lawmakers - and you will figure out how much iv is working on behalf of eb3. Unfortunately, not many eb3 were active until the last 2 vbs. So, please do not say, "nothing much can be done for eb3" or "IV is not working for EB3". Its just that you may not see value in the route that IV is pursuing. It is eb3 members' unwillingness to admit that IV needs grass root help more than ever now.
but, if we are all willing to put our hearts and minds to it we can surely come up with new ideas that will help our cause. Surely, laws are written so that justice can happen. So if justice is not happening, the law would have some answer, somewhere.
Let me put forward my idea.
The ina language says that until eb2 is not current, there will be no spillover to eb3. Agreed. but i would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis. that is, if in the year 2002 (for example) all eb2 has been satisfied, then the spillovers should go to year 2002 eb3.
i am sorry to point this out, but you are looking at this from only your angle. Don't get me wrong, i would probably do the same. Having said that, logically this change will not fly with the uscis - 2 reasons - 1. Your contention that this rule is year to year - flawed contention 2. What does all eb2 satisfied mean? - these arguments will not work. I am not pulling you or the idea down - but simply stating my point of view based on what I know of the law.
is this something iv can point out and fight for? Can eb3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
now a days we are seeing more threads related to spill over allocation interpretation etc, but i have not seen any single post by iv core about this. I am from eb3 community and share the frustration among others.
i remember a time just a few months ago this year, eb2 were complaining about spillover not happening, and iv core disputed it, saying that spillover was happening.
i see a lot of people suggesting to port from eb3 to eb2, instead of wasting time on these discussions. Well, porting is not an option for most of us. It is either because we are working for big companies (who do not want to extra burden) or not able to find a small company which can help us.
just like you are seeing the ground realities of porting from eb3 to eb2, i believe that iv knows the ground reality of proposing new interpretations to the law. I would go a little further in saying that the proposals considered here are changes in the law than changes in the interpretation of the law.
I may be wrong on my thinking, but I do hope you take a suggestion - when reading the INS law, understand it independently first. Then go back to see, if it can be applied on your interpretation. Do not start out with it, everything looks red when wearing red tinted glasses.......
After the advocacy days in DC, I am sold on what IV is offering and its commitment to the EB community. I am EB3 too and I am pretty much in the same boat as many of you here.
I went to the advocacy days in DC this June, and the biggest push IV was/is making - country cap elimination. The biggest benefactor of this change is EB3 (eb2 will be helped too, but that is how INS preference system works) - again, the biggest benefactor of this legislative change is eb3. IV has been pushing this issue over and over - try reaching out about town hall meetings or any such meetings with lawmakers - and you will figure out how much iv is working on behalf of eb3. Unfortunately, not many eb3 were active until the last 2 vbs. So, please do not say, "nothing much can be done for eb3" or "IV is not working for EB3". Its just that you may not see value in the route that IV is pursuing. It is eb3 members' unwillingness to admit that IV needs grass root help more than ever now.
but, if we are all willing to put our hearts and minds to it we can surely come up with new ideas that will help our cause. Surely, laws are written so that justice can happen. So if justice is not happening, the law would have some answer, somewhere.
Let me put forward my idea.
The ina language says that until eb2 is not current, there will be no spillover to eb3. Agreed. but i would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis. that is, if in the year 2002 (for example) all eb2 has been satisfied, then the spillovers should go to year 2002 eb3.
i am sorry to point this out, but you are looking at this from only your angle. Don't get me wrong, i would probably do the same. Having said that, logically this change will not fly with the uscis - 2 reasons - 1. Your contention that this rule is year to year - flawed contention 2. What does all eb2 satisfied mean? - these arguments will not work. I am not pulling you or the idea down - but simply stating my point of view based on what I know of the law.
is this something iv can point out and fight for? Can eb3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
now a days we are seeing more threads related to spill over allocation interpretation etc, but i have not seen any single post by iv core about this. I am from eb3 community and share the frustration among others.
i remember a time just a few months ago this year, eb2 were complaining about spillover not happening, and iv core disputed it, saying that spillover was happening.
i see a lot of people suggesting to port from eb3 to eb2, instead of wasting time on these discussions. Well, porting is not an option for most of us. It is either because we are working for big companies (who do not want to extra burden) or not able to find a small company which can help us.
just like you are seeing the ground realities of porting from eb3 to eb2, i believe that iv knows the ground reality of proposing new interpretations to the law. I would go a little further in saying that the proposals considered here are changes in the law than changes in the interpretation of the law.
