reachinus
03-05 11:04 AM
We had soft LUD on our cases as well, for both my wife and me. Hope it will be all good. My Atty mailed the application on 6/31 and it was receipted on 09/07/07.
wallpaper (14861) middot; Tues
sri1309
09-10 05:31 PM
Guys,
Now that the delay happened, lets ask for Citizenship, . We waited 10 years, played by the rules. And we have seen the drama for the last 3-4 years. So why do you want to do these calculations, spillovers etc. We must ask our fair share,,
Think,
Sri..
Now that the delay happened, lets ask for Citizenship, . We waited 10 years, played by the rules. And we have seen the drama for the last 3-4 years. So why do you want to do these calculations, spillovers etc. We must ask our fair share,,
Think,
Sri..
waitingmygc
05-18 03:44 PM
Hi ind_game, attorney and all readers,
After reading ind_game last quote "God save AC21.....". I have following questions:
1. Do you know any one (your friend, client) used AC21 and faced same problem? Es
2. Is it true that AC-21 info don't get updated in the USCIS records?
3. If yes (2 question), then x-employer I-140 revocation will ALWAYS result in THIS kind of problems (as ind-game is facing)?
4. To attorneys only: Is AC-21 really helpful or misleading? Asking because if it don't update in USCIS records.
Please reply.
thanks,
waitingmygc
After reading ind_game last quote "God save AC21.....". I have following questions:
1. Do you know any one (your friend, client) used AC21 and faced same problem? Es
2. Is it true that AC-21 info don't get updated in the USCIS records?
3. If yes (2 question), then x-employer I-140 revocation will ALWAYS result in THIS kind of problems (as ind-game is facing)?
4. To attorneys only: Is AC-21 really helpful or misleading? Asking because if it don't update in USCIS records.
Please reply.
thanks,
waitingmygc
2011 and Dodgeball games :D
my2cents
04-30 04:51 PM
look here at
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=71f24d6c52c99110VgnVCM1000004718190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=68439c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
"Though we still have challenges to overcome, USCIS is currently showing improvements as a result of process improvements. As of April 25, 2008, USCIS had adjudicated over 65 percent of its FY 2008 target for employment-based visas. With five months to go in FY 2008, this is a strong start. We plan to continue implementing process improvements and new reporting mechanisms for managing these important applications. "
It means they have used 90K Visa out of 140-150K ..it means 50K visa left for next 5 month..not sure how much visa dates wlll be moved.
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=71f24d6c52c99110VgnVCM1000004718190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=68439c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
"Though we still have challenges to overcome, USCIS is currently showing improvements as a result of process improvements. As of April 25, 2008, USCIS had adjudicated over 65 percent of its FY 2008 target for employment-based visas. With five months to go in FY 2008, this is a strong start. We plan to continue implementing process improvements and new reporting mechanisms for managing these important applications. "
It means they have used 90K Visa out of 140-150K ..it means 50K visa left for next 5 month..not sure how much visa dates wlll be moved.
more...
Milind123
09-16 02:12 AM
Important people (lawmakers and others who can make things happen) know there is a problem with GC. They don't know how big. We show up in small numbers; well, they are going to interpret it like that; a small problem; as simple as that. To solve small problems takes big (long) time.
The funny thing is, if this happens; people who knew that the size of the rally mattered, and who could have very easily showed up, but will not come, assured in their mind, other people will show up, also end up being losers.
You want to know who these people are; people who will go to the office that day, people who do not have a single (even unimportant meeting), people whose boss don�t care if they are in the office or not, those who have no deadlines, those who have plenty of PV days left, those within 100 miles of DC, those who can pick up the phone on 18th and tell their boss about taking a day off (and the boss replying �OK That�s fine�), the people who will waste their entire freaking day going to sites like CCN, ABC News, Samachar.com and god know what other sites, trying to find the latest news about the rally, and once in a while folding their tiny hands and looking up at the roof of their cubicle and murmuring �Please God, make this rally a grand success�.
No amount of coaxing, urging, reasoning, and other forms of persuasion will ever let us drag you out of your cubicle.
