gc_check
06-27 08:17 AM
I understand that there is lot of fear among applicants that USCIS might retrogress the dates interimly sometime in july due to the expected high volume of applications filing in the begining of july.
To minimize the chance of USCIS from taking any such steps, shall we all unite and file the applications on a specific date in july probably on 30th of july? This will accomodate all applicants...so that we shall all be winners and use this opportunity to our advantage instead of competing amongst each other...where only a few will be winners and others will be loosers.
This will also reduce the pressure among applicants , attorneys and doctors.
Can the AILA cooperate? Will there be unity amongst applicants to make this possible??? any ideas ??
Dude, From your previous posts looks like you have already filed and got your receipt notice.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=87755#post87755
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=80880#post80880
Well, this is not a good idea ... and obviously every one is as anxious as others to get their papers filed on time. This does not make sense at all. I read your posting history and notice your posts with GC approval and also about receipt notice for spouse.
What is goin on with you ?
To minimize the chance of USCIS from taking any such steps, shall we all unite and file the applications on a specific date in july probably on 30th of july? This will accomodate all applicants...so that we shall all be winners and use this opportunity to our advantage instead of competing amongst each other...where only a few will be winners and others will be loosers.
This will also reduce the pressure among applicants , attorneys and doctors.
Can the AILA cooperate? Will there be unity amongst applicants to make this possible??? any ideas ??
Dude, From your previous posts looks like you have already filed and got your receipt notice.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=87755#post87755
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=80880#post80880
Well, this is not a good idea ... and obviously every one is as anxious as others to get their papers filed on time. This does not make sense at all. I read your posting history and notice your posts with GC approval and also about receipt notice for spouse.
What is goin on with you ?
wallpaper Jessica Alba Atelier Versace
gcgreen
08-12 01:28 PM
Both your job descriptions say design develop and test applications using Win32 API and MFC (among other things) .... tell me why you are worried again...? :-)
It is similar. The key words are "Design, develop, test .....maintain.... etc.." Look up the O*net code for 15-1031.00 - Your L/C will state this occupational code. This has a broad classification.
I am in the same boat - my old job says ""design, develop, test wireless and mobile applications using Pocket PC SDK, MFC, Win32 API ........" and my new job says "Design , develop, test finaicial system applications using VC++, MFC, Win32API ........" I ran this through some lawyers and they say it is fine.
15-1031.00 has a lot of titles that any software person can fit in.
Old job title is "Senior Software Engineer" new job title is "Senior Software Developer"
Fellow IVans - please comment if this is fine?
It is similar. The key words are "Design, develop, test .....maintain.... etc.." Look up the O*net code for 15-1031.00 - Your L/C will state this occupational code. This has a broad classification.
I am in the same boat - my old job says ""design, develop, test wireless and mobile applications using Pocket PC SDK, MFC, Win32 API ........" and my new job says "Design , develop, test finaicial system applications using VC++, MFC, Win32API ........" I ran this through some lawyers and they say it is fine.
15-1031.00 has a lot of titles that any software person can fit in.
Old job title is "Senior Software Engineer" new job title is "Senior Software Developer"
Fellow IVans - please comment if this is fine?
anadimisra
11-17 07:12 AM
Thanks for applying and for the quick reply. Your skill set and experienced matched what we are looking for, and you passed the prescreening with perfect scores, except we can not hire anybody that requires sponsorship at this time. If you applied with a mistake on that prescreening question, please change the answer on the prescreening questions. Thank you and good luck!
xxxxx xxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxx xxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
2011 Jessica Alba Atelier Versace
Shirdibaba
11-11 12:44 PM
Hi folks,
We had the appt wt infopass the other day.I guess it was just like others,some kinda error and that happened opening the SR wt TSC.They said our case is preadjudicated.and said we may want to check on the case by making an appt wt the center but maybe NOT calling and opening a service request.What a waste of time n energy, all the agony we had to go through!!
NOW guys i have some other issue/question to ask u all.
After the EAD is approved do u necessarily have to be working for the same employer who sponsored for you? Ours is like future appointment.The USCIS wanted some docs from us this June re the appontment/work related.And yesterday when we asked that officer she said our case is preadjuticated as of Oct 2009.So far we have taken couple of paychecks frm the sponsoring company.But then we have our own small business also that has kept us going.And we were thinking of taking more paychecks after the GC is approved.Does that make sense to you guys? or are we at fault?
PLS Suggest??
