perm2gc
12-28 05:30 PM
For Detroit you can use http://miindia.com.
I have already posted in miindia but we have to post for every 2 hours as their will be lot of activity in the forums and our ad may go back pages.
I have already posted in miindia but we have to post for every 2 hours as their will be lot of activity in the forums and our ad may go back pages.
wallpaper kuromi wallpaper. kuromi by
gc_aspirant_prasad
07-09 04:07 PM
Hatz off to that lady... Lot of us are still thinking to fill law-suit against USCIS/DOS.... We should act fast now and file law-suit rather than just waiting and discussing here. I felt bad some people even asked when will be outcome of that law-suit....That clearly tells you are going to wait till the out come of it and you will file law-suit....
Weird........Weird...Weird
If the class is certified, we may want to join that class rather than have separate lawsuits.
Weird........Weird...Weird
If the class is certified, we may want to join that class rather than have separate lawsuits.
alisa
01-21 11:13 AM
Assuming everyone stays the course, under these timelines
1. At least 5% of applicants will be sponsored by their American children.
2. Another 5% will have their first million and move to the investor's category.
The timelines would be a maximum of 20 years or so, at which point people would be sponsored by their children.
Ok. So thats a 10 percent decrease in accumulation rate.
Lets add another 10 percent decrease to that. These will be 10 percent that commit suicide, suffer a lay-off, or just pack up and go back.
So, the accumulation rate decreases to 15600, the initial backlogs from 2001, and 2002 also decreased to 80 percent their currently assumed values. Following are the results. Good news. Wait time decreases. Bad news, you still have to send your dependents back as we are not counting them.
The timelines are now less than 20 years.
For India. (ROW wait times are less than 5-10 years anyway according to this model)
YApp YC(New) YC(Old)
2001 2011 2013
2002 2015 2018
2003 2016 2020
2004 2018 2022
2005 2020 2024
2006 2021 2026
2007 2023 2028
2008 2024 2030
2009 2026 2032
2010 2027 2034
In anycase, there is a point to this exercise.
I don't want to pull numbers out of my ass. I want to make a good faith effort in estimating what the wait times would be with things being the way they are. A reasonable model should show that for Indians, the situation is hopeless. For others, the situation is painful. The current model shows that. I just want to give this some time, and get the best feedback and incorporate that in it.
Maybe, then I will be able to convince people (especially from India) to get active, and stop being ignoramuses asking innocently 'Oh! Is the situation really that bad?'
If anyone has any ideas on modelling EB-2 vs EB-3 for India, that would also be helpful. Given some data, simple math should give us good enough estimates.
1. At least 5% of applicants will be sponsored by their American children.
2. Another 5% will have their first million and move to the investor's category.
The timelines would be a maximum of 20 years or so, at which point people would be sponsored by their children.
Ok. So thats a 10 percent decrease in accumulation rate.
Lets add another 10 percent decrease to that. These will be 10 percent that commit suicide, suffer a lay-off, or just pack up and go back.
So, the accumulation rate decreases to 15600, the initial backlogs from 2001, and 2002 also decreased to 80 percent their currently assumed values. Following are the results. Good news. Wait time decreases. Bad news, you still have to send your dependents back as we are not counting them.
The timelines are now less than 20 years.
For India. (ROW wait times are less than 5-10 years anyway according to this model)
YApp YC(New) YC(Old)
2001 2011 2013
2002 2015 2018
2003 2016 2020
2004 2018 2022
2005 2020 2024
2006 2021 2026
2007 2023 2028
2008 2024 2030
2009 2026 2032
2010 2027 2034
In anycase, there is a point to this exercise.
I don't want to pull numbers out of my ass. I want to make a good faith effort in estimating what the wait times would be with things being the way they are. A reasonable model should show that for Indians, the situation is hopeless. For others, the situation is painful. The current model shows that. I just want to give this some time, and get the best feedback and incorporate that in it.
Maybe, then I will be able to convince people (especially from India) to get active, and stop being ignoramuses asking innocently 'Oh! Is the situation really that bad?'
If anyone has any ideas on modelling EB-2 vs EB-3 for India, that would also be helpful. Given some data, simple math should give us good enough estimates.
2011 Kuromi. Facebook middot; Email
pappu
06-14 08:47 AM
/\/\/
more...
