Macaca
01-26 08:29 AM
Finally, I understood the purpose of this forum. No, the title is not wrong.
I understand that you are
1. explaining retrogression, and
2. predicting time it will take a person to get GC.
The above are based on
1. applications with USCIS, and
2. USCIS policy to approve GC.
If this is true, it is the first good idea I have seen here. Alisa for president! (Arnold, California Gov, is working on changing rules for naturalized citizens).
I have the following suggestions. I will help after I read everything. Give me some time.
1. Indians are over-represented in IV. Consider the case of a country that is doing better and mention countries that are worst.
2. Write a short paragraph that goes in IV email sales pitch. This has a URL to this complete report.
3. This complete report has URL to USCIS data.
4. We work on similar report (with URLs) on lobbying effort and funding level of anti-immigration organizations.
USCIS numbers and rules are not the only factors against us. The anti-immigrants are a much bigger factor.
5. IV email sales pitch has a para with URL on
a. explaining retrogression (this report).
b. lobbying effort and funding level of opponents (next report).
c. IV's experience with legislation.
d. BEGing for contributions.
6. KISS principle baby: Keep It Simple, Stupid. Too much gymnastics in IV writeups.
I understand that you are
1. explaining retrogression, and
2. predicting time it will take a person to get GC.
The above are based on
1. applications with USCIS, and
2. USCIS policy to approve GC.
If this is true, it is the first good idea I have seen here. Alisa for president! (Arnold, California Gov, is working on changing rules for naturalized citizens).
I have the following suggestions. I will help after I read everything. Give me some time.
1. Indians are over-represented in IV. Consider the case of a country that is doing better and mention countries that are worst.
2. Write a short paragraph that goes in IV email sales pitch. This has a URL to this complete report.
3. This complete report has URL to USCIS data.
4. We work on similar report (with URLs) on lobbying effort and funding level of anti-immigration organizations.
USCIS numbers and rules are not the only factors against us. The anti-immigrants are a much bigger factor.
5. IV email sales pitch has a para with URL on
a. explaining retrogression (this report).
b. lobbying effort and funding level of opponents (next report).
c. IV's experience with legislation.
d. BEGing for contributions.
6. KISS principle baby: Keep It Simple, Stupid. Too much gymnastics in IV writeups.
wallpaper Dates: May 21 st – June 20th
file485
07-28 09:48 AM
that is the catchy situation...I think this employment letter from the GC sponsored employer is required until we get the GC into our hands..so the sooner we get out of this cycle the better..or else we can be asked for a fresh employment letter in an RFE which is a sticky situation for many employers/employees
yabadaba
02-20 03:19 PM
few weeks :D
from our polls in the past we came to a general consensus that there is a significant amount of filers between pre 2003 - 2005 march. Once u go over that hump...the date should move to dec 2005 because of the conservative approach most of the lawyers had with filing PERM in the initial days
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=101115
from our polls in the past we came to a general consensus that there is a significant amount of filers between pre 2003 - 2005 march. Once u go over that hump...the date should move to dec 2005 because of the conservative approach most of the lawyers had with filing PERM in the initial days
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=101115
2011 21 to May 21 by cplaza
coopheal
03-20 08:43 AM
I agree with you man. These screwed up desi consulting firms sell LCs like it is walmart. And people who work for them don't care about the position offered or their qualifications. They just want to have multiple LCs and I-140s and then cut the line when it is convenient.
Don�t do character assassination of EB3 applicants. EB3s who now have qualifications/job for EB2 should definitely try to convert over to EB2. EB3s don�t listen to people like these. It�s the same mentality which opposes eliminating country limits; more over its same mentality which opposes EB reforms. Grow up��
Trying to stop an EB3 person who spent more time than you in GC queue and has qualification for EB2 is just insane.
Don�t do character assassination of EB3 applicants. EB3s who now have qualifications/job for EB2 should definitely try to convert over to EB2. EB3s don�t listen to people like these. It�s the same mentality which opposes eliminating country limits; more over its same mentality which opposes EB reforms. Grow up��
Trying to stop an EB3 person who spent more time than you in GC queue and has qualification for EB2 is just insane.
more...
dreamgc_real
07-13 08:43 AM
Does anyone have the list of latest set documents required to file for 485.... can you plzzzz email/post it here... thanks
can it be done without the help of an attorney...????
Check out the USCIS site: USCIS - Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=3faf2c1a6855d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1RCR D)
You can download the form as well as the instruction to fill out the firm.
As for filing it on your own - depends on how confident you are in your abilities to follow the instructions!!!!!!!!! Just kidding... Try filling the form on a copy.........
can it be done without the help of an attorney...????
Check out the USCIS site: USCIS - Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=3faf2c1a6855d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1RCR D)
You can download the form as well as the instruction to fill out the firm.
As for filing it on your own - depends on how confident you are in your abilities to follow the instructions!!!!!!!!! Just kidding... Try filling the form on a copy.........
sanju_dba
09-09 01:50 PM
This is a big fantasy.