We had the appt wt infopass the other day.I guess it was just like others,some kinda error and that happened opening the SR wt TSC.They said our case is preadjudicated.and said we may want to check on the case by making an appt wt the center but maybe NOT calling and opening a service request.What a waste of time n energy, all the agony we had to go through!!
NOW guys i have some other issue/question to ask u all.
After the EAD is approved do u necessarily have to be working for the same employer who sponsored for you? Ours is like future appointment.The USCIS wanted some docs from us this June re the appontment/work related.And yesterday when we asked that officer she said our case is preadjuticated as of Oct 2009.So far we have taken couple of paychecks frm the sponsoring company.But then we have our own small business also that has kept us going.And we were thinking of taking more paychecks after the GC is approved.Does that make sense to you guys? or are we at fault?
PLS Suggest??
more...
snathan
04-19 12:06 PM
They do not accept Indian 3 yr bachelors & 2/3years of Masters + 5 years for EB2. This has been discussed lot of times. They expect single 4 year degree.
15yrs of education(India Bachelors) + 5 or more years of education for EB3 is accepted if certain qualifiers are included in the Labor.
Just take care if you are dealing with attorney who saying above thing.
It all depends on what you have in the PERM requirement. If you have like MS, BS or any foreign equivalent as evaluated by reputed firm or equivalent experience then you can get approval
.
15yrs of education(India Bachelors) + 5 or more years of education for EB3 is accepted if certain qualifiers are included in the Labor.
Just take care if you are dealing with attorney who saying above thing.
It all depends on what you have in the PERM requirement. If you have like MS, BS or any foreign equivalent as evaluated by reputed firm or equivalent experience then you can get approval
.
kevinkris
05-08 02:44 PM
can't wait to see responses from GC holders..
more...
abhijitp
07-08 07:50 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEpN96P_1LA&NR=1
2010 jessica alba party dress
gc_on_demand
11-21 11:29 AM
Dear Friends,
As per yesterday�s floor summary (access link below), the House of Congress has been adjourned and this marks the end of the business activity in the house of the110th Congress. House will re-convene at 11:00 a.m. on January 3, 2009 and that will be the first session of the 111th Congress.
Floor Summary: http://clerk.house.gov/floorsummary/floor.html
3:02 P.M. -
The House adjourned pursuant to H. Con. Res. 440. The next meeting is scheduled for 11:00 a.m. on January 3, 2009.
HR 5882 introduced in the 110th Congress will no longer valid for consideration in the 111th Congress and a new RECAPTURE bill has to be introduced in 111th Congress with the same contents of HR 5882 in order for us to obtain some relief.
I think we should start our campaign now itself, targeting Rep Lofgren, Zoe [CA-16] and Rep Sensenbrenner, F. James, Jr. [WI-5], for the RE-INTRODUCTION of the RECAPTURE bill during the first week of the 111th Congress.
Also, it is very important NOT to campaign for the expansion of the scope of this bill at this point of time as that will make this bill to get ignored and become a reason to add the whole relief measures to a Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill which may take 1-2 years to get passed depending on the political landscape.
We should ask Hon. Zoe and Hon. Sensenbrenner to introduce this as an emergency relief measure and try to get this passed during the first quarter itself.
Once this bill gets introduced, we could request all previous Co-Sponsors of HR 5882 to become Co-Sponsors of the new bill.
So at this point, we should send mails to Rep Lofgren, Zoe and Rep Sensenbrenner, F. James, Jr. encouraging them to re-introduce the RECAPTURE bill.
Let�s keep HOPE alive!
I was pushing it for week. I tried to email her. It didnot work out.. On her website if you are not from her constitute it will not allow to send message. I called her office to and lady asked me details first like name , address and she said I should call my local rep. Also she didnot give any details on HR 5882. I was asking support from some member from her consitute and get the thing going ..no one showed interest. People are busy on AC21 thing. I think its good for them but doesnot matter for me who didont even file I 485.
We are in such a minority in terms of immigrants. 12 mil Illegal Vs 500k legal ( who are waiting for visa ) Out of that who knows how many we are on this site ? may be 10 % or less.. and people starts campaign for AC21 which brings number even smaller. How can we get success... We should think broad. The whole point of this was forum should be for every one. I know we had done a progress. (1) We did good job on July fiasco. only helped those who were waiting for filling 485.. ( may be 90 % of population of this site . )
(2) then we did good job for 2 year of EAD
(3) Now AC21..
but this is helping only few % of us. and becoming less and less as some senior members get GC and leave site.. In order to attrack more and more people we should be broad. Our primary goal should be Backlog and increase visa .. Unless congress increase visa nothing will happen to backlog.