Ramba
07-14 06:18 PM
You are correct but his case could be that his employer cancelled his 140 which could damage his case more than the use of AC21 to change employers.
The fundamental rule (for getting GC) is the longterm intent of having permanent employment relationship between employer and employee at the time of filing 140 and 485 (see the Q&A). The intet has to be "at the time of filing" only. The employee has worked 3 years in H1B for thr sponser. It clearly establishes the both party's intent at the time of filing. So, even if the employer revokes his approved 140, he is 100% safe.
The fundamental rule (for getting GC) is the longterm intent of having permanent employment relationship between employer and employee at the time of filing 140 and 485 (see the Q&A). The intet has to be "at the time of filing" only. The employee has worked 3 years in H1B for thr sponser. It clearly establishes the both party's intent at the time of filing. So, even if the employer revokes his approved 140, he is 100% safe.
supers789
11-23 02:25 PM
Ok. This is new to me. Can someone confirm if this is true? Is there any link that supports this?
--------
I guess Employer cannot revoke I-140 after 180 days - You may want to check with Immigration Specialist/lawyer
--------
I guess Employer cannot revoke I-140 after 180 days - You may want to check with Immigration Specialist/lawyer
more...
paskal
07-16 06:18 PM
only the media can do this for us
they like exposes' don't they?
now how can we get them interested
would the nyt reporter that wrote a story on Numbers USA be interested in a follwo up on their tactics?
they like exposes' don't they?
now how can we get them interested
would the nyt reporter that wrote a story on Numbers USA be interested in a follwo up on their tactics?
2010 My Melody amp; Kuromi
feedfront
10-21 01:26 PM
Hi Guys
At last today is my day.. online status changed to "Card Production Order" :)
Hope every one will get soon.
Thanks
onemorecame
Congrats dude, I had told you to hang in there and you would hear something in a week or two.
At last today is my day.. online status changed to "Card Production Order" :)
Hope every one will get soon.
Thanks
onemorecame
Congrats dude, I had told you to hang in there and you would hear something in a week or two.
more...
Anu119
01-11 11:36 AM
Hi:
I just joined the chapter.
Would love to be able to volnteer my services to this cause. How can I help? Also it may be a good idea to start a local support group for those of us in line waiting for this immigration hell to be over...may be a get together of some sort....
Wishin' for a better future ahead for all us immigration victims
PD for self: August 03
Labor Cert: pending
PD for husband: Dec 03
Labor Cert & I-140: appoved.
I just joined the chapter.
Would love to be able to volnteer my services to this cause. How can I help? Also it may be a good idea to start a local support group for those of us in line waiting for this immigration hell to be over...may be a get together of some sort....
Wishin' for a better future ahead for all us immigration victims
PD for self: August 03
Labor Cert: pending
PD for husband: Dec 03
Labor Cert & I-140: appoved.
hair kuromi wallpaper. my melody
immi_2006
09-26 10:29 AM
Check this
http://morejazzbythebay.wordpress.com/2007/09/26/cnn-misreports-purpose-of-immigrationvoice-rally/
Lets spread the message....
http://morejazzbythebay.wordpress.com/2007/09/26/cnn-misreports-purpose-of-immigrationvoice-rally/
Lets spread the message....
more...
inthehole
07-18 12:12 PM
hi tapukakababa, can you please provide me with a number for USCIS nebraska SC. I would like to talk to them as well.
Phone Number: 1-800-375-5283
Options 1, 2, 2, 6, 2, 2, 1 (For english)
Phone Number: 1-800-375-5283
Options 1, 2, 2, 6, 2, 2, 1 (For english)
hot My Melody®, Kuromi®,
priti8888
02-16 02:57 PM
2006 census
Total population of India,china, mexico and Philipines = about 40 % of world population
India - 17% of world Population
China- 20% of world population
Mexico- 1.7
Phillipines-1.3 %
------------
Ttl 40 % of world population.
so theres a reason behind this quota. Its not divide and rule.
Excluding US (4.3) , ICMP Still comprise of 35.7 % of world total
Total population of India,china, mexico and Philipines = about 40 % of world population
India - 17% of world Population
China- 20% of world population
Mexico- 1.7
Phillipines-1.3 %
------------
Ttl 40 % of world population.
so theres a reason behind this quota. Its not divide and rule.
