Refugee_New
02-21 11:03 AM
My co-worker tried that and now has 3 RFE's to respond to.
Don't know the details but mostly it looks like a scam since why did one file Eb3 in first place and how can he add more exp. while Eb3 is pending as a factor for EB2? He is respondign since OCT. but they just keep asking for more details and they have first question for 140/PERM asking - DID YOU EVER HAD ANOTHER LABOR certification besides this one?
Be very careful-
This is what happend in my case. I converted my EB3 PD to EB2 PD.
My EB3 PD was 02/2002. LC Approved in Oct 2005. I-140 approved in 04/2006
I lost my job and joined another company. Applied PERM with MS degree. Got approved in Jan 2007. Then applied I-140 using PP, requesting to recapture older PD.
My I-140 was approved within 3 days without any trouble. Now my PD is 02/2002, EB2
So if you have a right reason then porting PD shouldn't be a problem.
Don't know the details but mostly it looks like a scam since why did one file Eb3 in first place and how can he add more exp. while Eb3 is pending as a factor for EB2? He is respondign since OCT. but they just keep asking for more details and they have first question for 140/PERM asking - DID YOU EVER HAD ANOTHER LABOR certification besides this one?
Be very careful-
This is what happend in my case. I converted my EB3 PD to EB2 PD.
My EB3 PD was 02/2002. LC Approved in Oct 2005. I-140 approved in 04/2006
I lost my job and joined another company. Applied PERM with MS degree. Got approved in Jan 2007. Then applied I-140 using PP, requesting to recapture older PD.
My I-140 was approved within 3 days without any trouble. Now my PD is 02/2002, EB2
So if you have a right reason then porting PD shouldn't be a problem.
wallpaper exposing food adulteration
gc_on_demand
11-11 01:36 PM
IV needs funds for lobbying. So rajuram - please start a campaign to collect funds for lobbying. You can be the first contributor. You can help in all ways, by lobbying, media, funding and driving threads to collect funds.
Shall we start a funding drive? rajuram - can you lead it?
We can do something to start with call. later admin adds funding drive or some senior member will add funding drive. Why people asking for IV core is If I or other member will start some thread/campaign it will divert to other discussion or no more support. But I have notice that if IV core starts it people become active and call or write email.
Even being a organization some one may be prez of IV org can call Zoe and find out what will be deal with HR 5882 in lame duck session. They will not reply to me or other members but atleast can reply to some IV rep.
hows that ? I am not favoring rajuram or not against chandu.. just expressing what I am thinking and what others may do..
Shall we start a funding drive? rajuram - can you lead it?
We can do something to start with call. later admin adds funding drive or some senior member will add funding drive. Why people asking for IV core is If I or other member will start some thread/campaign it will divert to other discussion or no more support. But I have notice that if IV core starts it people become active and call or write email.
Even being a organization some one may be prez of IV org can call Zoe and find out what will be deal with HR 5882 in lame duck session. They will not reply to me or other members but atleast can reply to some IV rep.
hows that ? I am not favoring rajuram or not against chandu.. just expressing what I am thinking and what others may do..
vbkris77
04-06 09:39 PM
Look below the URL. If they are doing it. It is legal. But If some one is denied entry, they can also challenge the decision. Consultants especially will need to use proper/legal answers.
http://www.golishlaw.com/statutes/ina212.htm
(5) Labor certification and qualifications for certain immigrants.-
(A) Labor certification.-
(i) In general.-Any alien who seeks to enter the United States for the purpose of performing skilled or unskilled labor is inadmissible, unless the Secretary of Labor has determined and certified to the Secretary of State and the Attorney General that-
(I) there are not sufficient workers who are able, willing, qualified (or equally qualified in the case of an alien described in clause (ii)) and available at the time of application for a visa and admission to the United States and at the place where the alien is to perform such skilled or unskilled labor, and
(II) the employment of such alien will not adversely affect the wages and working conditions of workers in the United States similarly employed.
(ii) Certain aliens subject to special rule.-For purposes of clause (i)(I), an alien described in this clause is an alien who-
(I) is a member of the teaching profession, or
(II) has exceptional ability in the sciences or the arts.
http://www.golishlaw.com/statutes/ina212.htm
(5) Labor certification and qualifications for certain immigrants.-
(A) Labor certification.-
(i) In general.-Any alien who seeks to enter the United States for the purpose of performing skilled or unskilled labor is inadmissible, unless the Secretary of Labor has determined and certified to the Secretary of State and the Attorney General that-
(I) there are not sufficient workers who are able, willing, qualified (or equally qualified in the case of an alien described in clause (ii)) and available at the time of application for a visa and admission to the United States and at the place where the alien is to perform such skilled or unskilled labor, and
(II) the employment of such alien will not adversely affect the wages and working conditions of workers in the United States similarly employed.
