Abhinaym
01-13 11:27 AM
It's a valid point from ur prospective, but let me give u the example if the shoe was on the other foot..
I'm sure this is a simplistic generalization, but urs is too
* In 2001, 20 people graduate in retrogressed country and equally qualified 20 graduate in non retrogressed.. both aspire to land a US opportunity
Thank you. You seem like a rational person who is balanced in arguments. I can give you real life examples too. Let me start with that. In 2005 I and my friend from a non-retrogressed country graduated with a masters, same degree same specialization.
* In a few weeks, all the 20 in the retrogressed country find opportunities among dozens of giant offshoring firms that quickly send them on H1 or L1 projects, within months or may be a year they are settled in the US and at most in 2003 their greencard process is up and running
Now THAT is over-generalization. You think all of us Indians and Chinese get jobs as soon as we graduate in giant offshoring cos? My friend you're stereotyping. It is wrong to assume that we get our jobs because of our nationality and not our skills.
Anyway, continuing with my example. My friend and I both found jobs after a few months of struggle in small boutique consulting companies (run by Americans), mind you no offshoring. In fact my friend's sponsor is Indian, my sponsor is American!
* The 20 equally qualified non-retrogressed however linger in their homeland for years and duke it out till the brightest 3 manage to find a rare opportunity that only comes every several years.. those 3 finally come to the US in 2005 and may be start their gc in 2006
Very subjective. My own example, none of my fellow-graduates were in the plight.
* Turns out (or actually it was known all along to people before they chose to came) that the US only gives 5 greencards per year and because they know qualified people exist in all countries and they don't want few countries to swallow the whole quota alone, they give 2/5 to non retrogressed and 3/5 to retrogressed.. only then do some people remember to cry not fair, well it wasn't fair to start with!
I agree a universal 7% limit for any coutry regardless of its population and number of college graduates is stupid.. the percentages need to be adjusted. But to tell me that the 3 unretrogressed have to stand at the end of the line behind the equally qualified 20 retrogressed who came here faster (and chose to come here knowing their homeland is retrogressed) that is really fair.. yeah right!
Yup. Standing your turn in line is fair. And that's what needs to change. EB visas are about skills and not nationality.
You need to quit stereotyping and being unfair to us by saying we get jobs because of our nationalities. Brother, you don't get degrees or jobs because you're Indian or Chinese, but because you add value.
I'm sure this is a simplistic generalization, but urs is too
* In 2001, 20 people graduate in retrogressed country and equally qualified 20 graduate in non retrogressed.. both aspire to land a US opportunity
Thank you. You seem like a rational person who is balanced in arguments. I can give you real life examples too. Let me start with that. In 2005 I and my friend from a non-retrogressed country graduated with a masters, same degree same specialization.
* In a few weeks, all the 20 in the retrogressed country find opportunities among dozens of giant offshoring firms that quickly send them on H1 or L1 projects, within months or may be a year they are settled in the US and at most in 2003 their greencard process is up and running
Now THAT is over-generalization. You think all of us Indians and Chinese get jobs as soon as we graduate in giant offshoring cos? My friend you're stereotyping. It is wrong to assume that we get our jobs because of our nationality and not our skills.
Anyway, continuing with my example. My friend and I both found jobs after a few months of struggle in small boutique consulting companies (run by Americans), mind you no offshoring. In fact my friend's sponsor is Indian, my sponsor is American!
* The 20 equally qualified non-retrogressed however linger in their homeland for years and duke it out till the brightest 3 manage to find a rare opportunity that only comes every several years.. those 3 finally come to the US in 2005 and may be start their gc in 2006
Very subjective. My own example, none of my fellow-graduates were in the plight.
* Turns out (or actually it was known all along to people before they chose to came) that the US only gives 5 greencards per year and because they know qualified people exist in all countries and they don't want few countries to swallow the whole quota alone, they give 2/5 to non retrogressed and 3/5 to retrogressed.. only then do some people remember to cry not fair, well it wasn't fair to start with!
