babuworld
11-19 03:33 PM
Gurus , I dont know if this question have been addressed before. I am currently on H1B and is valid still july 2009. But i dont have stamping on my passport. I am waiting for AP for my wife and myself. If we user AP to India Trip then
1.Is my H1B still valid?
2. What will be the status? My employer didnt apply for EAD at this movement.
Thanks in advance for your suggestions.
1.Is my H1B still valid?
2. What will be the status? My employer didnt apply for EAD at this movement.
Thanks in advance for your suggestions.
wallpaper prince harry recent photos.
gc_check
06-26 03:23 PM
trying go get an answer if any one can give some insight?
Consult with you Attorney first, as this is a very rare scenario for any one to answer in the forum. Also see if you can get this addresses when you go for the actual FP, Try to carry all the documents, Passport, Driver's License, etc and the copy of the I-485/ I-765 etc where you have the correct names.
Attorney is the best source of information in this scenario. Also call USCIS and request them what needs to be done in this case. Also you can get a InfoPASS appointment and get this corrected.
Consult with you Attorney first, as this is a very rare scenario for any one to answer in the forum. Also see if you can get this addresses when you go for the actual FP, Try to carry all the documents, Passport, Driver's License, etc and the copy of the I-485/ I-765 etc where you have the correct names.
Attorney is the best source of information in this scenario. Also call USCIS and request them what needs to be done in this case. Also you can get a InfoPASS appointment and get this corrected.
fasterthanlight�
08-23 05:25 PM
HOly old thread batman!!!
2011 images Prince Harry#39;s new gym buddy prince harry recent photos.
chinna2003
03-11 05:21 PM
This is a very subjective question of intent? If the employer has no problem and willing to support the petition and a job offer when the RFE arrives, how will the UCSIS ever determine intent.
Lets assume the greencard is approved and can it be revoked if i never work for the employer.
And will the fac that i worked for them in the past and resigned before filing a I 14o be a negative factor for adjudication.
Its 100% fraud and abuse. I'm suprised you even thought of asking about this. The answer is in your question.
Lets assume the greencard is approved and can it be revoked if i never work for the employer.
And will the fac that i worked for them in the past and resigned before filing a I 14o be a negative factor for adjudication.
Its 100% fraud and abuse. I'm suprised you even thought of asking about this. The answer is in your question.
more...
optimizer
01-15 11:15 AM
My case is also under extended review and in the same situation as other VSG/affiliate current/former employees in this thread.
Based on the current situation and discussing with other members it doesn't really look like USCIS will revoke or deny I140/I485s enmasse, but you never know.
We have followed the law and were always employed with paystubs and everything and have nothing to fear.
I have formed a yahoo group for current/former VSG employees whose GC is stuck.
Group members can share experiences and exchange ideas as we go through the pain of GC Processing.
Staying as a group we can plan to hire a powerful attorney if god forbid our situation gets worse.
I have already sent group invite to some of you to join this group. If you are interested in joining, send me a private message or email me at thebestoptimizer @ gmail.com
I believe Suvendra had posted the same question in the OTHER popular immigration forum and had some replies there.
Thanks,
Optimizer
Based on the current situation and discussing with other members it doesn't really look like USCIS will revoke or deny I140/I485s enmasse, but you never know.
We have followed the law and were always employed with paystubs and everything and have nothing to fear.
I have formed a yahoo group for current/former VSG employees whose GC is stuck.
Group members can share experiences and exchange ideas as we go through the pain of GC Processing.
Staying as a group we can plan to hire a powerful attorney if god forbid our situation gets worse.
I have already sent group invite to some of you to join this group. If you are interested in joining, send me a private message or email me at thebestoptimizer @ gmail.com
I believe Suvendra had posted the same question in the OTHER popular immigration forum and had some replies there.
Thanks,
Optimizer
indyanguy
10-19 02:10 PM
Interesting thread. For all those who've gotten their hands dirty in the stock market, can you recommend any message boards that conducts healthy discussions for taking advantage of the volatility in the short term. I have looked at yahoo, aol, msn and google and most of them are non sensible discussions without much factual info.
Thanks!
Thanks!
more...
insbaby
06-12 10:18 AM
Hi,
While in the process of filing for labor certification my company has found 2 suitable citizens who are eligible for the job.
Now what are my options going forward and how does this affect my chances of a successful PERM filing ??