Confused if you belong to this group. Think hard for about 10 minutes before you start insulting me. Maybe one of the above points doesn�t apply to you. In my dictionary, not attending the rally, certainly doesn�t put you in this very special group of people. All the points stated above need to be applied (including the prayer point) to you, to qualify.
Please also visit
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=13427
The funny thing is, if this happens; people who knew that the size of the rally mattered, and who could have very easily showed up, but will not come, assured in their mind, other people will show up, also end up being losers.
You want to know who these people are; people who will go to the office that day, people who do not have a single (even unimportant meeting), people whose boss don�t care if they are in the office or not, those who have no deadlines, those who have plenty of PV days left, those within 100 miles of DC, those who can pick up the phone on 18th and tell their boss about taking a day off (and the boss replying �OK That�s fine�), the people who will waste their entire freaking day going to sites like CCN, ABC News, Samachar.com and god know what other sites, trying to find the latest news about the rally, and once in a while folding their tiny hands and looking up at the roof of their cubicle and murmuring �Please God, make this rally a grand success�.
No amount of coaxing, urging, reasoning, and other forms of persuasion will ever let us drag you out of your cubicle.
Confused if you belong to this group. Think hard for about 10 minutes before you start insulting me. Maybe one of the above points doesn�t apply to you. In my dictionary, not attending the rally, certainly doesn�t put you in this very special group of people. All the points stated above need to be applied (including the prayer point) to you, to qualify.
Please also visit
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=13427
pappu
08-12 10:55 AM
Senate Passage of Border Security Legislation
August 12, 2010
Today, I come to the floor to seek unanimous consent to pass a smart, tough, and effective $600 million bill that will significantly enhance the security and integrity of our nation’s southern border—which currently lacks the resources needed to fully combat the drug smugglers, gun-runners, human-traffickers, money launderers and other organized criminals that seek to do harm to innocent Americans along our border….
The best part of this border package, Mr. President, is that it is fully paid for and does not increase the deficit by a single penny. In actuality, the Congressional Budget Office has determined that this bill will yield a direct savings to taxpayers of $50 million….
The emergency border funds we are passing today are fully paid for by assessing fees on certain types of companies who hire foreign workers using certain types of visas in a way that Congress did not intend. I want to take a moment to explain exactly what we are doing in this bill a little further because I want everyone to clearly understand how these offsets are designed.
In 1990, Congress realized that the world was changing rapidly and that technological innovations like the internet were creating a high demand in the United States for high-tech workers to create new technologies and products. Consequently, Congress created the H-1B visa program to allow U.S. employers to hire foreign tech workers in special circumstances when they could not find an American citizen who was qualified for the job.
Many of the companies that use this program today are using the program in the exact way Congress intended. That is, these companies (like Microsoft, IBM, and Intel) are hiring bright foreign students educated in our American universities to work in the U.S. for 6 or 7 years to invent new product lines and technologies so that Microsoft, IBM, and Intel can sell more products to the American public. Then—at the expiration of the H-1B visa period—these companies apply for these talented workers to earn green cards and stay with the company.
When the H-1B visa program is used in this manner, it is a good program for everyone involved. It is good for the company. It is good for the worker. And it is good for the American people who benefit from the products and jobs created by the innovation of the H-1B visa holder.
Every day, companies like Oracle, Cisco, Apple and others use the H-1B visa program in the exact way I have just described—and their use of the program has greatly benefitted this country.
But recently, some companies have decided to exploit an unintended loophole in the H-1B visa program to use the program in a manner that many in Congress, including myself, do not believe is consistent with the program’s intent.
Rather than being a company that makes something, and simply needs to bring in a talented foreign worker to help innovate and create new products and technologies—these other companies are essentially creating “multinational temp agencies” that were never contemplated when the H-1B program was created.
The business model of these newer companies is not to make any new products or technologies like Microsoft or Apple does. Instead, their business model is to bring foreign tech workers into the United States who are willing to accept less pay than their American counterparts, place these workers into other companies in exchange for a “consulting fee,” and transfer these workers from company to company in order to maximize profits from placement fees. In other words, these companies are petitioning for foreign workers simply to then turn around and provide these same workers to other companies who need cheap labor for various short term projects.