Excluding US (4.3) , ICMP Still comprise of 35.7 % of world total
more...
house pictures kuromi wallpaper.
desi3933
02-12 08:24 AM
The visa numbers reported as used for FY 2009 is 141,020 from http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09...ort_TableV.pdf
This was the response i got from Ron Gotcher.
"The employment based category is entitled to use the "unused" family based numbers from the previous year. Last year, the quota for EB was the base of 140,000, plus another 13,000 shifted over from FB. Unfortunately, the CIS failed once again to approve enough cases to use up the entire available quota."
.....
Would you mind asking source/link for "another 13,000 shifted over"?
As per this link - family based numbers were totally used up for FY2008
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY08-AR-TableV.pdf
Family based visa used for FY2008 = 226,105 against 226,000 available.
I think it is important to understand and read what is being said.
I suggest that you follow your own advice and read & understand what is being posted in this thread. What do you think? Is this information or "message" correct?
______________________
Not a legal advice.
This was the response i got from Ron Gotcher.
"The employment based category is entitled to use the "unused" family based numbers from the previous year. Last year, the quota for EB was the base of 140,000, plus another 13,000 shifted over from FB. Unfortunately, the CIS failed once again to approve enough cases to use up the entire available quota."
.....
Would you mind asking source/link for "another 13,000 shifted over"?
As per this link - family based numbers were totally used up for FY2008
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY08-AR-TableV.pdf
Family based visa used for FY2008 = 226,105 against 226,000 available.
I think it is important to understand and read what is being said.
I suggest that you follow your own advice and read & understand what is being posted in this thread. What do you think? Is this information or "message" correct?
______________________
Not a legal advice.
tattoo kuromi wallpaper
ssss
11-14 05:23 PM
There seem to be less EB3 cases filed post PERM. May be due to retrogression every one started filing EB2
more...
pictures 放了一張月曆kuromi wallpaper,
logiclife
12-20 07:55 PM
<If anything like out of status or unauthorized employed happened before your last legal entry into USA (whether is more than 180 days or less than 180 days) IT DOES NOT MATTER and you can adjust status. You are fine. What's important is that "out of status" and "unauthorized stay" periods must not happen after you last entered USA and after you filed your 485 - and if it does happen, then it should be less than 180 days.>
So, logiclife, going with your above statement, I don't have any problem with my adustment of status? My last legal entry to the U.S was Mar, 2006. I applied for AOS in July, 2007. Can you point to any USCIS memo/documents stating the above facts? I was out of status in the year 2001 (more than 180 days).
This is not based on any memo. Its in the immigration and nationality act. That is even better because it wont change without an act of congress. Its rock solid. Memos and field manual can be changed by USCIS and they dont need change in laws. To change or edit 245(k), you need change in laws, which needs an act of congress. So the whole thing is on rock solid grounds.
The section is 8 USC � 1255 (k). Also known as 245(k).
Here is how to find the text of 245(k) on USCIS website:
1. Go to USCIS.gov
2. Go to "Laws and Regulations" menu item on top menu.
3. Click on "Immigration and Nationality Act" on the left menu.
4. Click on the link that says "Immigration and Nationality Act" below the 2 paragraph lecture.
5. Scroll down to Chapter 5 and go to "Act 245". DONT GO to "Act 245A".
6. Under Act 245, go to section (k), the lowercase k.
You will read this :
(k) 7/ An alien who is eligible to receive an immigrant visa under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 203(b) (or, in the case of an alien who is an immigrant described in section 101(a)(27)(C) , under section 203(b)(4) ) may adjust status pursuant to subsection (a) and notwithstanding subsection (c)(2), (c)(7), and (c)(8), if--
(1) the alien, on the date of filing an application for adjustment of status, is present in the United States pursuant to a lawful admission;
(2) the alien, subsequent to such lawful admission has not, for an aggregate period exceeding 180 days--
(A) failed to maintain, continuously, a lawful status;
(B) engaged in unauthorized employment; or
(C) otherwise violated the terms and conditions of the alien's admission.
Another link is here http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001255----000-.html
Go to (k) -lowercase k.
So, logiclife, going with your above statement, I don't have any problem with my adustment of status? My last legal entry to the U.S was Mar, 2006. I applied for AOS in July, 2007. Can you point to any USCIS memo/documents stating the above facts? I was out of status in the year 2001 (more than 180 days).