I'm filing in EB3 category right now. Also I need to file for labor before oct since my H1 will expire its original 6 year length next Oct (Oct 2010).
It appears that you have not realized that you have been admitted in this country for work because there was no US Citizen available to do the same work.
As you have agreed that two US Citizens are available, you must give them the oppertunity.
If not, not only you are but your company is also in trouble.
While in the process of filing for labor certification my company has found 2 suitable citizens who are eligible for the job.
Now what are my options going forward and how does this affect my chances of a successful PERM filing ??
I'm filing in EB3 category right now. Also I need to file for labor before oct since my H1 will expire its original 6 year length next Oct (Oct 2010).
It appears that you have not realized that you have been admitted in this country for work because there was no US Citizen available to do the same work.
As you have agreed that two US Citizens are available, you must give them the oppertunity.
If not, not only you are but your company is also in trouble.
2010 African cause: Prince Harry,
dreamgc_real
08-03 12:05 PM
My EAD details
Mailed Date : 5/24/10
Received Date : 5/26/10
Notice Date: 06/03/10
Checks Cashed: Yes
File Type: Paper/E-filed/Lawyer - Lawyer
Service Center/Lockbox : TSC
RFE DATE: N/A
RFE Description: N/A
SR Opened: Yes ( 07/26/2010)
InfoPass: NO
Current EAD Expiry: 9/03/10
Approval Date:
Approval Desc:
EAD Validity:
I have opened SR @( 07/26/2010) and got the reply back by mail below
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The status of the Service Request is
Case type:-- I765
The status of this service request is: Due to the high volume of expedite requests for this case type, we are strictly enforcing the criteria that has been set for these expedite requests.
Since the date we received your case, we denied your case and send a notice of explaining our decision to you on 06/25/2010 to the file we have on the file
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is this denial of service request or denial of EAD Renewal?
I am confused. Lawyer or I never received any denial notice so for and online case status showing initial review with LUD of 06/26/2010.
What should I do now? Please let me know.
Thx
KPR
What does your lawyer say? He should be able to let you know exactly what the letter means - denial for SR or EAD. Check with him.
Mailed Date : 5/24/10
Received Date : 5/26/10
Notice Date: 06/03/10
Checks Cashed: Yes
File Type: Paper/E-filed/Lawyer - Lawyer
Service Center/Lockbox : TSC
RFE DATE: N/A
RFE Description: N/A
SR Opened: Yes ( 07/26/2010)
InfoPass: NO
Current EAD Expiry: 9/03/10
Approval Date:
Approval Desc:
EAD Validity:
I have opened SR @( 07/26/2010) and got the reply back by mail below
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The status of the Service Request is
Case type:-- I765
The status of this service request is: Due to the high volume of expedite requests for this case type, we are strictly enforcing the criteria that has been set for these expedite requests.
Since the date we received your case, we denied your case and send a notice of explaining our decision to you on 06/25/2010 to the file we have on the file
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is this denial of service request or denial of EAD Renewal?
I am confused. Lawyer or I never received any denial notice so for and online case status showing initial review with LUD of 06/26/2010.
What should I do now? Please let me know.
Thx
KPR
What does your lawyer say? He should be able to let you know exactly what the letter means - denial for SR or EAD. Check with him.
more...
calif
12-07 04:16 PM
* * *
hair Prince Harry joins Afghan war
sagittariusarm
08-27 12:28 PM
I am sorry for posting in here, but I was wondering if someone actually went in person to the Houston Consulate to get their passport renewed. Also, do we need to have any reason to attend in person at the Consulate such as emergency, etc.
I am from India and my passport is expiring on Aug 17. I read before in the forum that it is better to go in person to renew the passport. Any experiences please let me know.
Thanks a bunch
Go in person that would be best. Houston will not respond to mail or phone calls, Their whole switch board is messed up. I had tough time when I sent it to Houston.
I am from India and my passport is expiring on Aug 17. I read before in the forum that it is better to go in person to renew the passport. Any experiences please let me know.
Thanks a bunch
Go in person that would be best. Houston will not respond to mail or phone calls, Their whole switch board is messed up. I had tough time when I sent it to Houston.
more...
dummgelauft
09-23 08:38 AM
As long as greedy corporations like microsoft exist noting will happen to H1B program..its the economy that's it ..once it start moving up h1b will become l1b and the import of cheap labor starts once again .....you guys are just spreading fear nothing else ....