Don’t take my word for it. If you look at the marketing materials of some of the companies that fall within the scope covered by today’s legislation, their materials boast about their “outsourcing expertise” and say that their advantage is their ability to conduct what they call “labor arbitrage” which is—in their own words—“transferring work functions to a lower cost environment for increased savings.”
The business model used by these companies within the United States is creating three major negative side effects. First, it is ruining the reputation of the H-1B program, which is overwhelmingly used by good actors for beneficial purposes. Second, according to the Economic Policy institute, it is lowering the wages for American tech workers already in the marketplace. Third, it is also discouraging many of our smartest students from entering the technology industry in the first place. Students can see that paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for advanced schooling is not worth the cost when the market is being flooded with foreign temporary workers willing to do tech-work for far less pay because their foreign education was much cheaper and they intend to move back home when their visa expires to a country where the cost of living is far less expensive.
This type of use of the H-1B visa program will be addressed as part of comprehensive immigration reform and will likely be dramatically restricted. We will be reforming the legal immigration system to encourage the world’s best and brightest individuals to come to the United States and create the new technologies and businesses that will employ countless American workers, but will discourage businesses from using our immigration laws as a means to obtain temporary and less-expensive foreign labor to replace capable American workers.
Nevertheless, I do wish to clarify a previous mischaracterization of these firms, where I labeled them as “chop shops.” That statement was incorrect, and I wish to acknowledge that. In the tech industry, these firms are sometimes known as “body shops” and that’s what I should have said.
While I strongly oppose the manner in which these firms are using the H-1B visa to accomplish objectives that Congress never intended, it would be unfortunate if anyone concluded from my remarks that these firms are engaging in illegal behavior.
But I also want to make clear that the purpose of this fee is not to target businesses from any particular country. Many news articles have reported that the only companies that will be affected by this fee are companies based in India and that, ipso facto, the purpose of this legislation must be to target Indian IT companies.
Well, it is simply untrue that the purpose of this legislation is to target Indian companies. We are simply raising fees for businesses who use the H-1B visa to do things that are contrary to the program’s original intent.
Visa fees will only increase for companies with more than 50 workers who continue to employ more than 50 percent of their employees through the H-1B program. Congress does not want the H-1B visa program to be a vehicle for creating multinational temp agencies where workers do not know what projects they will be working on—or what cities they will be working in—when they enter the country.
The fee is based solely upon the business model of the company, not the location of the company.
If you are using the H-1B visa to innovate new products and technologies for your own company to sell, that is a good thing regardless of whether the company was originally founded in India, Ireland, or Indiana.
But if you are using the H-1B visa to run a glorified international temp agency for tech workers in contravention of the spirit of the program, I and my colleagues believe that you should have to pay a higher fee to ensure that American workers are not losing their jobs because of unintended uses of the visa program that were never contemplated when the program was created.
This belief is consistent regardless of whether the company using these staffing practices was founded in Bangalore, Beijing, or Boston.
Raising the fees for companies hiring more than 50 percent of their workforce through foreign visas will accomplish two important goals. First, it will provide the necessary funds to secure our border without raising taxes or adding to the deficit. Second, it will level the playing field for American workers so that they do not lose out on good jobs here in America because it is cheaper to bring in a foreign worker rather than hire an American worker.
Let me tell you what objective folks around the world are saying about the impact of this fee increase. In an August 6, 2010, Wall Street Journal article, Avinash Vashistha—the CEO of a Bangalore based off-shoring advisory consulting firm—told the Journal that the new fee in this bill “would accelerate Indian firms’ plans to hire more American-born workers in the U.S.” What’s wrong with that? In an August 7, 2010 Economic Times Article, Jeya Kumar, a CEO of a top IT company, said that this bill would “erode cost arbitrage and cause a change in the operational model of Indian offshore providers.”
The leaders of this business model are agreeing that our bill will make it more expensive to bring in foreign tech workers to compete with American tech workers for jobs here in America. That means these companies are going to start having to hire U.S. tech workers again.