(ii) Certain aliens subject to special rule.-For purposes of clause (i)(I), an alien described in this clause is an alien who-
(I) is a member of the teaching profession, or
(II) has exceptional ability in the sciences or the arts.
2011 Food adulteration grows
puddonhead
08-10 02:25 PM
I think it will be a lot easier to focus out energies to port ourselves to EB2/EB1.
Most of us would have bachelors + 5 years. So EB2 shouldn't be any problem as long as you are willing to change jobs and the employer is willing to file for GC.
Personally, the next time I'm in a position to drive a hard bergain for a job negotiation (still difficult in the current economic environment) - I will try to shoot for a 1 year foreign assignment -> EB1 route. I still curse myself for letting go of one such opportunity in 2006 becuase I did not want to go to London.
So if anybody knows companies that have started filing for GCs again after the freeze of last year - please let us know.
I think that discussion will be far more productive than any wishful reinterpretation of the law.
Most of us would have bachelors + 5 years. So EB2 shouldn't be any problem as long as you are willing to change jobs and the employer is willing to file for GC.
Personally, the next time I'm in a position to drive a hard bergain for a job negotiation (still difficult in the current economic environment) - I will try to shoot for a 1 year foreign assignment -> EB1 route. I still curse myself for letting go of one such opportunity in 2006 becuase I did not want to go to London.
So if anybody knows companies that have started filing for GCs again after the freeze of last year - please let us know.
I think that discussion will be far more productive than any wishful reinterpretation of the law.
more...
rajuseattle
07-14 07:48 PM
One more thing AC-21 is not a formal USCIS form which one can fill in and send it over to USCIS, its just a letter wherein you or your legal representative informs USCIS about the change in employment, be it a job promotion with same employer or u switching the Job using the AC-21 provisions.
As explained earlier in this forum, 180 day rule interpretation is solely USCIS's descretion, if USCIS adjudicator who is working on your case accepts your new EVL and approves your case you are good to go, but for some reason the adjudicator keeps sending more RFE then you will need someone who can answer them in a legal language and thats where attorney services comes in handy.
I am hoping for the best for you that once they see your new EVL, they are satisfied and sends you GC.
As explained earlier in this forum, 180 day rule interpretation is solely USCIS's descretion, if USCIS adjudicator who is working on your case accepts your new EVL and approves your case you are good to go, but for some reason the adjudicator keeps sending more RFE then you will need someone who can answer them in a legal language and thats where attorney services comes in handy.
I am hoping for the best for you that once they see your new EVL, they are satisfied and sends you GC.
GC20??
07-12 03:52 PM
Visa Bulletin for August 2010 (http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/bulletin/bulletin_5092.html)
more...
ncrtpMay2004
09-09 02:13 PM
You know it takes serious $$$ to get anything moving.
Please consider $50/month level.
Please consider $50/month level.
2010 food. The adulteration of
gckabayega
03-17 01:07 PM
Thanks
Porting from Eb3 to Eb2, at first glance looks like advantageous to remained lot of EB3 as it seems to be shortened the queue but one factor spilling over from ROW to EB2 first w.r.t EB3 kills that "virtual" advantage proprtionately (if not 100%).
Porting from Eb3 to Eb2, at first glance looks like advantageous to remained lot of EB3 as it seems to be shortened the queue but one factor spilling over from ROW to EB2 first w.r.t EB3 kills that "virtual" advantage proprtionately (if not 100%).
more...
pappu
01-10 11:59 PM
Thank you again perm2gc for helping with this effort.
hair Food Contamination cartoon 7
coopheal
04-09 05:47 PM
Wiki updated to include May VB.
Past Visa Bulletin Data - Immigration Wiki (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/Past_Visa_Bulletin_Data)
Past Visa Bulletin Data - Immigration Wiki (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/Past_Visa_Bulletin_Data)
more...
a_yaja
12-28 03:05 PM
You mean 529? Thanks of telling. I was planning to open an account for my kid's college.