EB3 is not going to get current in the next 4-5 years you said.
Backlog posted by USCIS and DOS is a lot more than posted. Their data is not totally right.
The only way EB3 India can be current if all Indians on H1B, EAD are deported by a law. Such law is likely in 4-5 years if outsourcing increase and anti-immigrants blame immigrants for their unemployment. Then EB3 I will get current. But there will be no EB3I to take advantage of it.
I say we stop dreaming and do a rally in DC.
I understand what you said, but just to consider the off numbers published by dos
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf
EB2 total pending 34325
EB3 total pending 136325
2010-2011 quota EB1+EB2 ( 85343 )
less eb2 " " 34325
--------------------------------------------
" " 51018 trickeling down for EB3 Worldwide?
2010-2011 quota EB3 ( 42671 )
less eb3 - 136325
--------------------------------------------
42636 ( eb3 pending left over from above )
2011-2012 quota eb1+eb2+eb3 128013
So, with above math Eb2 will be current by next year, and eb3 will be by end of 2012?
above math is based on
inaccurate numbers given by DOS?
assuming no new applicants applying.
Hope I am correct! :)
EB3 is not going to get current in the next 4-5 years you said.
Backlog posted by USCIS and DOS is a lot more than posted. Their data is not totally right.
The only way EB3 India can be current if all Indians on H1B, EAD are deported by a law. Such law is likely in 4-5 years if outsourcing increase and anti-immigrants blame immigrants for their unemployment. Then EB3 I will get current. But there will be no EB3I to take advantage of it.
I say we stop dreaming and do a rally in DC.
I understand what you said, but just to consider the off numbers published by dos
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf
EB2 total pending 34325
EB3 total pending 136325
2010-2011 quota EB1+EB2 ( 85343 )
less eb2 " " 34325
--------------------------------------------
" " 51018 trickeling down for EB3 Worldwide?
2010-2011 quota EB3 ( 42671 )
less eb3 - 136325
--------------------------------------------
42636 ( eb3 pending left over from above )
2011-2012 quota eb1+eb2+eb3 128013
So, with above math Eb2 will be current by next year, and eb3 will be by end of 2012?
above math is based on
inaccurate numbers given by DOS?
assuming no new applicants applying.
Hope I am correct! :)
more...
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.
2010 zodiac sign Gemini (May 21
rajeevkaza
03-17 02:32 PM
My PD is March 2005, filed 485 in July 2007.
more...
Abhinaym
09-10 11:22 AM
This is taken from the chat page:
To access this area you must have: a.) Over 50 posts b.) Over 30 reputation points
Right! Then it means 30 reputation points and not dots!
Thanks for that.
To access this area you must have: a.) Over 50 posts b.) Over 30 reputation points
Right! Then it means 30 reputation points and not dots!
Thanks for that.
hair house 21st May - 21st June
kicca
08-29 02:09 PM
found this old (aug 2002) but still interesting pdf that may help if nothing else to clarify some of the acronyms used in the I485 process:
www.ilw.com/seminars/august2002_citation2b.pdf
www.ilw.com/seminars/august2002_citation2b.pdf
more...
anilnag
03-09 10:47 PM
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=324915#post324915
Please contribute here so that we can end the guessing game and get realistic data on pending applications by each category and country. This will help us determine how fast VB may move in future.
Thanks
Please contribute here so that we can end the guessing game and get realistic data on pending applications by each category and country. This will help us determine how fast VB may move in future.
Thanks
hot The zodiac may 21st zodiac.
Ramba
07-09 07:44 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.
I feel that they did not violate any clause. Till June 30 which is end of third quarter, they are authorized to approve (3*27%*140K) 113,400. However they approved only 66,400 till May 31. That yields about 47,000 for June alone(10%+any number not used in previous months). The reamining visas are eligible for Jul 1, which is 13,000. Put together June and July1, it comes 60,000. Therefore they did not violate any law. This makes only 126,000. The remaining number was splitted for Consular processing.
my 2 cents...
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.
I feel that they did not violate any clause. Till June 30 which is end of third quarter, they are authorized to approve (3*27%*140K) 113,400. However they approved only 66,400 till May 31. That yields about 47,000 for June alone(10%+any number not used in previous months). The reamining visas are eligible for Jul 1, which is 13,000. Put together June and July1, it comes 60,000. Therefore they did not violate any law. This makes only 126,000. The remaining number was splitted for Consular processing.
my 2 cents...
more...
house is the zodiac sign for May
belmontboy
05-23 05:56 PM
Why we dont like gultis ? - eCharcha.Com (http://www.echarcha.com/forum/showthread.php?t=18691)
This link might help you understand the different definitions.
get out of your stereotyped moronic attitude.
If Indians cannot respect fellow Indians, how do you expect to be respected by others in this country??
This link might help you understand the different definitions.
get out of your stereotyped moronic attitude.