Just wait a couple of yeard for the things to improve a bit, "American Workers" will go right back to getting high on borrowed money, spending money that they don't have...this will all go away. Then, the focus will be..i don't know.....buying "stuff".
Plus, other countries are not sleeping any more. America started the outsourcing model and now, the hitherto underdeveloped economies have expanded their own industrial base and middle class. WHile US protectionism might hurt them in the short run, but they are much better prepared than they were, only a few years ago.
Druecken die daumen!!
Just wait a couple of yeard for the things to improve a bit, "American Workers" will go right back to getting high on borrowed money, spending money that they don't have...this will all go away. Then, the focus will be..i don't know.....buying "stuff".
Plus, other countries are not sleeping any more. America started the outsourcing model and now, the hitherto underdeveloped economies have expanded their own industrial base and middle class. WHile US protectionism might hurt them in the short run, but they are much better prepared than they were, only a few years ago.
Druecken die daumen!!
hot prince harry recent photos.
voldemar
03-20 11:15 AM
Not sure how withdrawing an approved I140 is good for the employee??
The general feeling is that I140 withdrawal is not necessary for the employer (but H1b is). But employers used to do this for labor substitution - now there is no such incentive. But still some lawyers suggest employers to do this - in my old company which is a large well known software company (with 10k+ employees worldwide) the HR group follows immigration attorneys almost blindly. All immigration issues are handled by a big law firm - many of regular immigration matters are done by paralegals who does not know much (I am not exaggerating when I say I know more than them) - but our HR has a policy that they would follow what those attorney/paralegal is saying. It seems the law firm is suggesting them to withdraw all applications including approved i140 - obviously the law firm would charge them for this so that is their interest.
And law firm is right, they protect their clients. Search this forum for I-140 revocation by USCIS. I-140 was approved and then revoked by USCIS itself. In that case AC21 does not help, 485 will be denied.
The general feeling is that I140 withdrawal is not necessary for the employer (but H1b is). But employers used to do this for labor substitution - now there is no such incentive. But still some lawyers suggest employers to do this - in my old company which is a large well known software company (with 10k+ employees worldwide) the HR group follows immigration attorneys almost blindly. All immigration issues are handled by a big law firm - many of regular immigration matters are done by paralegals who does not know much (I am not exaggerating when I say I know more than them) - but our HR has a policy that they would follow what those attorney/paralegal is saying. It seems the law firm is suggesting them to withdraw all applications including approved i140 - obviously the law firm would charge them for this so that is their interest.
And law firm is right, they protect their clients. Search this forum for I-140 revocation by USCIS. I-140 was approved and then revoked by USCIS itself. In that case AC21 does not help, 485 will be denied.
more...
house prince harry recent photos. Prince Harry photo
a_yaja
04-27 11:47 AM
Get I-140 approved for EB3 case and then swtich to another company and start fresh GC and once you are ready to file I-140 at new company, take this approved I-140 for EB3 and port it.
Hope this helps.
Might be an issue as the EB2 I-140 is already approved. Talk to a good lawyer and see what is the best course of action.
Although it is late now, you should have withdrawn the original LC and refiled in PERM with same PD. That way you would have maintained the original priority date for EB2. Your lawyer must have told you that when you refiled your LC.
Hope this helps.
Might be an issue as the EB2 I-140 is already approved. Talk to a good lawyer and see what is the best course of action.
Although it is late now, you should have withdrawn the original LC and refiled in PERM with same PD. That way you would have maintained the original priority date for EB2. Your lawyer must have told you that when you refiled your LC.
tattoo Prince Harry, in reality:
sreenivas11
11-16 10:39 AM
Nov' 07 Processing times are not posted yet
more...
pictures prince harry recent photos.
dalishi
10-13 02:54 PM
Thanks guys!!
dresses prince harry recent photos.
americandesi
09-10 12:05 AM
Hi - How to complain to USCIS about a fradulant company, What would be the affect of the complain on the employee ? Please advise and provide with any information. I know abot a cheater who exploites innocent students, are there any threads or blogs where there is informtion about fradulant companies, I guess there should be thread about such kind of companes and people running them, so that people do not get into their trap..
Thanks.