Good start and let me know if you need some help on this campaign.
As per yesterday�s floor summary (access link below), the House of Congress has been adjourned and this marks the end of the business activity in the house of the110th Congress. House will re-convene at 11:00 a.m. on January 3, 2009 and that will be the first session of the 111th Congress.
Floor Summary: http://clerk.house.gov/floorsummary/floor.html
3:02 P.M. -
The House adjourned pursuant to H. Con. Res. 440. The next meeting is scheduled for 11:00 a.m. on January 3, 2009.
HR 5882 introduced in the 110th Congress will no longer valid for consideration in the 111th Congress and a new RECAPTURE bill has to be introduced in 111th Congress with the same contents of HR 5882 in order for us to obtain some relief.
I think we should start our campaign now itself, targeting Rep Lofgren, Zoe [CA-16] and Rep Sensenbrenner, F. James, Jr. [WI-5], for the RE-INTRODUCTION of the RECAPTURE bill during the first week of the 111th Congress.
Also, it is very important NOT to campaign for the expansion of the scope of this bill at this point of time as that will make this bill to get ignored and become a reason to add the whole relief measures to a Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill which may take 1-2 years to get passed depending on the political landscape.
We should ask Hon. Zoe and Hon. Sensenbrenner to introduce this as an emergency relief measure and try to get this passed during the first quarter itself.
Once this bill gets introduced, we could request all previous Co-Sponsors of HR 5882 to become Co-Sponsors of the new bill.
So at this point, we should send mails to Rep Lofgren, Zoe and Rep Sensenbrenner, F. James, Jr. encouraging them to re-introduce the RECAPTURE bill.
Let�s keep HOPE alive!
I was pushing it for week. I tried to email her. It didnot work out.. On her website if you are not from her constitute it will not allow to send message. I called her office to and lady asked me details first like name , address and she said I should call my local rep. Also she didnot give any details on HR 5882. I was asking support from some member from her consitute and get the thing going ..no one showed interest. People are busy on AC21 thing. I think its good for them but doesnot matter for me who didont even file I 485.
We are in such a minority in terms of immigrants. 12 mil Illegal Vs 500k legal ( who are waiting for visa ) Out of that who knows how many we are on this site ? may be 10 % or less.. and people starts campaign for AC21 which brings number even smaller. How can we get success... We should think broad. The whole point of this was forum should be for every one. I know we had done a progress. (1) We did good job on July fiasco. only helped those who were waiting for filling 485.. ( may be 90 % of population of this site . )
(2) then we did good job for 2 year of EAD
(3) Now AC21..
but this is helping only few % of us. and becoming less and less as some senior members get GC and leave site.. In order to attrack more and more people we should be broad. Our primary goal should be Backlog and increase visa .. Unless congress increase visa nothing will happen to backlog.
Good start and let me know if you need some help on this campaign.
more...
wahwah
06-05 11:04 AM
What is the effectivity date of this memo?
May 30th or June 1st?
I think for few people this might be bad news. Some people changed their job without I-140 being approved. Sorry guys...i used AC21 but i have approved I-140.
May 30th or June 1st?
I think for few people this might be bad news. Some people changed their job without I-140 being approved. Sorry guys...i used AC21 but i have approved I-140.
hair jessica alba dress 2011.
EBX-Man
05-12 11:33 AM
Pappu,
Reality is DREAM act is directly connected to HISPANIC votes for Democrats, EB community doesnt have any VOTING rights, neither they get any support from the folks who are already GC/UScitizenship holders.
Once people are out of this GC mess, they all start talking about anti immigration and that's the reality, u go to any indian community around and see how much support you have from those folks who have GC/US citizenship.
Hispanic community has unity. EB Community has factured groups, each intenet on their narrow goals and aspirations. There is no use commenting on and comparing Hispanic comunity with legal community. Every illegal fights for all the illegals where as every EB immigrant fights for himself and by extension his/her group be it preference category or country category
Reality is DREAM act is directly connected to HISPANIC votes for Democrats, EB community doesnt have any VOTING rights, neither they get any support from the folks who are already GC/UScitizenship holders.
Once people are out of this GC mess, they all start talking about anti immigration and that's the reality, u go to any indian community around and see how much support you have from those folks who have GC/US citizenship.