So Mr. President, this bill is not only a responsible border security bill, it has the dual advantage of creating more high-paying American jobs.
Finally, Mr. President, I want to be clear about one other thing. Even though passing this bill will secure our border, I again say that the only way to fully restore the rule of law to our entire immigration system is by passing comprehensive immigration reform….
The urgency for immigration reform cannot be overstated because it is so overdue. The time for excuses is now over, it is now time to get to work.
August 12, 2010
Today, I come to the floor to seek unanimous consent to pass a smart, tough, and effective $600 million bill that will significantly enhance the security and integrity of our nation’s southern border—which currently lacks the resources needed to fully combat the drug smugglers, gun-runners, human-traffickers, money launderers and other organized criminals that seek to do harm to innocent Americans along our border….
The best part of this border package, Mr. President, is that it is fully paid for and does not increase the deficit by a single penny. In actuality, the Congressional Budget Office has determined that this bill will yield a direct savings to taxpayers of $50 million….
The emergency border funds we are passing today are fully paid for by assessing fees on certain types of companies who hire foreign workers using certain types of visas in a way that Congress did not intend. I want to take a moment to explain exactly what we are doing in this bill a little further because I want everyone to clearly understand how these offsets are designed.
In 1990, Congress realized that the world was changing rapidly and that technological innovations like the internet were creating a high demand in the United States for high-tech workers to create new technologies and products. Consequently, Congress created the H-1B visa program to allow U.S. employers to hire foreign tech workers in special circumstances when they could not find an American citizen who was qualified for the job.
Many of the companies that use this program today are using the program in the exact way Congress intended. That is, these companies (like Microsoft, IBM, and Intel) are hiring bright foreign students educated in our American universities to work in the U.S. for 6 or 7 years to invent new product lines and technologies so that Microsoft, IBM, and Intel can sell more products to the American public. Then—at the expiration of the H-1B visa period—these companies apply for these talented workers to earn green cards and stay with the company.
When the H-1B visa program is used in this manner, it is a good program for everyone involved. It is good for the company. It is good for the worker. And it is good for the American people who benefit from the products and jobs created by the innovation of the H-1B visa holder.
Every day, companies like Oracle, Cisco, Apple and others use the H-1B visa program in the exact way I have just described—and their use of the program has greatly benefitted this country.
But recently, some companies have decided to exploit an unintended loophole in the H-1B visa program to use the program in a manner that many in Congress, including myself, do not believe is consistent with the program’s intent.
Rather than being a company that makes something, and simply needs to bring in a talented foreign worker to help innovate and create new products and technologies—these other companies are essentially creating “multinational temp agencies” that were never contemplated when the H-1B program was created.
The business model of these newer companies is not to make any new products or technologies like Microsoft or Apple does. Instead, their business model is to bring foreign tech workers into the United States who are willing to accept less pay than their American counterparts, place these workers into other companies in exchange for a “consulting fee,” and transfer these workers from company to company in order to maximize profits from placement fees. In other words, these companies are petitioning for foreign workers simply to then turn around and provide these same workers to other companies who need cheap labor for various short term projects.
Don’t take my word for it. If you look at the marketing materials of some of the companies that fall within the scope covered by today’s legislation, their materials boast about their “outsourcing expertise” and say that their advantage is their ability to conduct what they call “labor arbitrage” which is—in their own words—“transferring work functions to a lower cost environment for increased savings.”
The business model used by these companies within the United States is creating three major negative side effects. First, it is ruining the reputation of the H-1B program, which is overwhelmingly used by good actors for beneficial purposes. Second, according to the Economic Policy institute, it is lowering the wages for American tech workers already in the marketplace. Third, it is also discouraging many of our smartest students from entering the technology industry in the first place. Students can see that paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for advanced schooling is not worth the cost when the market is being flooded with foreign temporary workers willing to do tech-work for far less pay because their foreign education was much cheaper and they intend to move back home when their visa expires to a country where the cost of living is far less expensive.