Here's the form to complain H1 violations to DOL.
http://www.dol.gov/esa/forms/whd/WH-4.pdf
If you are on H1, better to get it transferred to another employer before complaining, so that your old employer doesn't retaliate by withdrawing your H1.
Thanks.
Here's the form to complain H1 violations to DOL.
http://www.dol.gov/esa/forms/whd/WH-4.pdf
If you are on H1, better to get it transferred to another employer before complaining, so that your old employer doesn't retaliate by withdrawing your H1.
more...
makeup Is Prince Harry really on
shuvro58
01-03 03:18 AM
hi all http://my-used-stuff.com/smiley.gif
girlfriend and Prince Harry – was her
dontcareaboutGC
03-19 11:24 AM
Ignore this if this is a repost!
U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on the Judiciary
Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security,
and International Law
Hearing on Comprehensive Immigration Reform: Government Perspectives
on Immigration Statistics
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim
Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division
Visa Services Office
U.S. Department of State
June 6, 2007
2:00 p.m.
2141 Rayburn House Office Building
Chairman Lofgren, Ranking Member King, and distinguished members of
the Committee, it is a pleasure to be here this afternoon to answer
your questions and provide an overview of our immigrant visa control
and reporting program operated by the U.S. Department of State. The
Department of State is responsible for administering the provisions of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) related to the numerical
limitations on immigrant visa issuances. At the beginning of each
month, the Visa Office (VO) receives a report from each consular post
listing totals of documentarily-qualified immigrant visa applicants in
categories subject to numerical limitation. Cases are grouped in three
different categories: 1) foreign state chargeability, 2) preference,
and 3) priority date.
Foreign state chargeability for visa purposes refers to the fact that
an immigrant is chargeable to the numerical limitation for the foreign
state or dependent area in which the immigrant's place of birth is
located. Exceptions are provided for a child (unmarried and under 21
years of age) or spouse accompanying or following to join a principal
to prevent the separation of family members, as well as for an
applicant born in the United States or in a foreign state of which
neither parent was a native or resident. Alternate chargeability is
desirable when the visa cut-off date for the foreign state of a parent
or spouse is more advantageous than that of the applicant's foreign
state.
As established by the Immigration and Nationality Act, preference is
the visa category that can be assigned based on relationships to U.S.
citizens or legal permanent residents. Family-based immigration falls
under two basic categories: unlimited and limited. Preferences
established by law for the limited category are:
Family First Preference (F1): Unmarried sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their minor children, if any.
Family Second Preference (F2): Spouses, minor children, and unmarried
sons and daughters of lawful permanent residents.
Family Third Preference (F3): Married sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their spouses and minor children.
Family Fourth Preference (F4): Brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens
and their spouses and minor children provided the U.S. citizen is at
least 21 years of age.
The Priority Date is normally the date on which the petition to accord
the applicant immigrant status was filed, generally with U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). VO subdivides the annual
preference and foreign state limitations specified by the INA into
monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily-qualified applicants
which have been reported to VO are compared each month with the
numbers available for the next regular allotment. The determination of
how many numbers are available requires consideration of several
variables, including: past number use; estimates of future number use
and return rates; and estimates of USCIS demand based on cut-off date
movements. Once this consideration is completed, the cutoff dates are
established and numbers are allocated to reported applicants in order
of their priority dates, the oldest dates first.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy
all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is
considered "Current." For example: If the monthly allocation target is
10,000, and we only have 5,000 applicants, the category can be
"Current.� Whenever the total of documentarily-qualified applicants in
a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for
the particular month, the category is considered to be
"oversubscribed" and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
The cut-off date is the priority date of the first
documentarily-qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a
visa number. For example, if the monthly target is 10,000 and we have
25,000 applicants, then we would need to establish a cut-off date so
that only 10,000 numbers would be allocated. In this case, the cut-off
would be the priority date of the 10,001st applicant.