If Indians cannot respect fellow Indians, how do you expect to be respected by others in this country??
tattoo LEO Zodiac Soapstone Heart
BharatPremi
03-17 01:35 PM
As i said, eb3 to eb2 porting is not easy....Unless, there is very strong case, like applicant having US Masters degree but employer filed in EB3 for reasons they only know....
Read this story...
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=13810
What are you talking about? I have seen people granted H1 and GC (Under EB2) not even with graduate degree.. It is all paperwork game.
Read this story...
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=13810
What are you talking about? I have seen people granted H1 and GC (Under EB2) not even with graduate degree.. It is all paperwork game.
more...
pictures Gemini Zodiac Sign (May 21
alex99
10-28 06:46 PM
Please participate in the Poll
dresses may 21st zodiac.
mirage
02-06 10:38 PM
^^Bump^^
more...
makeup Taurus - April 21 - May 21
gimme_GC2006
03-09 02:02 PM
hey bsbawa atleast ur pd is apr 04, now it is feb 04 for you , there is hope that you will get it by this year end atleast, think about folks like me, i have to wait till 2019 to get my eb3 to current......... so stop crying and be happy that atleast ur in EB2........ :o
lol..dont say 2019..my PD is almost same as yours and I aint hanging around till 2019..by that time I will be old and no idea what will I do with..GC..probaly hope for citizenship and apply for retirement benefits :confused::confused::confused:
Edit: Never mind..yours is EB3..so may be mine will come in 2015
lol..dont say 2019..my PD is almost same as yours and I aint hanging around till 2019..by that time I will be old and no idea what will I do with..GC..probaly hope for citizenship and apply for retirement benefits :confused::confused::confused:
Edit: Never mind..yours is EB3..so may be mine will come in 2015
girlfriend April 21 to May 21 - Taurus is
paskal
12-28 12:18 PM
i have never had that problem
may have been because you booked those flights separately, if they are on the same itinerary and both were booked through Thai, United should not do that, guess they don't care because you are not continuing on United. btw how could they demand money for the international part of the flight- they are not Thai and their rules don't apply...i also think the person you dealt with was ignorant...
the problem i have seen- you fly into the US and have a connecting flight onwards- if you take it withing 24 hrs ie same day- bags just continue- if not you are stuck with domestic rules. now it no longer matters on american carriers at least, intl allowance has also been decreased to 50 lbs.
may have been because you booked those flights separately, if they are on the same itinerary and both were booked through Thai, United should not do that, guess they don't care because you are not continuing on United. btw how could they demand money for the international part of the flight- they are not Thai and their rules don't apply...i also think the person you dealt with was ignorant...
the problem i have seen- you fly into the US and have a connecting flight onwards- if you take it withing 24 hrs ie same day- bags just continue- if not you are stuck with domestic rules. now it no longer matters on american carriers at least, intl allowance has also been decreased to 50 lbs.
hairstyles Gemini the Twins (May 21st
ivy55
01-16 08:17 PM
Contributing $20/month
mallu
02-22 07:17 PM
Following advice of 'Googler' i skimmed through the USCIS OMbud's report. So USCIS is not able to accurately 'count' the cases because old cases at local offices are not accounted in system (?) . Otherwise it would have been a quick data base query to obtain whatever statistics.
And i was interested in knowing how many India EB2 pending till Oct.2002 ;-)
And i was interested in knowing how many India EB2 pending till Oct.2002 ;-)
MDix
02-07 10:28 PM
Very good point for removing country cap.
Some questions to those who are supporting country cap.
Why not put a country cap on foreign students� visas since many of them get into the green card line eventually?
Why not put a country cap on H1B visas since many of them get into the green card line eventually?
Why not put a country cap on labor certifications?
Why not put a country cap on I-140s?
Why not impose a country cap at the port of entry?
Why not put a country cap on visitors� visas?
Why not put a country cap on business visas?
Why not put a country cap on US trade with other countries?
Why not put a country cap on amount of US $ reserves that each country can have?
Why not put a country cap on children that foreigners in the US can bear?
Why not put a country cap on the foreigners� earnings in the US?
.
.
.
And the list can go on.
Putting country cap on greens cards serves a hidden racist agenda of not letting the people of one particular ethnic group grow in number and become strong.
Some questions to those who are supporting country cap.
Why not put a country cap on foreign students� visas since many of them get into the green card line eventually?
Why not put a country cap on H1B visas since many of them get into the green card line eventually?
Why not put a country cap on labor certifications?
Why not put a country cap on I-140s?
Why not impose a country cap at the port of entry?
Why not put a country cap on visitors� visas?
Why not put a country cap on business visas?
Why not put a country cap on US trade with other countries?
Why not put a country cap on amount of US $ reserves that each country can have?
Why not put a country cap on children that foreigners in the US can bear?
Why not put a country cap on the foreigners� earnings in the US?
.
.
.
And the list can go on.
Putting country cap on greens cards serves a hidden racist agenda of not letting the people of one particular ethnic group grow in number and become strong.