I agree a universal 7% limit for any coutry regardless of its population and number of college graduates is stupid.. the percentages need to be adjusted. But to tell me that the 3 unretrogressed have to stand at the end of the line behind the equally qualified 20 retrogressed who came here faster (and chose to come here knowing their homeland is retrogressed) that is really fair.. yeah right!
Yup. Standing your turn in line is fair. And that's what needs to change. EB visas are about skills and not nationality.
You need to quit stereotyping and being unfair to us by saying we get jobs because of our nationalities. Brother, you don't get degrees or jobs because you're Indian or Chinese, but because you add value.
wallpaper escape fate logo. Escape The Fate. Kate Nash. Escape The Fate. Kate Nash.
kshitijnt
04-11 06:29 PM
Sorry to be rude guys, but if you are a new EB3 India. "post 2005 perm". I would advise you to seek greener pastures in UK or India. I dont see a light at the end of tunnel as things stand today
delax
07-15 05:18 PM
How we are getting 50k is like this.
1) EB1 Over Flow (50% of EB1 was unused last year) 46k/2= 23k
2) EB2 Over Flow , this number is still fuzzy. But lets say around 10k.
3) EB2 India has quota of 3500.
So approx 40k.
Thanks for the post. However I read testimony that said more than 80% of EB visas have been used up. That leaves only 28k (20% of 140k) at most as spill over for Fiscal 2008. Thoughts?
1) EB1 Over Flow (50% of EB1 was unused last year) 46k/2= 23k
2) EB2 Over Flow , this number is still fuzzy. But lets say around 10k.
3) EB2 India has quota of 3500.
So approx 40k.
Thanks for the post. However I read testimony that said more than 80% of EB visas have been used up. That leaves only 28k (20% of 140k) at most as spill over for Fiscal 2008. Thoughts?
2011 escape fate logo. and Escape the fate(I#39;m; and Escape the fate(I#39;m
hydboy77
02-14 11:40 PM
USCIS does not work for you or me but sure you can go and ask them for prefiling AOS but not to issue RFE for same job requirement condition and other haressing rfe. how can you say we cannot ask USCIS not to raise RFE for irrelevant stuff,I guess you are ok with all the RFE that are being issued by USCIS on h1 holders currently. Sure some of those rfe are valid ones but vast majority of them are to kick h1 out. Does USCIS or any other department issue rfe to GC holders when there is something "fishy" as you put it. Like I said as long as you work in the relevant field in which your labor got certified we can ask to be left alone. Its one thing to get an rfe for birth certificate, medical records and another thing if you are issued the sort of rfe that are being issued to h1. You and all the people who missed out on July fiasco obviously want to file AOS and get EAD at any cost (i understand and support that ) but what about us who have been here for 5 to 10 years and took us multiple years of wait to file AOS and get EAD. Without strengthening AC21\EAD and allowing everyone to file AOS is going to attract USCIS, grasley, sanders and all anti eb folks attention.
You have a great plan, come to US on H1 and within 6 months get EAD and you are free from H1b crackdown by jumping to EAD. You think USCIS, Grasley, sanders, and anti eb folks are a bunch of idiots, they will send you and me packing with the same rfe they are hitting h1 folks with if everybody gets to pre file AOS and get EAD. that is why you need to strengthen ac21 by removing same\semilar job condition and other potential h1 like rfe's, otherwise you will drag us down along with you and turn ead into h1.
Anyway I have made my point in this post and all my previous posts. ASK anybody who has been waiting for last 5 to 10 years without GC If what I said is wrong or laughable. I am not one of those bitter folks who says its my way or the highway. Good luck to you guys.
Dude,
Be pragmatic. How can you ask CIS NOT to raise RFE's for EAD extensions? If they find some thing fishy they would definitely dig the issue. Remember, CIS is not working for you or for me. I cannot stop laughing!
Even now I do not understand how prefiling of AOS is related to Remove\dilute same similar job requirement? If you feel there is so much of importance for your SO COMPLEX CUSTOMIZED REQUIREMENT then why dont you start a new action item and gather people? Believe me I would be the first person to support you, because I understand the issue and I would like to work as a team. All I am saying is do not mix up the action items.
I hate to say this but your post is SO ridiculous which clearly implies that there is no place for people in IV who have PD's after may 2007.