Hispanic community has unity. EB Community has factured groups, each intenet on their narrow goals and aspirations. There is no use commenting on and comparing Hispanic comunity with legal community. Every illegal fights for all the illegals where as every EB immigrant fights for himself and by extension his/her group be it preference category or country category
more...
prioritydate
08-17 07:31 PM
Bumpy... Bumpy...:D
hot Jessica Alba BAFTAs best worst
sujan_vatrapu
10-28 04:03 PM
Sujan vatarapu you are a baby here. you just believe what ever supereme court says! it is influenced by politicians, and the so called minority community in India. So if you dont know dont argue. I never said anything -ve about athiest, I said they are denying themselves by claiming as an atheist. that is about it. When you point a finger three of your own fingers are pointing towards you Please understand that.
exactly and it applies more to you because if someone does not agree with your opinion thats what you do, wherz the proof that supreme court is influenced by minorities? you are totally out of touch with reality and u probably are struck with 70s/80s mentality, no point in arguing with you,
exactly and it applies more to you because if someone does not agree with your opinion thats what you do, wherz the proof that supreme court is influenced by minorities? you are totally out of touch with reality and u probably are struck with 70s/80s mentality, no point in arguing with you,
more...
house Jessica Alba looks fantastic
ssnd03
07-17 10:05 AM
FBI background check delay is the only reason why visa numbers are wasted every year. Pending I485 cannot be adjudicated and allocated visa numbers due to pending security checks. At the same time these pending I485s also don't let the visa bulletin dates move forward fast enough. Just wait and see how this problem is going to get worse in the coming years.
Retrogression is a serious problem right now due to quotas and country quotas. But backlogged FBI checks will make it worse for thousands of people.
Retrogression is a serious problem right now due to quotas and country quotas. But backlogged FBI checks will make it worse for thousands of people.
tattoo Jessica Alba Preggers With
hydboy77
02-11 05:08 PM
vdl rao is an irrational person. without any sound reasoning he started that stupid thread "eb2 India will be current", when I tried to point out something about the amount of eb3 to eb2 portings going on and how this will set the eb2 dates back significantly I was given red dots (what else can they do). The people in that thread were halucinating about eb2 being current. Reality should now set in, there in no way eb2 is even going to 2006 anytime soon. This is the sad reality.
Last year there were only about 3 to 4k spillover from eb1 to eb2, eb2 row pretty much consumed all the eb2 row numbers and there was no spillover from eb2 row to eb2 india and eb2 china.
If the same trend continues we might get 3k spillover to eb2 india\china which will advance PD by a month. Some people are hoping that because of the bad economy there might not be many eb1 applications and that will lead to spillover to eb2, that is wrong assumption, the people getting approval in eb1 in 2009 are people who applied in 2008 and earlier when the economy was doing good, lay offs started only in nov-dec of 2008. Even if eb1 applications drop because of bad economy the results would be reflected in 2010 and not in 2009.
USCIS is not going to waste any visa numbers anymore. That means the last rollover from FB to eb has already happened in 2008 and might not happen ever again.
Last year there were only about 3 to 4k spillover from eb1 to eb2, eb2 row pretty much consumed all the eb2 row numbers and there was no spillover from eb2 row to eb2 india and eb2 china.
If the same trend continues we might get 3k spillover to eb2 india\china which will advance PD by a month. Some people are hoping that because of the bad economy there might not be many eb1 applications and that will lead to spillover to eb2, that is wrong assumption, the people getting approval in eb1 in 2009 are people who applied in 2008 and earlier when the economy was doing good, lay offs started only in nov-dec of 2008. Even if eb1 applications drop because of bad economy the results would be reflected in 2010 and not in 2009.
USCIS is not going to waste any visa numbers anymore. That means the last rollover from FB to eb has already happened in 2008 and might not happen ever again.
more...
pictures Alba with Gold dress
longq
12-20 03:41 PM
Hello IV and its core members,
I am one of the members of the forum and suffering due to the severe retrogression of EB visas. I highly appreciate IV�s effort to bring some legislative relief to address the severe backlogs in EB visas. I too participated in all IVs campaign in urging the law makers to bring some relief for this crisis. However, I have some concern here; about the method followed U.S DOS in allocating EB visas particularly in EB2 category for India and China. I am worried whether U.S DOS is violating the INA 202 (a), by suspending AC21 provision that eliminates country quota in EB categories. If they are violating by mistake, it is our responsibility to notify/clarify with them or we need to understand the law clearly. This is very important. Because, even if 110th congress passes SKIL bill, if DOS violates the AC21 law then it will not help applicants from oversubscribed countries (India and China). Here is my analysis based on following facts.