This type of use of the H-1B visa program will be addressed as part of comprehensive immigration reform and will likely be dramatically restricted. We will be reforming the legal immigration system to encourage the world’s best and brightest individuals to come to the United States and create the new technologies and businesses that will employ countless American workers, but will discourage businesses from using our immigration laws as a means to obtain temporary and less-expensive foreign labor to replace capable American workers.
Nevertheless, I do wish to clarify a previous mischaracterization of these firms, where I labeled them as “chop shops.” That statement was incorrect, and I wish to acknowledge that. In the tech industry, these firms are sometimes known as “body shops” and that’s what I should have said.
While I strongly oppose the manner in which these firms are using the H-1B visa to accomplish objectives that Congress never intended, it would be unfortunate if anyone concluded from my remarks that these firms are engaging in illegal behavior.
But I also want to make clear that the purpose of this fee is not to target businesses from any particular country. Many news articles have reported that the only companies that will be affected by this fee are companies based in India and that, ipso facto, the purpose of this legislation must be to target Indian IT companies.
Well, it is simply untrue that the purpose of this legislation is to target Indian companies. We are simply raising fees for businesses who use the H-1B visa to do things that are contrary to the program’s original intent.
Visa fees will only increase for companies with more than 50 workers who continue to employ more than 50 percent of their employees through the H-1B program. Congress does not want the H-1B visa program to be a vehicle for creating multinational temp agencies where workers do not know what projects they will be working on—or what cities they will be working in—when they enter the country.
The fee is based solely upon the business model of the company, not the location of the company.
If you are using the H-1B visa to innovate new products and technologies for your own company to sell, that is a good thing regardless of whether the company was originally founded in India, Ireland, or Indiana.
But if you are using the H-1B visa to run a glorified international temp agency for tech workers in contravention of the spirit of the program, I and my colleagues believe that you should have to pay a higher fee to ensure that American workers are not losing their jobs because of unintended uses of the visa program that were never contemplated when the program was created.
This belief is consistent regardless of whether the company using these staffing practices was founded in Bangalore, Beijing, or Boston.
Raising the fees for companies hiring more than 50 percent of their workforce through foreign visas will accomplish two important goals. First, it will provide the necessary funds to secure our border without raising taxes or adding to the deficit. Second, it will level the playing field for American workers so that they do not lose out on good jobs here in America because it is cheaper to bring in a foreign worker rather than hire an American worker.
Let me tell you what objective folks around the world are saying about the impact of this fee increase. In an August 6, 2010, Wall Street Journal article, Avinash Vashistha—the CEO of a Bangalore based off-shoring advisory consulting firm—told the Journal that the new fee in this bill “would accelerate Indian firms’ plans to hire more American-born workers in the U.S.” What’s wrong with that? In an August 7, 2010 Economic Times Article, Jeya Kumar, a CEO of a top IT company, said that this bill would “erode cost arbitrage and cause a change in the operational model of Indian offshore providers.”
The leaders of this business model are agreeing that our bill will make it more expensive to bring in foreign tech workers to compete with American tech workers for jobs here in America. That means these companies are going to start having to hire U.S. tech workers again.
So Mr. President, this bill is not only a responsible border security bill, it has the dual advantage of creating more high-paying American jobs.
Finally, Mr. President, I want to be clear about one other thing. Even though passing this bill will secure our border, I again say that the only way to fully restore the rule of law to our entire immigration system is by passing comprehensive immigration reform….
The urgency for immigration reform cannot be overstated because it is so overdue. The time for excuses is now over, it is now time to get to work.
more...
santb1975
06-05 10:41 AM
I will update our numbers tonight
2010 Play Dodgeball Games - QwickStep Answers Search Engine
plassey
07-21 12:19 PM
You would think that USCIS is effecient and well managed, but the fact of the matter is that they are not.
If you think about what happened in last one month , it points out that things are in pretty bad shape untill take notice by affected people like us.
Well, if you do the direct calculations (eventhough it looks correct for most of us), it always results scary.
But that does not happen always. A Government Agency decided to accept that many applications in a month window, defintely it would not have been decided in a lunch or dinner meeting.
They should have known their limitations and how to handle the situation. If there are 20K 485 applications sitting at the storage, it would not create much problems. But it creates so much administration issues if the number is 600K applications.