I have a strong advice for you... 'THINK B4 U INK'
You have a great plan, come to US on H1 and within 6 months get EAD and you are free from H1b crackdown by jumping to EAD. You think USCIS, Grasley, sanders, and anti eb folks are a bunch of idiots, they will send you and me packing with the same rfe they are hitting h1 folks with if everybody gets to pre file AOS and get EAD. that is why you need to strengthen ac21 by removing same\semilar job condition and other potential h1 like rfe's, otherwise you will drag us down along with you and turn ead into h1.
Anyway I have made my point in this post and all my previous posts. ASK anybody who has been waiting for last 5 to 10 years without GC If what I said is wrong or laughable. I am not one of those bitter folks who says its my way or the highway. Good luck to you guys.
Dude,
Be pragmatic. How can you ask CIS NOT to raise RFE's for EAD extensions? If they find some thing fishy they would definitely dig the issue. Remember, CIS is not working for you or for me. I cannot stop laughing!
Even now I do not understand how prefiling of AOS is related to Remove\dilute same similar job requirement? If you feel there is so much of importance for your SO COMPLEX CUSTOMIZED REQUIREMENT then why dont you start a new action item and gather people? Believe me I would be the first person to support you, because I understand the issue and I would like to work as a team. All I am saying is do not mix up the action items.
I hate to say this but your post is SO ridiculous which clearly implies that there is no place for people in IV who have PD's after may 2007.
I have a strong advice for you... 'THINK B4 U INK'
more...
byeusa
08-03 02:37 PM
Good to hear some good and not so good reviews about the immigration lawyers in this thread. One of the firms about which folks have written contradictory statements is Fragomen. Thay have been very responsive and professional in some cases but the user polulation in general has complained about their non responsiveness. They have advised their clients ( i.e the companies) about how the slow down the process for green cards for their employees. It has been seen in a multitude of cases that they have advised the companies of not filing for EB-2 cases and use the route that creates the most delays in GC processing thus maximing the revenues for themselves and helping the companies use GC processing as a tool for employee retention. They made employers to belive that letting the cases processed in BEC is the best option instead of capturing the PD's from the old cases to PERM. Now, several thousand of those cases are still languishing at BEC and no one seems to have an answer about what will happen to those after 17th August.Isn't that so so unfair......
Their practice can not be termed ethical and the employees need to highlight this issue with their senior management and HR. I was wondering if Immigration Voice can help those individuals by guiding them about appropriate steps to highlight the malpractice by Fragomen.
Their practice can not be termed ethical and the employees need to highlight this issue with their senior management and HR. I was wondering if Immigration Voice can help those individuals by guiding them about appropriate steps to highlight the malpractice by Fragomen.
snathan
03-20 09:44 PM
To answer your question Yes nuthing gets transfered. Every time its a new h1b there is no transfer of anything. You can have 2 or more valid approved petition from different employers but you can use only one at a time.
Pay - They are liable and USCIS can question them. All they will have to do is show that this employee (OP) was no show never joined the company so basically agree with you here.
I was also under the same assumption. But I came to know that you can work for more than one sponsoring employer at a time.
Pay - They are liable and USCIS can question them. All they will have to do is show that this employee (OP) was no show never joined the company so basically agree with you here.
I was also under the same assumption. But I came to know that you can work for more than one sponsoring employer at a time.
more...
srikondoji
07-01 12:01 PM
Maybe somebody added an 'order by date desc' to the actual sql query.:rolleyes:
Or some intern may be practising the sql queries on the actual production system instead of a development box.:eek:
whatever may be the reason, just chill and celebrate this event.
Or some intern may be practising the sql queries on the actual production system instead of a development box.:eek:
whatever may be the reason, just chill and celebrate this event.
2010 escape fate logo.
swaroopmukka
07-18 10:39 AM
Hello,
I'm also in the same situation. My labor is approved May 2007. I'll need to apply for both 140 and 485 together. Can I do it at the same time ?? or do I need to file my 140 immediately and then 485 after a few days. Time is running out now, as we never know when USCIS would again stop accepting 485s. Please advice.