Only persons with a priority date earlier than a cut-off date are
entitled to allotment of a visa number. The cut-off dates are the 1st,
8th, 15th, and 22nd of a month, since VO groups demand for numbers
under these dates. (Priority dates of the first through seventh of a
month are grouped under the 1st, the eighth through the 14th under the
8th, etc.) VO attempts to establish the cut-off dates for the
following month on or about the 8th of each month. The dates are
immediately transmitted to consular posts abroad and USCIS, and also
published in the Visa Bulletin and online at the website
www.travel.state.gov. Visa allotments for use during that month are
transmitted to consular posts. USCIS requests visa allotments for
adjustment of status cases only when all other case processing has
been completed. I am submitting the latest Visa Bulletin for the
record or you can click on: Visa Bulletin for June 2007.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE SYSTEM AND CLARIFICATION OF SOME
FREQUENTLY MISUNDERSTOOD POINTS:
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become documentarily qualified
at their own initiative and convenience. By no means has every
applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date
been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, visa allotments
are made only on the basis of the total applicants reported
�documentarily qualified� (or, theoretically ready for interview) each
month. Demand for visa numbers can fluctuate from one month to
another, with the inevitable impact on cut-off dates.
If an applicant is reported documentarily qualified but allocation of
a visa number is not possible because of a visa availability cut-off
date, the demand is recorded at VO and an allocation is made as soon
as the applicable cut-off date advances beyond the applicant's
priority date. There is no need for such applicant to be reported a
second time.
Visa numbers are always allotted for all documentarily-qualified
applicants with a priority date before the relevant cut-off date, as
long as the case had been reported to VO in time to be included in the
monthly calculation of visa availability. Failure of visa number
receipt by the overseas processing office could mean that the request
was not dispatched in time to reach VO for the monthly allocation
cycle, or that information on the request was incomplete or inaccurate
(e.g., incorrect priority date).
Allocations to Foreign Service posts outside the regular monthly cycle
are possible in emergency or exceptional cases, but only at the
request of the office processing the case. Note that, should
retrogression of a cut-off date be announced, VO can honor
extraordinary requests for additional numbers only if the applicant's
priority date is earlier than the retrogressed cut-off date. Not all
numbers allocated are actually used for visa issuance; some are
returned to VO and are reincorporated into the pool of numbers
available for later allocation during the fiscal year. The rate of
return of unused numbers may fluctuate from month to month, just as
demand may fluctuate. Lower returns mean fewer numbers available for
subsequent reallocation. Fluctuations can cause cut-off date movement
to slow, stop, or even retrogress. Retrogression is particularly
possible near the end of the fiscal year as visa issuance approaches
the annual limitations.
Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7 percent is a
cap, which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed.
Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The
country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the
annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This
limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled,
however. A portion of the numbers provided to the Family Second
preference category is exempt from this per-country cap. The American
Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act (AC21) removed the
per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant
demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of
such numbers available.
Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by
documentarily-qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds
the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation,
that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may
require the establishment of a cut-off date which is earlier than that
which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The
prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same
percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual
limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off
dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off
dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
The committee submitted several questions that fell outside of VO�s
area of work, therefore, I have provided in my written testimony today
the answers only to those questions that the Department of State can
answer. Thank you for this opportunity.
U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on the Judiciary
Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security,
and International Law
Hearing on Comprehensive Immigration Reform: Government Perspectives
on Immigration Statistics
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim
Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division
Visa Services Office
U.S. Department of State
June 6, 2007
2:00 p.m.
2141 Rayburn House Office Building
Chairman Lofgren, Ranking Member King, and distinguished members of
the Committee, it is a pleasure to be here this afternoon to answer
your questions and provide an overview of our immigrant visa control
and reporting program operated by the U.S. Department of State. The
Department of State is responsible for administering the provisions of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) related to the numerical
limitations on immigrant visa issuances. At the beginning of each
month, the Visa Office (VO) receives a report from each consular post
listing totals of documentarily-qualified immigrant visa applicants in
categories subject to numerical limitation. Cases are grouped in three
different categories: 1) foreign state chargeability, 2) preference,
and 3) priority date.
Foreign state chargeability for visa purposes refers to the fact that
an immigrant is chargeable to the numerical limitation for the foreign
state or dependent area in which the immigrant's place of birth is
located. Exceptions are provided for a child (unmarried and under 21
years of age) or spouse accompanying or following to join a principal
to prevent the separation of family members, as well as for an
applicant born in the United States or in a foreign state of which
neither parent was a native or resident. Alternate chargeability is
desirable when the visa cut-off date for the foreign state of a parent
or spouse is more advantageous than that of the applicant's foreign
state.