One major issue is, every year they are going to receive 600K EAD renewals. They will never get time to work on 485, but life long working on renewing this EAD's and no more further GC processing.
So, its not going to be the case. Now they have money, even if it takes first year some more months, they may go for hiring more contracters OR spliting the applications across different centers processing them.
Its a big administration issue to the agency to keep all the applications pending than us.
So, no worries. There must be a solution ahead for us.
If you think about what happened in last one month , it points out that things are in pretty bad shape untill take notice by affected people like us.
Well, if you do the direct calculations (eventhough it looks correct for most of us), it always results scary.
But that does not happen always. A Government Agency decided to accept that many applications in a month window, defintely it would not have been decided in a lunch or dinner meeting.
They should have known their limitations and how to handle the situation. If there are 20K 485 applications sitting at the storage, it would not create much problems. But it creates so much administration issues if the number is 600K applications.
One major issue is, every year they are going to receive 600K EAD renewals. They will never get time to work on 485, but life long working on renewing this EAD's and no more further GC processing.
So, its not going to be the case. Now they have money, even if it takes first year some more months, they may go for hiring more contracters OR spliting the applications across different centers processing them.
Its a big administration issue to the agency to keep all the applications pending than us.
So, no worries. There must be a solution ahead for us.
more...
dante1271
07-19 01:43 PM
Jimi,
I'm in Riverside.
I'm in Riverside.
hair comes War dodgeball games
hopefullegalimmigrant
01-20 10:40 PM
Hello All - Got AP on Friday. What a delay. Hope everyone else gets the documents in time.
more...
gangster
07-18 01:44 PM
Contributed $100 and will sign up for monthly contrbution.
Thanks again IV and all members.
Thanks again IV and all members.
hot Dodgeball games,
chanduv23
09-12 12:11 PM
can we put up forum threads here for state chapters or some kind of direct link or page for each individual state chapter
Doing state chapters through list servs is just not working out.
Most people here just want to discuss but when it comes to action - you will notice that they would not even give out their proper name to IV while registering - so mobilizing is not as easy as discussing it here.
Discussion forums are good because ideas emerge here - ideas are needed for execution and discussing pressing issues must lead us towards a path to execution.
The question is - can all those who do that talk actually walk the talk?
Doing state chapters through list servs is just not working out.
Most people here just want to discuss but when it comes to action - you will notice that they would not even give out their proper name to IV while registering - so mobilizing is not as easy as discussing it here.
Discussion forums are good because ideas emerge here - ideas are needed for execution and discussing pressing issues must lead us towards a path to execution.
The question is - can all those who do that talk actually walk the talk?
more...
house A dodgeball game by Nestle
karthiknv143
08-10 06:10 PM
Any updates from USCIS regarding lockbox & receipting dates?
tattoo Super Dodge Ball game for
greenlight
06-10 03:33 PM
My PD is Dec. 04, and my I-485 was filed during the july fiasco in 2007. My PD was current since March 08 until it will become "unavailable" in June 08.
My attorney got update from Nebraska SC in May stating "Your case is in queue for green card." Now what will happen to my case since EB-3 ROW will be unavailable in June? Does that mean an IO once opened my file after March and will close it without processing any further because of the change in the June Visa Bulletin?
I am confused. Please share your insights and experiences.
Thank you.
My attorney got update from Nebraska SC in May stating "Your case is in queue for green card." Now what will happen to my case since EB-3 ROW will be unavailable in June? Does that mean an IO once opened my file after March and will close it without processing any further because of the change in the June Visa Bulletin?
I am confused. Please share your insights and experiences.
Thank you.
more...
pictures in this dodgeball games.
ickeys
07-29 10:02 AM
Hi, the website says my case was certified but my employer and my lawyer did not receive the hard copy yet. It got certified July 17. How long does it take for me to receive it? What should I do?
dresses Portland Corporate Games
sheela
07-11 09:39 AM
Just wondering...
How many people would benefit out of this big movement?
What estimated # of applications is USCIS expecting through this movement?