Thanks
I'm also in the same situation. My labor is approved May 2007. I'll need to apply for both 140 and 485 together. Can I do it at the same time ?? or do I need to file my 140 immediately and then 485 after a few days. Time is running out now, as we never know when USCIS would again stop accepting 485s. Please advice.
Thanks
more...
karthiknv143
07-06 07:12 PM
Bump>>>>>>>>>>>
hair Escape the Fate
Neo7
03-11 08:57 PM
Hello,
During the July 2007 fiasco I applied for I485 and I got my EAD and AP, but I have not used the EAD and still using and maintaining my H1.
Here is my dilemma, 2 years ago I went to India and used my AP when entering US though I had a valid H1 but I did not get the Visa stamped and after entering US on AP I am still using and maintaining my H1 and NOT using EAD. Recently I also got a 3 year extension on my H1.
Now I am applying for my new AP as the old one is expired. My question to you gurus is what should I put in the "Class of Admission" field? Shall I put the AOS or H1?
TIA
During the July 2007 fiasco I applied for I485 and I got my EAD and AP, but I have not used the EAD and still using and maintaining my H1.
Here is my dilemma, 2 years ago I went to India and used my AP when entering US though I had a valid H1 but I did not get the Visa stamped and after entering US on AP I am still using and maintaining my H1 and NOT using EAD. Recently I also got a 3 year extension on my H1.
Now I am applying for my new AP as the old one is expired. My question to you gurus is what should I put in the "Class of Admission" field? Shall I put the AOS or H1?
TIA
more...
nixstor
03-20 11:10 PM
Well, which interpretation? The one from April '08 or from November '05? They substantially differ. That's part of the controversy. What motivated them to change it?
I do think that the interpretation is, at least, debatable, and I can see both interpretations. In the end, the question comes down to: does the country limit have priority over the EB category, and I don't think you can have a conclusive answer.
But it also doesn't say the opposite.
It also states: if Visas available. You can certainly construe the case that Visas can only be available if they cannot be assigned to a lower category. 202 (a) (5) (B) actually states that only in application of 202 (e), Visas should be deemed to be required. Does that mean they are not required otherwise? 203(b) actually uses the same terminology to allow non-required visas to fall through.
Historically, before AC-21 was added, Visa numbers were wasted because they needed to be assigned in proportion. Irrespective of the interpretation of 202 (a) (5) this cannot happen with AC-21.
Snips from Nov 05 Bulletin (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_2712.html)
The 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.
>> As per my understanding, When there are no per country limits, It can be assigned to any one with oldest PD. Not that it is working like that with USCIS. As I said, before in my previous post, we can imagine these visa numbers tagged with the category name beside them. <<
During FY due to anticipated heavy demand, the AC21 provisions are not expected to apply, and the amount of Employment numbers available to any single country will be subject to the 7% cap. It is anticipated that the addition of unused FY-2005 Family numbers and the remaining AC21 numbers to the 140,000 annual minimum will result in an FY-2006 annual Employment limit of 152,000. This will mean an Employment per-country limit for FY-2006 of approximately 10,650.
To illustrate the effect of the reduced per-county limitation during FY-2006 on the oversubscribed countries, it should be noted that during FY-2005 India used approximately 47,175 Employment numbers.
>> Just to let you know before you think I am biased towards one thing or the other, I haven't looked at the text of the INA until a week before and for the past 2 years I have heard the same story that country limits trump category. I have spoken with an attorney and he expressed above similar opinion where we might not have noticed how numbers were overflowing and NOT overflowing to demand or lack of demand. Either way, This is not a panacea for the problem at hand as there is no clarity what so ever in either procedures. <<
I do think that the interpretation is, at least, debatable, and I can see both interpretations. In the end, the question comes down to: does the country limit have priority over the EB category, and I don't think you can have a conclusive answer.
But it also doesn't say the opposite.
It also states: if Visas available. You can certainly construe the case that Visas can only be available if they cannot be assigned to a lower category. 202 (a) (5) (B) actually states that only in application of 202 (e), Visas should be deemed to be required. Does that mean they are not required otherwise? 203(b) actually uses the same terminology to allow non-required visas to fall through.