The cutoff date for EB2 India has moved just 7 days since last 9 months. However EB2 �Row has been current. EB2- ROW has never retrogressed before. EB3 ROW has seen considerable movement in last 9 months.
There may be four possible separate or combination of following reasons for the freeze of cutoff dates for India in EB2 at Jan 2003.
1. The backlog elimination effort of DOL pumped massive approved labor certificates from BEC. There may be tons of EB2 applicants from India and China with PD in the year 2001 and 2002 might have applied 485s based on recent approvals from BEC. However I doubt that. Because, in the year 2001, 2002 and 2003, EB3 India and China were �current�. No body cared about filing EB2 labor certification till the later part of 2004. Most lawyers preferred to file EB3 as it was easy, and there were no difference between EB3 and EB2 at that time. First ever indication for EB3 retrogression was issued by DOS only in later part of 2004. I doubt so many people have filed EB2-labor till 2003, keeping in mind that EB3 will retrogress in 2004 or future. Traditionally EB2 has been less demanding compare to EB1 and EB3.
2. Perhaps, there may be a huge demand by ROW (Due to PERM) to consume all the 86% of visa numbers in EB2 category in every month that prompts DOS to allocate only 7% to India and China. I doubt this too, because India and China itself consume about 60% of EB2 visas.
3. There may be lot of EB3 Indians and Chinese with PD 2001 and 2002 porting their PD from EB3 to EB2 by filing new LC and EB2-I-140. This may escalate the demand. However, how many will do this? How many employers will to do this �favor� for their employees? A real US employer/big corporations will not do double time work for an employee. Only consulting/staffing companies will do this. I think this may be a small group (or may not be?).
4. There may be another possible reason. There may be something wrong with U.S.DOS in allocating visa numbers in EB2 category, as per section 202 (a) of current INA. They may be issuing only 2800 (7% of 40,000) visas to India and China in EB2 and redirecting unused EB2 numbers to EB3 category. They may be imposing hard country cap in EB2 (Suspending AC21 law as per their VB Nov 2005). There is a large room for this speculation, due to the pattern of cutoff date movement in EB2 category. This is just a speculation. This argument/speculation is valid if DOS has issued less than 40,000 EB2 visas in FY 2006 as mandated by the law, and issued those numbers (40,000 minus actually issued) to EB3-ROW. In my view, it violates section 203 (b) (2) of the INA. One has to wait till they release statistics for FY 2006, to see how many EB2 visas are issued in that FY.
Here is some detailed analysis that says why it violates the law.
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 203 a and b of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets numbers for each preference categories with in FB and EB.
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. This section also explains how to handle unused numbers with respect to country quota.
Even before AC21 rule enacted in 2000, there was no �hard� country cap as per INA then. Here is the section of INA before year 2000, describes how to allocate unused visas, if overall/total demand for FB an EB visas are less than supply*.
INA 202 (a) (3)
�Exception if additional visas available. - If because of the application of paragraph (2) with respect to one or more foreign states or dependent areas, the total number of visas available under both subsections (a-Family category) and (b-Employment category) of section 203 for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who otherwise may be issued such a visa, paragraph (2) shall not apply to visas made available to such states or areas during the remainder of such calendar quarter�.
Therefore, the 7% country cap had always been �soft� till year 2000.
After year 2000, AC21 has completely removed country cap in each employment category, if excess visas are available in each preference categories.
After 2000 (After AC21) the following law was added to INA in the section 202.
INA 202 (a) (5) (A)
EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
As per my simple interpretation of above AC21 rule, DOS should allocate unused visas by ROW �EB2 (ROW- countries other than India and China in EB2 category) for the first two months of any calendar quarter to over-subscribed countries (India & China) at the third month of that calendar quarter. They should not allocate to lower Preference category (EB3), if demand is more in higher preference category (EB2) to consume all the visa numbers in that preference category. They should allocate visas to all the documentarily qualified applicants in that (EB2) preference category, irrespective of country of birth. If they followed this rule/law, there may be a considerable movement in cut-off dates for India and China in Dec 2005, Mar, June and Sep of 2006 in EB2 (last month of each calendar quarter in a fiscal year). We have not witnessed such movement in last 1.5 years. No one knows how DOS is allocating numbers. They may be allocating only 7% visas to India and China in EB2 category very strictly, every month, and allocating unused numbers to EB3 category, by suspending AC21 law as indicated in their Nov 2005 Visa Bulletin. If they do so, it is against the law, at least in my interpretation of AC21 rule that eliminates country quota in EB categories.