If the dates were current last year same time, how many ppl with PDs between 2004 and 2006 would have missed the bus last year? Dont think many wld have...
Excuse my ignorance if there is a basic mistake in my assumption
If uscis works more efficiently, several thousand EB2 i may benefit.
Below is reproduced from uscis 7/07 explanation for last yr july fiasco. "60000 visa numbers available were made available" during the weekend of june/july 07.
during the past month have resulted in the use of almost 60,000 Employment numbers. As a result of this unexpected action it has been necessary to make immediate adjustments to several previously announced cut-off dates. All Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices have been notified of the following:
Effective Monday July 2, 2007 there will be no further authorizations in response to requests for Employment-based preference cases. All numbers available to these categories under the FY-2007 annual numerical limitation have been made available.
How many people would benefit out of this big movement?
What estimated # of applications is USCIS expecting through this movement?
If the dates were current last year same time, how many ppl with PDs between 2004 and 2006 would have missed the bus last year? Dont think many wld have...
Excuse my ignorance if there is a basic mistake in my assumption
If uscis works more efficiently, several thousand EB2 i may benefit.
Below is reproduced from uscis 7/07 explanation for last yr july fiasco. "60000 visa numbers available were made available" during the weekend of june/july 07.
during the past month have resulted in the use of almost 60,000 Employment numbers. As a result of this unexpected action it has been necessary to make immediate adjustments to several previously announced cut-off dates. All Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices have been notified of the following:
Effective Monday July 2, 2007 there will be no further authorizations in response to requests for Employment-based preference cases. All numbers available to these categories under the FY-2007 annual numerical limitation have been made available.
more...
makeup This photo belongs to. DelawareSportsLeague#39;s (14861) middot; Tues
meridiani.planum
12-13 11:41 PM
What are the chances for the PD moving to Mid 2007 by end of 2010 ? :(
are you referring to EB2-India? Without any legislative or administrative changes the chances of reaching 2007 next year are pretty much zero IMO.
If I were to play the prediction game, based on the stats that USCIS released and their own statements in this months VB, this is what I would guess [Q1 meaning Jan-Feb-March: calendar quarter, not USCIS quarter which runs from Sept]:
- Q1 2010 : EB2-I reaches Feb and or early March
>> Reasoning: its already at Jan-end and there are tons of cases in March. because PERM was about to start from April 2005, lots and lots of companies pushed and filed for labor in March. So Jan will be crossed and most likely Feb also. But March is a big hump to cross.
- Q2 2010 : EB2-I goes "unavailable". Probably in May, or in June
>> EB2-India should exhaust its annual quota for the quarter well within the cases from Jan/Feb/early-March. So now the VB would go unavailable.
- Q3 2010 : EB2-I goes to April/May/June-2005 in July, then Dec 2005 by Sept VB.
>> the big spillover of visa starts. Note that spillover has not yet happened. THere is speculation at this point, but traditionally whenever there is spillover (look at last 3 years VB) India and China have the same PD because thats how the visas can spill over equally to both of them. The state dept's own prediction is dates will reach December and thats likely. Note that in their prediction (in the VB) dates for India and China are identical as is expected when spillover takes place. This is the time when the big bump of cases at March should get levelled out.
- Q4 2010 : EB2-I goes to Oct 2005
>> 6 months past PERM the number of filings had picked up again, so based on the EB-I pending cases stats come October 2010 the date should roll back to October 2005. Spillover wont be in effect and India will be back to its annual 7% limit.
- Q1 2011 : EB2-I goes to Dec 2005
>> dates will creep along slowly/
- Q2 2011 : Dec-2005 or 'U'.
>> same story: India quickly exhausts its annual quota, and must now wait for spillover.
- Q3 2011 : EB2-I goes to March/June 2006
>> spillover happens, but unlike earlier there are lots and lots of cases from 2005-end to first half of 2006. So even with spillover the dates are unlikely to go past June 2006.
are you referring to EB2-India? Without any legislative or administrative changes the chances of reaching 2007 next year are pretty much zero IMO.