Historically, before AC-21 was added, Visa numbers were wasted because they needed to be assigned in proportion. Irrespective of the interpretation of 202 (a) (5) this cannot happen with AC-21.
Snips from Nov 05 Bulletin (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_2712.html)
The 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.
>> As per my understanding, When there are no per country limits, It can be assigned to any one with oldest PD. Not that it is working like that with USCIS. As I said, before in my previous post, we can imagine these visa numbers tagged with the category name beside them. <<
During FY due to anticipated heavy demand, the AC21 provisions are not expected to apply, and the amount of Employment numbers available to any single country will be subject to the 7% cap. It is anticipated that the addition of unused FY-2005 Family numbers and the remaining AC21 numbers to the 140,000 annual minimum will result in an FY-2006 annual Employment limit of 152,000. This will mean an Employment per-country limit for FY-2006 of approximately 10,650.
To illustrate the effect of the reduced per-county limitation during FY-2006 on the oversubscribed countries, it should be noted that during FY-2005 India used approximately 47,175 Employment numbers.
>> Just to let you know before you think I am biased towards one thing or the other, I haven't looked at the text of the INA until a week before and for the past 2 years I have heard the same story that country limits trump category. I have spoken with an attorney and he expressed above similar opinion where we might not have noticed how numbers were overflowing and NOT overflowing to demand or lack of demand. Either way, This is not a panacea for the problem at hand as there is no clarity what so ever in either procedures. <<
hot escape fate logo. escape the fate the song is; escape the fate the song is
mbartosik
09-21 07:12 PM
I cancelled my tickets because of the FP appointment I had on same day.
You could have called the local finger print office, and asked to move to another day because of travel. They let me come in 2 weeks early because of a flight. I had tickets in hand but they didn't ask to see.
You could have called the local finger print office, and asked to move to another day because of travel. They let me come in 2 weeks early because of a flight. I had tickets in hand but they didn't ask to see.
more...
house escape fate logo. Escape the Fate. New Medicine
h1techSlave
04-11 05:42 PM
All the talk on the forums were about visa data movements only in the last quarter. So the one month movement for Eb2-I and Eb3-I is kinda expected and is not really a disappointing news.
The dates would move forward. Based on the discussions here, there are around 80,000 visas still available for this FY. (50,000 pending from regular EB quota + some 27,000 due to AC21 backlog + 2007 share from Family other quota). For the USCIS to not waste any more EB visas, the DOS will have to move the dates forward. I am expecting that Eb2-I will be set some where in 2005 and Eb3-I will be set at the middle or end of 2003 in the coming 3-4 months.
This month also didnt improve EB3 (I) condition!!
Does this mean more and more will convert to EB3 whose PD is 2001-2004?
The dates would move forward. Based on the discussions here, there are around 80,000 visas still available for this FY. (50,000 pending from regular EB quota + some 27,000 due to AC21 backlog + 2007 share from Family other quota). For the USCIS to not waste any more EB visas, the DOS will have to move the dates forward. I am expecting that Eb2-I will be set some where in 2005 and Eb3-I will be set at the middle or end of 2003 in the coming 3-4 months.
This month also didnt improve EB3 (I) condition!!
Does this mean more and more will convert to EB3 whose PD is 2001-2004?
tattoo Max Green of Escape The Fate
akhilmahajan
02-19 09:15 AM
Got 3 letters yesterday.
We are trying to get as many as we can.
We are trying to get as many as we can.
more...
pictures Escape The Fate T-shirt - Lips
NolaIndian32
04-30 01:06 PM
Updated count is $7,836 (needhelp! and santb1975 please confirm total fwith Pineapple's contribution (see post on page 13)).
Thanks,
NolaIndian
Thanks,
NolaIndian
dresses Escape The Fate 2011 Pictures
andy garcia
09-27 02:47 PM
The numbers game is really a 6 of one, half a dozen of the other - since we can only best guess it all - as I think this healthy debate has shown!
Efficiency of processing is a HUGE problem! Why do you think the visa numbers have gone unused? Your statement perplexes me somewhat. The name check isn't the only reason that there are delays. The Ombudsman's 1st 3 annual reports documents where the inefficiencies are.