As established by the Immigration and Nationality Act, preference is
the visa category that can be assigned based on relationships to U.S.
citizens or legal permanent residents. Family-based immigration falls
under two basic categories: unlimited and limited. Preferences
established by law for the limited category are:
Family First Preference (F1): Unmarried sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their minor children, if any.
Family Second Preference (F2): Spouses, minor children, and unmarried
sons and daughters of lawful permanent residents.
Family Third Preference (F3): Married sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their spouses and minor children.
Family Fourth Preference (F4): Brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens
and their spouses and minor children provided the U.S. citizen is at
least 21 years of age.
The Priority Date is normally the date on which the petition to accord
the applicant immigrant status was filed, generally with U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). VO subdivides the annual
preference and foreign state limitations specified by the INA into
monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily-qualified applicants
which have been reported to VO are compared each month with the
numbers available for the next regular allotment. The determination of
how many numbers are available requires consideration of several
variables, including: past number use; estimates of future number use
and return rates; and estimates of USCIS demand based on cut-off date
movements. Once this consideration is completed, the cutoff dates are
established and numbers are allocated to reported applicants in order
of their priority dates, the oldest dates first.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy
all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is
considered "Current." For example: If the monthly allocation target is
10,000, and we only have 5,000 applicants, the category can be
"Current.� Whenever the total of documentarily-qualified applicants in
a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for
the particular month, the category is considered to be
"oversubscribed" and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
The cut-off date is the priority date of the first
documentarily-qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a
visa number. For example, if the monthly target is 10,000 and we have
25,000 applicants, then we would need to establish a cut-off date so
that only 10,000 numbers would be allocated. In this case, the cut-off
would be the priority date of the 10,001st applicant.
Only persons with a priority date earlier than a cut-off date are
entitled to allotment of a visa number. The cut-off dates are the 1st,
8th, 15th, and 22nd of a month, since VO groups demand for numbers
under these dates. (Priority dates of the first through seventh of a
month are grouped under the 1st, the eighth through the 14th under the
8th, etc.) VO attempts to establish the cut-off dates for the
following month on or about the 8th of each month. The dates are
immediately transmitted to consular posts abroad and USCIS, and also
published in the Visa Bulletin and online at the website
www.travel.state.gov. Visa allotments for use during that month are
transmitted to consular posts. USCIS requests visa allotments for
adjustment of status cases only when all other case processing has
been completed. I am submitting the latest Visa Bulletin for the
record or you can click on: Visa Bulletin for June 2007.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE SYSTEM AND CLARIFICATION OF SOME
FREQUENTLY MISUNDERSTOOD POINTS:
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become documentarily qualified
at their own initiative and convenience. By no means has every
applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date
been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, visa allotments
are made only on the basis of the total applicants reported
�documentarily qualified� (or, theoretically ready for interview) each
month. Demand for visa numbers can fluctuate from one month to
another, with the inevitable impact on cut-off dates.
If an applicant is reported documentarily qualified but allocation of
a visa number is not possible because of a visa availability cut-off
date, the demand is recorded at VO and an allocation is made as soon
as the applicable cut-off date advances beyond the applicant's
priority date. There is no need for such applicant to be reported a
second time.
Visa numbers are always allotted for all documentarily-qualified
applicants with a priority date before the relevant cut-off date, as
long as the case had been reported to VO in time to be included in the
monthly calculation of visa availability. Failure of visa number
receipt by the overseas processing office could mean that the request
was not dispatched in time to reach VO for the monthly allocation
cycle, or that information on the request was incomplete or inaccurate
(e.g., incorrect priority date).
Allocations to Foreign Service posts outside the regular monthly cycle
are possible in emergency or exceptional cases, but only at the
request of the office processing the case. Note that, should
retrogression of a cut-off date be announced, VO can honor
extraordinary requests for additional numbers only if the applicant's
priority date is earlier than the retrogressed cut-off date. Not all
numbers allocated are actually used for visa issuance; some are
returned to VO and are reincorporated into the pool of numbers
available for later allocation during the fiscal year. The rate of
return of unused numbers may fluctuate from month to month, just as
demand may fluctuate. Lower returns mean fewer numbers available for
subsequent reallocation. Fluctuations can cause cut-off date movement
to slow, stop, or even retrogress. Retrogression is particularly
possible near the end of the fiscal year as visa issuance approaches
the annual limitations.
Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7 percent is a
cap, which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed.
Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The
country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the
annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This
limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled,
however. A portion of the numbers provided to the Family Second
preference category is exempt from this per-country cap. The American
Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act (AC21) removed the
per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant
demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of
such numbers available.
Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by
documentarily-qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds
the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation,
that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may
require the establishment of a cut-off date which is earlier than that
which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The
prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same
percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual
limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off
dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off
dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
The committee submitted several questions that fell outside of VO�s
area of work, therefore, I have provided in my written testimony today
the answers only to those questions that the Department of State can
answer. Thank you for this opportunity.
hairstyles Prince Harry checks his
linuxra
07-22 11:56 AM
I submitted RFE with all necessary documents from my side everything is ok...
i got an email that my docs recieved and rfe docs recieved...
thats it nothing recieved after that and my pd is current next month
i got an email that my docs recieved and rfe docs recieved...
thats it nothing recieved after that and my pd is current next month
posmd
06-08 07:45 PM
Guys,
I have approved EB3 LC and approved I 140 with PD JAN 2002. My wife has approved EB2 LC (Perm) and Approved I 140 with PD JAN 2006
As we represent one family can't my wife use my PD and apply I 485 under EB2.
for example If husband is born in a retrogressed country and wife in a non retrogressed country in that case, husband gets a free ride !
Why not in this case ? Just curious !
Faced with this same predicament. The truth is the US immigration rules were not made to cater for this era of fast paced change and lifestyles.
When the current EB rules were fashioned, mostly in the early 1960s most families had one working household and were generally migrating in the very highest skills level. Opportunities in the high skilled fields were also not as prevalent as they are today. US was not the knowledge economy it is today.
In the same sense people if they would migrate did so just once in their lifetime, nowadays people often shift 3 places sometimes even more. Hence your citizenship does not count, only your birth place. Imagine the insanity in a scenario that you are from antigua and you are born in India while your father was serving as the consul general there. If fate and destiny have you wishing to immigrate to the US now in the EB2 category then you would have to have a PD of Jan 2003 as opposed to current.
Many such combinations are possible, but in my humble view all this country quota stuff for EB based immigration is ridiculous and worse yet when it takes no acccount of population size. Clearly they ought to be more discerning in who they allow in via EB immigration by tightening the regulations as they stand currently, but this insane quota is off base in todays world.
A quota system for family or any other type of immigration is more reasonable, but once it is deemed you are immigrating based on your skills why should something else matter in this land of opportunity where every man is considered equal and is said to rise or fall on his ability and nothing else. Perhaps others know the answer to this but it befuddles me and makes me realise how antequated the rules really are.
I have approved EB3 LC and approved I 140 with PD JAN 2002. My wife has approved EB2 LC (Perm) and Approved I 140 with PD JAN 2006
As we represent one family can't my wife use my PD and apply I 485 under EB2.
for example If husband is born in a retrogressed country and wife in a non retrogressed country in that case, husband gets a free ride !
Why not in this case ? Just curious !
Faced with this same predicament. The truth is the US immigration rules were not made to cater for this era of fast paced change and lifestyles.
When the current EB rules were fashioned, mostly in the early 1960s most families had one working household and were generally migrating in the very highest skills level. Opportunities in the high skilled fields were also not as prevalent as they are today. US was not the knowledge economy it is today.
In the same sense people if they would migrate did so just once in their lifetime, nowadays people often shift 3 places sometimes even more. Hence your citizenship does not count, only your birth place. Imagine the insanity in a scenario that you are from antigua and you are born in India while your father was serving as the consul general there. If fate and destiny have you wishing to immigrate to the US now in the EB2 category then you would have to have a PD of Jan 2003 as opposed to current.
Many such combinations are possible, but in my humble view all this country quota stuff for EB based immigration is ridiculous and worse yet when it takes no acccount of population size. Clearly they ought to be more discerning in who they allow in via EB immigration by tightening the regulations as they stand currently, but this insane quota is off base in todays world.
A quota system for family or any other type of immigration is more reasonable, but once it is deemed you are immigrating based on your skills why should something else matter in this land of opportunity where every man is considered equal and is said to rise or fall on his ability and nothing else. Perhaps others know the answer to this but it befuddles me and makes me realise how antequated the rules really are.
funny
09-16 02:27 PM
Don't forget to CALL guys..
No comments:
Post a Comment