If I were to play the prediction game, based on the stats that USCIS released and their own statements in this months VB, this is what I would guess [Q1 meaning Jan-Feb-March: calendar quarter, not USCIS quarter which runs from Sept]:
- Q1 2010 : EB2-I reaches Feb and or early March
>> Reasoning: its already at Jan-end and there are tons of cases in March. because PERM was about to start from April 2005, lots and lots of companies pushed and filed for labor in March. So Jan will be crossed and most likely Feb also. But March is a big hump to cross.
- Q2 2010 : EB2-I goes "unavailable". Probably in May, or in June
>> EB2-India should exhaust its annual quota for the quarter well within the cases from Jan/Feb/early-March. So now the VB would go unavailable.
- Q3 2010 : EB2-I goes to April/May/June-2005 in July, then Dec 2005 by Sept VB.
>> the big spillover of visa starts. Note that spillover has not yet happened. THere is speculation at this point, but traditionally whenever there is spillover (look at last 3 years VB) India and China have the same PD because thats how the visas can spill over equally to both of them. The state dept's own prediction is dates will reach December and thats likely. Note that in their prediction (in the VB) dates for India and China are identical as is expected when spillover takes place. This is the time when the big bump of cases at March should get levelled out.
- Q4 2010 : EB2-I goes to Oct 2005
>> 6 months past PERM the number of filings had picked up again, so based on the EB-I pending cases stats come October 2010 the date should roll back to October 2005. Spillover wont be in effect and India will be back to its annual 7% limit.
- Q1 2011 : EB2-I goes to Dec 2005
>> dates will creep along slowly/
- Q2 2011 : Dec-2005 or 'U'.
>> same story: India quickly exhausts its annual quota, and must now wait for spillover.
- Q3 2011 : EB2-I goes to March/June 2006
>> spillover happens, but unlike earlier there are lots and lots of cases from 2005-end to first half of 2006. So even with spillover the dates are unlikely to go past June 2006.
girlfriend X games, Dodgeball games,
mbawa2574
07-06 02:22 AM
[QUOTE=ronhira;462888]lahiribaba - you are my hero. this is the best idea yaar :D[/QUOTE
good thought
good thought
hairstyles intramural dodge-ball game
pappu
07-14 08:22 PM
Thanks. The thread is a sticky now. Let us see how much we can collect. Someone, please add up on the thread. Thanks.
raydon
08-05 07:28 PM
lonedesi,
Much as I'd like to participate in this campaign, it's the employer's signature that I can't guarantee. My employer is a big and prestigious (supposedly) company and will not want to sign this petition or do anything against the counsel of the attorney. The attorney is not gaining anything by expedited processing of the I-140 and won't support this either. He's an AILA member too, if that's of any significance.
If this is worthless without the employer's signature, then I'm unable to participate in this campaign, though it is a worthy effort.I would urge all members who can get the employer's consent to definitely participate and wake up the USCIS from it's slumber.They need a big kick up their you-know-where, especially the TSC.
Much as I'd like to participate in this campaign, it's the employer's signature that I can't guarantee. My employer is a big and prestigious (supposedly) company and will not want to sign this petition or do anything against the counsel of the attorney. The attorney is not gaining anything by expedited processing of the I-140 and won't support this either. He's an AILA member too, if that's of any significance.
If this is worthless without the employer's signature, then I'm unable to participate in this campaign, though it is a worthy effort.I would urge all members who can get the employer's consent to definitely participate and wake up the USCIS from it's slumber.They need a big kick up their you-know-where, especially the TSC.
bsbawa10
09-12 10:03 AM
The campaign will fail in my opinion. Because anytime you ask people to spend money, many will not. Such activity and motivation for the campaign will die out next week when visa bulletin fever is over. We will again get agitated next month same time. So unless we figure out a campaign idea that costs us no money, it is bound to fail. I am for a phone call campaign. Or if we really want to do something big, we should do a rally in DC with 10 thousand members.
I agree that calculator /flower campaign can fail. But poster (actually pamphlet) and letter campaign will cost only 41 cents stamp from us.
I agree that calculator /flower campaign can fail. But poster (actually pamphlet) and letter campaign will cost only 41 cents stamp from us.
No comments:
Post a Comment