DOS can not interpret above AC21 rule that eliminates per country limit applies �totally� to all EB categories put together, not by individual preference categories. I.e. If they say they will issue more than 2,800 visas to EB2- India per year (more than 7% of 40,000), provided overall demand for EB visas are less than 140,000. If they interpret the law like this, then there is no need for section 202(a) (5) (A) due to AC21 law. The law before AC21 {i.e. section 202 (a) (3)} itself address the elimination of country quota in both FB and EB category*. Then, section 202(a) (5) (A) is a duplicate wording of section 202(a) (3). So, this section of AC21 law becomes a redundant/duplicate law. Then, there is no meaning of employment �preference� category if they interpret �totally or overall worldwide demand�. In other words, a non-Indian/Chinese restaurant cook (EB3) is more preferred than a NIW PhDs (EB2) from India or China. Is it the intend of the congress when enacting AC21 law in removing per country limitation in EB category? Is it the American Competitiveness in 21st century? I highly doubt that.
Now it is the time to ask US DOS, how they are allocating visa number in EB2 category. If DOS interpreting the law differently, then we need to ask the law makers (Congress) what is their original intension behind the section 202(a)(5)(A) when they drafted the AC21 law in 2000 and how it is differ from 202 (a) (3).
Perhaps Core IV team can initiate to discuss/consult this issue with an immigration lawyer and place an enquiry with DOS or Law makers, if needed.
(*Note: DOS do not mix FB and EB categories for visa number allocation/calculation to meet the per country limit. They keep both in separate track to meet separately the 7% limit)
I am one of the members of the forum and suffering due to the severe retrogression of EB visas. I highly appreciate IV�s effort to bring some legislative relief to address the severe backlogs in EB visas. I too participated in all IVs campaign in urging the law makers to bring some relief for this crisis. However, I have some concern here; about the method followed U.S DOS in allocating EB visas particularly in EB2 category for India and China. I am worried whether U.S DOS is violating the INA 202 (a), by suspending AC21 provision that eliminates country quota in EB categories. If they are violating by mistake, it is our responsibility to notify/clarify with them or we need to understand the law clearly. This is very important. Because, even if 110th congress passes SKIL bill, if DOS violates the AC21 law then it will not help applicants from oversubscribed countries (India and China). Here is my analysis based on following facts.
The cutoff date for EB2 India has moved just 7 days since last 9 months. However EB2 �Row has been current. EB2- ROW has never retrogressed before. EB3 ROW has seen considerable movement in last 9 months.
There may be four possible separate or combination of following reasons for the freeze of cutoff dates for India in EB2 at Jan 2003.
1. The backlog elimination effort of DOL pumped massive approved labor certificates from BEC. There may be tons of EB2 applicants from India and China with PD in the year 2001 and 2002 might have applied 485s based on recent approvals from BEC. However I doubt that. Because, in the year 2001, 2002 and 2003, EB3 India and China were �current�. No body cared about filing EB2 labor certification till the later part of 2004. Most lawyers preferred to file EB3 as it was easy, and there were no difference between EB3 and EB2 at that time. First ever indication for EB3 retrogression was issued by DOS only in later part of 2004. I doubt so many people have filed EB2-labor till 2003, keeping in mind that EB3 will retrogress in 2004 or future. Traditionally EB2 has been less demanding compare to EB1 and EB3.
2. Perhaps, there may be a huge demand by ROW (Due to PERM) to consume all the 86% of visa numbers in EB2 category in every month that prompts DOS to allocate only 7% to India and China. I doubt this too, because India and China itself consume about 60% of EB2 visas.
3. There may be lot of EB3 Indians and Chinese with PD 2001 and 2002 porting their PD from EB3 to EB2 by filing new LC and EB2-I-140. This may escalate the demand. However, how many will do this? How many employers will to do this �favor� for their employees? A real US employer/big corporations will not do double time work for an employee. Only consulting/staffing companies will do this. I think this may be a small group (or may not be?).