I may be wrong on my thinking, but I do hope you take a suggestion - when reading the INS law, understand it independently first. Then go back to see, if it can be applied on your interpretation. Do not start out with it, everything looks red when wearing red tinted glasses.......
After the advocacy days in DC, I am sold on what IV is offering and its commitment to the EB community. I am EB3 too and I am pretty much in the same boat as many of you here.
more...
pictures 1994 Mitsubishi Montero
jayleno
10-15 03:21 PM
I propose Non Co-operation Movement for another flower campaign. I know art imitates life and life imitates art etc. But imitates again and again irritates.
I dont understand how sending flowers is Gandhigiri. Yes, I did watch the movie you are going to refer to, but still its just Munna Bhai Giri.
I dont understand how sending flowers is Gandhigiri. Yes, I did watch the movie you are going to refer to, but still its just Munna Bhai Giri.
dresses mitsubishi radio wiring
needhelp!
11-14 01:26 PM
Couple of days back I got the receipt. I'll post the number soon.
more...
makeup mitsubishi radio wiring
kaisersose
07-14 05:56 PM
Should I send a AC21 letter to USCIS along with my new employment letter?
Who is the best attorney for such cases?
Is it possible that my prevous employer hasn't revoked 140? How can I know that? I have received RFE after one year after filing the case. Is there any way I can know the date when my previous employer did revoke the 140 ( in case he did)?
Of course, you know your problems best, but it was obviously irresponsible of you to quit before letting 180 days pass after applying for 485.
Here is the problem. The letter of employment you send to CIS must have a start date which will expose your violation of the 180 day rule. So unless you lie here, you are likely in in trouble. Your best bet is to suck it up and return to your sponsoring employer. That will ensure your case 100%. Any other option is risky.
Go to a knowledged attorney. Khanna, Murthy, Gotcher etc., are the names I know.
Who is the best attorney for such cases?
Is it possible that my prevous employer hasn't revoked 140? How can I know that? I have received RFE after one year after filing the case. Is there any way I can know the date when my previous employer did revoke the 140 ( in case he did)?
Of course, you know your problems best, but it was obviously irresponsible of you to quit before letting 180 days pass after applying for 485.
Here is the problem. The letter of employment you send to CIS must have a start date which will expose your violation of the 180 day rule. So unless you lie here, you are likely in in trouble. Your best bet is to suck it up and return to your sponsoring employer. That will ensure your case 100%. Any other option is risky.
Go to a knowledged attorney. Khanna, Murthy, Gotcher etc., are the names I know.
girlfriend mitsubishi radio wiring
amitjoey
11-07 05:18 PM
bump
hairstyles mitsubishi radio wiring
mheggade
07-20 10:24 AM
The regular quota for EB2 and EB3 combined is only about 9,800. That means 17,700 visas have to come from somewhere. I dont think those many visas are remaining for this year. Be prepared to see FIFO thrown under the bus and approvals with PDs that are all over the place. Please critique this analysis without piling on. Thoughts?
DOS has stated that they have given entire EB1 over flow (approx 25,000 visa's) and EB2 ROW over flow to EB2 I and C. Per my estimate, It is definitely possible that we could see at least 30k to 40k EB2 I approvals for this FY.
If only DOS pulls up some kind of trick and come up with strategy to give similar kind of over flow next year to EB3 I and C. We could see EB3 cut off move to Mid 2003.
DOS has stated that they have given entire EB1 over flow (approx 25,000 visa's) and EB2 ROW over flow to EB2 I and C. Per my estimate, It is definitely possible that we could see at least 30k to 40k EB2 I approvals for this FY.
If only DOS pulls up some kind of trick and come up with strategy to give similar kind of over flow next year to EB3 I and C. We could see EB3 cut off move to Mid 2003.
Michael chertoff
07-12 09:06 PM
AUG BULLETIN is already out, it moved to March06 for EB2,
He is talking about next month (September). I think we have to wait for next year now.
He is talking about next month (September). I think we have to wait for next year now.
vghc
07-03 12:51 PM
I remember there was a proposal to give one Green Card per family to eliminate the retrogression for EB categories. I don't know what happen to that. It was like one year ago or so.
Yes, i recall seeing that too.
I don't like seeing families being torn apart......the best solution is to increase the number of GC for all of us. But that won't happen. :(
So the next best thing in my opinion, is to give GC's to principle applicant. That would benefit the country as a whole and all those who are working in this country.
Yes, i recall seeing that too.
I don't like seeing families being torn apart......the best solution is to increase the number of GC for all of us. But that won't happen. :(
So the next best thing in my opinion, is to give GC's to principle applicant. That would benefit the country as a whole and all those who are working in this country.
0 comments:
Post a Comment