Are you sure they wont let you open an account even if the kid is american citizen by birth?
Your kid has to be a US citizen/ GC holder. You don't need to be either - except tht you need to be a resident of US with SSN (not sure if you need to be a legal resident). I live in Ohio and I opend a 529 for my daughter.
Are you sure they wont let you open an account even if the kid is american citizen by birth?
Your kid has to be a US citizen/ GC holder. You don't need to be either - except tht you need to be a resident of US with SSN (not sure if you need to be a legal resident). I live in Ohio and I opend a 529 for my daughter.
hot food, Adulteration,
slowwin
06-14 09:11 AM
Email sent to both Texas US senators.
more...
house Adulteration in Food Items
vicky007
04-26 02:50 PM
Guys,
I heard on NPR yesterday evening,DHS has decided to conduct Security Checks through FBI for over 400,000 Port and Dock Employees in the US of A.
President BUSH wants the initial Phase of Name Checks to be done before Summer is over.If the move proceeds as per the plan(I see no reason not to, considering the sensitive nature for which it is being carried out)its going to be even more pain for people who have been waiting to get their Name Check done.
Regards.
I heard on NPR yesterday evening,DHS has decided to conduct Security Checks through FBI for over 400,000 Port and Dock Employees in the US of A.
President BUSH wants the initial Phase of Name Checks to be done before Summer is over.If the move proceeds as per the plan(I see no reason not to, considering the sensitive nature for which it is being carried out)its going to be even more pain for people who have been waiting to get their Name Check done.
Regards.
tattoo Food Adulteration
BharatPremi
04-08 08:48 AM
Finally just received THAT email. "Current Status: Card production ordered"
PD Sep 2001
EB3 India.
Congratulations for getting out of the hell hole and proceeding for the life.
PD Sep 2001
EB3 India.
Congratulations for getting out of the hell hole and proceeding for the life.
more...
pictures Adulteration in Food Items
kondur_007
04-10 10:28 AM
Does anyone have numbers for spillover last year category wise? I mean, last year how many EB4, EB5 and EB1 left out visas got spilled over to EB2? Thanks...
Here are the details for last year and years before:
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
Here are the details for last year and years before:
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
dresses of food adulteration delhi
IMGPAT
05-05 08:33 PM
Follow the url and refer Q.31, clearly answers your question.
http://www.immigration.com/faq/lvisa.html#77.
http://www.immigration.com/faq/lvisa.html#77.
more...
makeup Food adulteration presented a
abhijitp
07-18 12:57 AM
As in, if you have a delivery confirmation from Fedex/UPS does it have any significance? It is still not clear if it will be accepted/ rejected AFAIK.
Have there been any applications that were not even "accepted" because the "packet" suggested it was an AOS application?
More likely, applications can be rejected for being "improperly filed" but you would only come to know about it whenever they are rejected. No one would know this in advance, so no point worrying about it.
Have there been any applications that were not even "accepted" because the "packet" suggested it was an AOS application?
More likely, applications can be rejected for being "improperly filed" but you would only come to know about it whenever they are rejected. No one would know this in advance, so no point worrying about it.
girlfriend food adulteration,
ArkBird
02-19 05:34 PM
I wish congress spends atleast 10% of the time our fellow IVans are spending here to discuss this bill!
hairstyles food poisoning
vgayalu
07-24 08:53 AM
I have a same idea like Mr Rpatel. I wrote a Personal message to our moderator Logiclife. But I failed to explain effectively about this to Logiclife.
Now I got some support from Rpatel. This is the very important and bst solution for time being. Rpatel can you send a personal message to logiclife with more clear picture please.
Vgayalu.
To the core group/Senior Members,
If I understand it right, the ability to concurrently file I40/I485 was introduced by the legacy INS through a memo in July of 2002 and it went effective almost immediately on July 31st 2002. I've tried to search for news archives on different law websites and to best of my knowledge it was purely an executive decision taken by INS governing body and no congressional or judicial intervention was needed to allow concurrent filing. In a very similar fashion, the new USCIS has indicated that it wants to discontinue concurrent filing in near future...an executive decision again.
Is it a possibility to get an audience with the USCIS director/start a letter campaign with the goal of getting them issue a memo allowing filing of I485/EAD even if the visa number is not available? The adjucation of the case would obviously happen only after visa number becomes available but as we all know this will be a big relief for all those who want to use AC21 provisions.