4. There may be another possible reason. There may be something wrong with U.S.DOS in allocating visa numbers in EB2 category, as per section 202 (a) of current INA. They may be issuing only 2800 (7% of 40,000) visas to India and China in EB2 and redirecting unused EB2 numbers to EB3 category. They may be imposing hard country cap in EB2 (Suspending AC21 law as per their VB Nov 2005). There is a large room for this speculation, due to the pattern of cutoff date movement in EB2 category. This is just a speculation. This argument/speculation is valid if DOS has issued less than 40,000 EB2 visas in FY 2006 as mandated by the law, and issued those numbers (40,000 minus actually issued) to EB3-ROW. In my view, it violates section 203 (b) (2) of the INA. One has to wait till they release statistics for FY 2006, to see how many EB2 visas are issued in that FY.
Here is some detailed analysis that says why it violates the law.
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 203 a and b of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets numbers for each preference categories with in FB and EB.
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. This section also explains how to handle unused numbers with respect to country quota.
Even before AC21 rule enacted in 2000, there was no �hard� country cap as per INA then. Here is the section of INA before year 2000, describes how to allocate unused visas, if overall/total demand for FB an EB visas are less than supply*.
INA 202 (a) (3)
�Exception if additional visas available. - If because of the application of paragraph (2) with respect to one or more foreign states or dependent areas, the total number of visas available under both subsections (a-Family category) and (b-Employment category) of section 203 for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who otherwise may be issued such a visa, paragraph (2) shall not apply to visas made available to such states or areas during the remainder of such calendar quarter�.
Therefore, the 7% country cap had always been �soft� till year 2000.
After year 2000, AC21 has completely removed country cap in each employment category, if excess visas are available in each preference categories.
After 2000 (After AC21) the following law was added to INA in the section 202.
INA 202 (a) (5) (A)
EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
As per my simple interpretation of above AC21 rule, DOS should allocate unused visas by ROW �EB2 (ROW- countries other than India and China in EB2 category) for the first two months of any calendar quarter to over-subscribed countries (India & China) at the third month of that calendar quarter. They should not allocate to lower Preference category (EB3), if demand is more in higher preference category (EB2) to consume all the visa numbers in that preference category. They should allocate visas to all the documentarily qualified applicants in that (EB2) preference category, irrespective of country of birth. If they followed this rule/law, there may be a considerable movement in cut-off dates for India and China in Dec 2005, Mar, June and Sep of 2006 in EB2 (last month of each calendar quarter in a fiscal year). We have not witnessed such movement in last 1.5 years. No one knows how DOS is allocating numbers. They may be allocating only 7% visas to India and China in EB2 category very strictly, every month, and allocating unused numbers to EB3 category, by suspending AC21 law as indicated in their Nov 2005 Visa Bulletin. If they do so, it is against the law, at least in my interpretation of AC21 rule that eliminates country quota in EB categories.
DOS can not interpret above AC21 rule that eliminates per country limit applies �totally� to all EB categories put together, not by individual preference categories. I.e. If they say they will issue more than 2,800 visas to EB2- India per year (more than 7% of 40,000), provided overall demand for EB visas are less than 140,000. If they interpret the law like this, then there is no need for section 202(a) (5) (A) due to AC21 law. The law before AC21 {i.e. section 202 (a) (3)} itself address the elimination of country quota in both FB and EB category*. Then, section 202(a) (5) (A) is a duplicate wording of section 202(a) (3). So, this section of AC21 law becomes a redundant/duplicate law. Then, there is no meaning of employment �preference� category if they interpret �totally or overall worldwide demand�. In other words, a non-Indian/Chinese restaurant cook (EB3) is more preferred than a NIW PhDs (EB2) from India or China. Is it the intend of the congress when enacting AC21 law in removing per country limitation in EB category? Is it the American Competitiveness in 21st century? I highly doubt that.
Now it is the time to ask US DOS, how they are allocating visa number in EB2 category. If DOS interpreting the law differently, then we need to ask the law makers (Congress) what is their original intension behind the section 202(a)(5)(A) when they drafted the AC21 law in 2000 and how it is differ from 202 (a) (3).
Perhaps Core IV team can initiate to discuss/consult this issue with an immigration lawyer and place an enquiry with DOS or Law makers, if needed.
(*Note: DOS do not mix FB and EB categories for visa number allocation/calculation to meet the per country limit. They keep both in separate track to meet separately the 7% limit)
dresses Jessica Alba Atelier Versace
SkilledWorker4GC
07-08 04:58 PM
We need to call for unity ask people to come out and support this initiative.