This is not based on any memo. Its in the immigration and nationality act. That is even better because it wont change without an act of congress. Its rock solid. Memos and field manual can be changed by USCIS and they dont need change in laws. To change or edit 245(k), you need change in laws, which needs an act of congress. So the whole thing is on rock solid grounds.
The section is 8 USC � 1255 (k). Also known as 245(k).
Here is how to find the text of 245(k) on USCIS website:
1. Go to USCIS.gov
2. Go to "Laws and Regulations" menu item on top menu.
3. Click on "Immigration and Nationality Act" on the left menu.
4. Click on the link that says "Immigration and Nationality Act" below the 2 paragraph lecture.
5. Scroll down to Chapter 5 and go to "Act 245". DONT GO to "Act 245A".
6. Under Act 245, go to section (k), the lowercase k.
You will read this :
(k) 7/ An alien who is eligible to receive an immigrant visa under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 203(b) (or, in the case of an alien who is an immigrant described in section 101(a)(27)(C) , under section 203(b)(4) ) may adjust status pursuant to subsection (a) and notwithstanding subsection (c)(2), (c)(7), and (c)(8), if--
(1) the alien, on the date of filing an application for adjustment of status, is present in the United States pursuant to a lawful admission;
(2) the alien, subsequent to such lawful admission has not, for an aggregate period exceeding 180 days--
(A) failed to maintain, continuously, a lawful status;
(B) engaged in unauthorized employment; or
(C) otherwise violated the terms and conditions of the alien's admission.
Another link is here http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001255----000-.html
Go to (k) -lowercase k.
dresses kuromi wallpaper. kuromi
Macaca
01-28 11:53 AM
I have come to this country in 1999 on F1 and have been working and paying takes since 2001.
Being on F(**k me) 1 is a triple whamy. Others are complaining about 6 years of H1B @ 50K+/year. Compare it with
1. 6+ years on F1 @ 10K/year.
2. 6- years on H1B @ 50K/year.
3. Jackshit (= rats ass) in SKILL bill for US degreeS.
Being on F(**k me) 1 is a triple whamy. Others are complaining about 6 years of H1B @ 50K+/year. Compare it with
1. 6+ years on F1 @ 10K/year.
2. 6- years on H1B @ 50K/year.
3. Jackshit (= rats ass) in SKILL bill for US degreeS.
more...
makeup kuromi wallpaper.
immi_seeker
04-09 06:32 PM
This is an "Ouch..." visa bulletin.
Dont want to be passimistic or discourage anyone; I have always been optimistic and will remain so...
However, this suggests that there will not be any fall down (previously called spillover) from EB4 and may not even be much from EB5 (Last year this was the major factor that gave 10k additional numbers to EB2 India). Lookes like people are finding alternate ways (who can) by these routes.
EB1 used up all its numbers last year and we dont know what will happen this year.
EB2 ROW usage looks low, but then again no movement in EB2 India...
Patience and persistence....
Good Luck to all of us.
EB1/EB2 demand is very low. So numbers should come from there i believe. Number crunchers could jump in and see how this EB4 demand will make a difference
Dont want to be passimistic or discourage anyone; I have always been optimistic and will remain so...
However, this suggests that there will not be any fall down (previously called spillover) from EB4 and may not even be much from EB5 (Last year this was the major factor that gave 10k additional numbers to EB2 India). Lookes like people are finding alternate ways (who can) by these routes.
EB1 used up all its numbers last year and we dont know what will happen this year.
EB2 ROW usage looks low, but then again no movement in EB2 India...
Patience and persistence....
Good Luck to all of us.
EB1/EB2 demand is very low. So numbers should come from there i believe. Number crunchers could jump in and see how this EB4 demand will make a difference
girlfriend New wallpapers added regularly
pappu
12-26 03:41 PM
6. If your visa is expired as mine is (btw a feb date has never opened up anywhere in India to date...i'm sick and tired and frustrated....getting an appt is a major hassle) the you better choose your airline carefully, the French embassy demands personal appearance (350 miles) for the 10 min it takes to issue a visa- which then lets me walk from one gate to another at De Gaulle.....
So if you travel to India and change planes in Paris you need a transit visa!!
What other countries do that and what countries allow without the visa? this information will be helpful.
So if you travel to India and change planes in Paris you need a transit visa!!
What other countries do that and what countries allow without the visa? this information will be helpful.
hairstyles images kuromi wallpaper.
javadeveloper
12-11 11:52 AM
All of us (people on L-1, F-1, J-1, H1, B1, K1 and their derivatives....) went to US consulate to request for VISA. US consulate never came to your door with a VISA.