In reality, its a complex problem that is a combination of many things;Inefficiencies in processing,Retrogression, country limits etc etc
I'm sorry, you just piqued my interest. You just seemed to be saying "there is no problem"
Efficiency of processing is a HUGE problem!. This is the biggest understatement. It should be a HUMONGOUS problem.
Check these numbers from 2000 to 2003.
I am quoting from the Report from CIS:
"In recent years, including '02, the number of immigrants
granted lawful permanent residence has been affected by an application backlog at INS. At the end of FY 2002,
there were 966,000 adjustment of status cases pending a decision.
They managed to issue 174,968 EB visas, even though the limit was much more.
Now the real shock.
The maximum number of visas allowed under the preference system in 2003 was 171,532 for EB immigrants.
Surprise, they only issued 82,137.
What happened?
I will give you a hint NC
Efficiency of processing is a HUGE problem! Why do you think the visa numbers have gone unused? Your statement perplexes me somewhat. The name check isn't the only reason that there are delays. The Ombudsman's 1st 3 annual reports documents where the inefficiencies are.
In reality, its a complex problem that is a combination of many things;Inefficiencies in processing,Retrogression, country limits etc etc
I'm sorry, you just piqued my interest. You just seemed to be saying "there is no problem"
Efficiency of processing is a HUGE problem!. This is the biggest understatement. It should be a HUMONGOUS problem.
Check these numbers from 2000 to 2003.
I am quoting from the Report from CIS:
"In recent years, including '02, the number of immigrants
granted lawful permanent residence has been affected by an application backlog at INS. At the end of FY 2002,
there were 966,000 adjustment of status cases pending a decision.
They managed to issue 174,968 EB visas, even though the limit was much more.
Now the real shock.
The maximum number of visas allowed under the preference system in 2003 was 171,532 for EB immigrants.
Surprise, they only issued 82,137.
What happened?
I will give you a hint NC
more...
makeup fate stay night wallpaper yet
zilmax007
08-03 11:54 PM
East or West, Gotcher law is THE BEST!!
http://www.gotcherlaw.com/
http://www.gotcherlaw.com/
girlfriend Escape the Fate
insbaby
01-14 10:18 PM
If they are going to work in US, then consulates will ask "super technical" questions at the H4s, like "Who will be your client?, Show us the contract!" etc.
May be the reason is not to scare the H4s right after their marriage.
May be the reason is not to scare the H4s right after their marriage.
hairstyles Escape The Fate Picture and
snathan
03-20 09:37 PM
H1 is always new? it could be, but not in case of a transfer
Any way good luck.
There is nothing really called transfer. When you are filing for the first time its counted against the cap. Otherwise its not. So when you are transfering the H1
1. You are not counted against the cap
2. Need to prove you are in status.
Any way good luck.
There is nothing really called transfer. When you are filing for the first time its counted against the cap. Otherwise its not. So when you are transfering the H1
1. You are not counted against the cap
2. Need to prove you are in status.
gapala
03-24 10:20 PM
There is a reason, I said read it and understand it. I don't think you have understood it.
The bottom line is that opinion letter is written by a USCIS officer and that I was referring it. And most important of all, you were proven wrong, again. That is the real reason of you being upset.
_______________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
I truely hope you are correct and op is out of the woods, but will wait until we get verdict from CIS. nrakkati please post when you hear from CIS on this situation. Good luck with your GC.
The bottom line is that opinion letter is written by a USCIS officer and that I was referring it. And most important of all, you were proven wrong, again. That is the real reason of you being upset.
_______________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
I truely hope you are correct and op is out of the woods, but will wait until we get verdict from CIS. nrakkati please post when you hear from CIS on this situation. Good luck with your GC.
ashish3
09-16 11:00 AM
Hi,
I am planning to come to the Rally with my wife and my kid. Please let e know if it is OK to bring my 2 year old to the rally.thanks!
I am planning to come to the Rally with my wife and my kid. Please let e know if it is OK to bring my 2 year old to the rally.thanks!
No comments:
Post a Comment