We got to do somthing. Enough is enough. Think of all high skilled workers not going to work for a day what kind of impact that will have? What kind of awareness that will create? I am ready to give up one day worth of pay for this. Anyone else?
Well, even before Indian independence, it was just a handful of population that were actively involved in the process, majority took life as it came and were afraid. In fact, there are a lot of coward stories where cowards helped the British against freedom fighters. The reason British could rule India so easily because desis are submissive and it took a long time for leaders like Mahatma Gandhi to lay a foundation and gather critical mass enought o bring about a change and the worst thing is - the only change that happened was that British govt moved out. 60 years after independence, we are still divided mentality, lack of civic sense, we claim greaatness in getting IT and BPO projects, we could not win a gold medal in Olympics nor could we make any big scientific achievement - the worst thing is we come here to US and stay divided and expect that someone will do good to us
We got to do somthing. Enough is enough. Think of all high skilled workers not going to work for a day what kind of impact that will have? What kind of awareness that will create? I am ready to give up one day worth of pay for this. Anyone else?
Well, even before Indian independence, it was just a handful of population that were actively involved in the process, majority took life as it came and were afraid. In fact, there are a lot of coward stories where cowards helped the British against freedom fighters. The reason British could rule India so easily because desis are submissive and it took a long time for leaders like Mahatma Gandhi to lay a foundation and gather critical mass enought o bring about a change and the worst thing is - the only change that happened was that British govt moved out. 60 years after independence, we are still divided mentality, lack of civic sense, we claim greaatness in getting IT and BPO projects, we could not win a gold medal in Olympics nor could we make any big scientific achievement - the worst thing is we come here to US and stay divided and expect that someone will do good to us
more...
makeup Jessica Alba wedding dress.
Kitiara
02-03 05:57 AM
What if I went :cyborg: ?
Hehe. I think I need a lot more practice to compete with the likes of you guys. :)
Hehe. I think I need a lot more practice to compete with the likes of you guys. :)
girlfriend jessica alba floral dress 2011
glen
04-01 06:27 PM
Fax 10 & 11 done.
hairstyles Jessica Alba | ELLE, December
prioritydate
08-07 05:45 PM
Here we go again. They are approving this on purpose, I guess.
walking_dude
11-21 07:31 PM
Folks, it's a good thing you guys are doing a grassroots drive. But please keep the chatter out of the public forums.
Anti-immigrants prowl on IV as members. If they get an hint, you are meeting any Rep./Senator on some day, they'll bombard that office with phone calls, E-mails and faxes same day or next day. It will in effect nullify all your efforts. It has happened in the past and it's sure to happen in the future.
So, please excercise due caution. Do not share information with the folks you don't know very well. These kind of actions are best suited to be carried out in your state chapter mailing-lists, where members are screened before joining. IV forums being public anyone can create a fake id in half an hour or one hour. It's not secure to carry these types of actions.
Thanks...I'm not in the 16th district, but if I'm not wrong digital2k is. I will talk to him and schedule a meeting with Zoe very soon...
Anti-immigrants prowl on IV as members. If they get an hint, you are meeting any Rep./Senator on some day, they'll bombard that office with phone calls, E-mails and faxes same day or next day. It will in effect nullify all your efforts. It has happened in the past and it's sure to happen in the future.
So, please excercise due caution. Do not share information with the folks you don't know very well. These kind of actions are best suited to be carried out in your state chapter mailing-lists, where members are screened before joining. IV forums being public anyone can create a fake id in half an hour or one hour. It's not secure to carry these types of actions.
Thanks...I'm not in the 16th district, but if I'm not wrong digital2k is. I will talk to him and schedule a meeting with Zoe very soon...
mmj
04-19 04:21 PM
Why not to use that very same ID you have been using for 2 years to post this one also? That way others will know you have been a member and also contributed in the past. No confusion and peace.
Man - U guys love to quibble about stupid things rather than focus on the big picture. All my thread says is - I'm doing X .... Please consider doing it as well if you think it is worth your while ... Thats it - Nothing more - nothing less. And here we're having a discussion about how long I've been a member of IV and yada yada yada ...
Man - U guys love to quibble about stupid things rather than focus on the big picture. All my thread says is - I'm doing X .... Please consider doing it as well if you think it is worth your while ... Thats it - Nothing more - nothing less. And here we're having a discussion about how long I've been a member of IV and yada yada yada ...