Everyone goes to Bank and do transactions , that doesn't mean that we only need Bank and Bank doesn't need us and our deposits.
Everyone goes to Bank and do transactions , that doesn't mean that we only need Bank and Bank doesn't need us and our deposits.
nomi
12-13 01:24 PM
All , this subject has been raised very often and every time new members join in they start a thread and start questioning it.
- IV has indepth explored and studied this option and have found that this change is not possible administratively.
- we have not just met a lawyer. we have met few lawyers. we also have communicated with USCIS in the past.
- In the past some administrative changes have been done by USCIS, but this change cannot be done by them. All, we already had this idea long long ago and we also thought that why dont we do it if it so simple and then we dont have to go through all the legislative hurdles. But NO it cannot be done by USCIS.
- Faxing USCIS will not work. USCIS does not take policy decisions. We need to approach policy makers to get it done and that is what we are doing. By coming up with ideas, endlessly discussing despite explaination by IV and not working with IV action items we will all go in divergent directions and lose focus on the main action items we want each every member should focus. If you really feel for some idea and want to help, instead of asking IV to give explanation to every question on the forum, contact any of the active IV core members on the forum and bounce ideas. We need people with ideas and also same people willing to work on them too.
- If it was possible to get it done administratively, then in the current Skil bill push we would have/ and lawmakers would also have just asked USCIS to implement it.
Hope this explains this topic. Thanks
Thanks Pappu for explaination. Look like this door is already close. Well let me know if I can do anything to help.
- IV has indepth explored and studied this option and have found that this change is not possible administratively.
- we have not just met a lawyer. we have met few lawyers. we also have communicated with USCIS in the past.
- In the past some administrative changes have been done by USCIS, but this change cannot be done by them. All, we already had this idea long long ago and we also thought that why dont we do it if it so simple and then we dont have to go through all the legislative hurdles. But NO it cannot be done by USCIS.
- Faxing USCIS will not work. USCIS does not take policy decisions. We need to approach policy makers to get it done and that is what we are doing. By coming up with ideas, endlessly discussing despite explaination by IV and not working with IV action items we will all go in divergent directions and lose focus on the main action items we want each every member should focus. If you really feel for some idea and want to help, instead of asking IV to give explanation to every question on the forum, contact any of the active IV core members on the forum and bounce ideas. We need people with ideas and also same people willing to work on them too.
- If it was possible to get it done administratively, then in the current Skil bill push we would have/ and lawmakers would also have just asked USCIS to implement it.
Hope this explains this topic. Thanks
Thanks Pappu for explaination. Look like this door is already close. Well let me know if I can do anything to help.
gc28262
04-10 11:14 AM
Time and again I am telling. EB 3 problem is due to 245(i) cases. Once 245(i) primaries are over, their dependent will come into the picture, who are waiting back home. All 245(i) cases have PD before April 2001. For time being, EB3 I or Mexico move beyond April 01 but again retrogress back to the April 01 when cases are accumulate at CP. This is the reason why EB3 I and Mexico is not moving since last many years.
If some one is not convince with me, request under FOIA
1. How many cases filed under 245(i) in India, Mexico, and ROW
2. How many cases filed under I 824 Follow to Join since 2007?
I agree with your observations except the point that it will retrogress again to 2001.
As dates have moved beyond April 2001, I don't believe there will be any more 245(i) s coming into the queue. Dependents of 245(i) applicants would have a PD of Apr 2001 or before. They already got their GCs by now. 245(i) applicants would have filed for their dependents already. If these 245(i) applicants file for relatives, they WON'T have 2001 PD.
Please correct me if I am wrong.
If some one is not convince with me, request under FOIA
1. How many cases filed under 245(i) in India, Mexico, and ROW
2. How many cases filed under I 824 Follow to Join since 2007?
I agree with your observations except the point that it will retrogress again to 2001.
As dates have moved beyond April 2001, I don't believe there will be any more 245(i) s coming into the queue. Dependents of 245(i) applicants would have a PD of Apr 2001 or before. They already got their GCs by now. 245(i) applicants would have filed for their dependents already. If these 245(i) applicants file for relatives, they WON'T have 2001 PD.
Please correct me if I am wrong.
No comments:
Post a Comment