Passage of CIR/SKIL is very important in the longer run to reduce the overall greencard processing time and alleviate heavy backlogs but if we get this small relief right now it would help a lot of individuals from retrogressed countries waiting to file I485...and the good thing is, it looks like USCIS might have the ability to effect this change without a lengthy legislative process.
Any thoughts ??
Now I got some support from Rpatel. This is the very important and bst solution for time being. Rpatel can you send a personal message to logiclife with more clear picture please.
Vgayalu.
To the core group/Senior Members,
If I understand it right, the ability to concurrently file I40/I485 was introduced by the legacy INS through a memo in July of 2002 and it went effective almost immediately on July 31st 2002. I've tried to search for news archives on different law websites and to best of my knowledge it was purely an executive decision taken by INS governing body and no congressional or judicial intervention was needed to allow concurrent filing. In a very similar fashion, the new USCIS has indicated that it wants to discontinue concurrent filing in near future...an executive decision again.
Is it a possibility to get an audience with the USCIS director/start a letter campaign with the goal of getting them issue a memo allowing filing of I485/EAD even if the visa number is not available? The adjucation of the case would obviously happen only after visa number becomes available but as we all know this will be a big relief for all those who want to use AC21 provisions.
Passage of CIR/SKIL is very important in the longer run to reduce the overall greencard processing time and alleviate heavy backlogs but if we get this small relief right now it would help a lot of individuals from retrogressed countries waiting to file I485...and the good thing is, it looks like USCIS might have the ability to effect this change without a lengthy legislative process.
Any thoughts ??
GCplease
03-04 09:26 AM
I am with Singhsa on this.
Recapture of un-used visas alone can make a huge difference.
Recapture of the unused visas which amounts to 160,000 and the yearly quota of Employment based visas for 2008 will add up to 300,000 visas which would approximately mean 150,000 families getting a Green Card.
Once people get a Green card, they�ll feel secure about their future and start thinking about buying a home and settle down. 10% of this may already have a home. 40% may not have the intention of buying a home due to various reasons. If the remaining 50% decide to buy a home after they get a green card, that amounts to 75,000 homes being taken off the real estate market.
This will not completely remove the housing crisis, but it will definitely ease it a little bit.
Legal immigrants have a very good credit score and the Lenders will be more than happy to offer them loans. At an average home value of $ 200,000, this will amount to Fifteen Billion Dollars which will work along with the President's Economic Stimulus Plan in bringing the nation out of Recession.
My assumptions are very conservative here. Even thought the average price for a home in US is around 200k, most of our guys live in costly places where houses will average around 300k.
We are not offering to USCIS that so many of us will buy a home if we get a greencard. we are just showing them the potential here.
We are not asking them to change their laws to increase the quota of green cards. all they have to do is, do some administrative fixes (which we are lobbying for in the Letter to President Campaign) whereby they can re-capture un-used visas.
Recapture of un-used visas alone can make a huge difference.
Recapture of the unused visas which amounts to 160,000 and the yearly quota of Employment based visas for 2008 will add up to 300,000 visas which would approximately mean 150,000 families getting a Green Card.
Once people get a Green card, they�ll feel secure about their future and start thinking about buying a home and settle down. 10% of this may already have a home. 40% may not have the intention of buying a home due to various reasons. If the remaining 50% decide to buy a home after they get a green card, that amounts to 75,000 homes being taken off the real estate market.
This will not completely remove the housing crisis, but it will definitely ease it a little bit.
Legal immigrants have a very good credit score and the Lenders will be more than happy to offer them loans. At an average home value of $ 200,000, this will amount to Fifteen Billion Dollars which will work along with the President's Economic Stimulus Plan in bringing the nation out of Recession.
My assumptions are very conservative here. Even thought the average price for a home in US is around 200k, most of our guys live in costly places where houses will average around 300k.
We are not offering to USCIS that so many of us will buy a home if we get a greencard. we are just showing them the potential here.
We are not asking them to change their laws to increase the quota of green cards. all they have to do is, do some administrative fixes (which we are lobbying for in the Letter to President Campaign) whereby they can re-capture un-used visas.
Guest007
12-12 12:48 PM
Guys I have a basic question if filing for 140 and 485 concurently is rule that uscis can change.. why cant they change a rule to file for EAD and AP after 140 is approved. Since these two are seperate all together from 485 anyway, all we need is filing these two. and 485 can filed when numbers are available.
No comments:
Post a Comment