keshtwo
07-09 05:00 PM
How can USCIS adher to 7% per country quota when AC21 explicitly says that if visas are still available after allotment to ROW, the remaining visas must spill over to the over subscribed countries?
As a result of failure of this lawsuite, if they start adhering to 7% cap, then they are in violation of AC21. That would be another lawsuite for sure.
dude, When do they know ROW quota is not filled. The last day of the year? do you think they can give the spillover numbers to India, China and Mexico in one day? Currently what they do is, make a guess on how much will be free and then allot spillovers. tommorow as a result of this ladies lawsuit, they might decided to make sure other countries under 7% get their quota, and spillivers might be drastically curtailed.
Rememer there is no law which states 140K numbers have to be issued. only that max 140k can be issued.
As a result of failure of this lawsuite, if they start adhering to 7% cap, then they are in violation of AC21. That would be another lawsuite for sure.
dude, When do they know ROW quota is not filled. The last day of the year? do you think they can give the spillover numbers to India, China and Mexico in one day? Currently what they do is, make a guess on how much will be free and then allot spillovers. tommorow as a result of this ladies lawsuit, they might decided to make sure other countries under 7% get their quota, and spillivers might be drastically curtailed.
Rememer there is no law which states 140K numbers have to be issued. only that max 140k can be issued.
wallpaper Music. Nice!! A tattoo thread.
feedfront
10-13 01:53 PM
Hi,
The response to my RFE reached USCIS on 10/12 at 9 am and I haven't got any online status update as of now - 10/13 1 pm EST. Should I be worried or does it generally take them some time to update their records. Just want to make sure that the RFE reached USCIS since the due date for RFE response is coming up soon.
Thanks.
If you have doc that response to RFE reached USCIS on time, then do not worry about it. It may take time to update record.
The response to my RFE reached USCIS on 10/12 at 9 am and I haven't got any online status update as of now - 10/13 1 pm EST. Should I be worried or does it generally take them some time to update their records. Just want to make sure that the RFE reached USCIS since the due date for RFE response is coming up soon.
Thanks.
If you have doc that response to RFE reached USCIS on time, then do not worry about it. It may take time to update record.
abhijitp
07-24 12:07 PM
I'll do it first thing as soon as I receive.
Somebody was saying CIS will reject before issuing RN.
Is that possible?
We will get the RN most likely after August 17, so can we send another document pertaining to our already submitted AOS?
I am trying to determine if it is worthwhile submitting a fresh I-485 along with this letter (and is there any risk at all with it). Suggestions welcome.
Somebody was saying CIS will reject before issuing RN.
Is that possible?
We will get the RN most likely after August 17, so can we send another document pertaining to our already submitted AOS?
I am trying to determine if it is worthwhile submitting a fresh I-485 along with this letter (and is there any risk at all with it). Suggestions welcome.
2011 Cross Tattoo Pictures
wc_user
02-20 06:16 PM
Don't worry man! Your coast is near ... I think the EB3 India movement will atleast go to Sept - Oct 2001 . Someone had posted the Labor PD count from May 01 to Dec 01 . (524 in total) . Obviously the unknown which came out of the BEC backlogs makes this situation worse.
Does anyone want to make a guess of when EB3 India 2002 will become current ? I am thinking of changing the case to EB2.. Should I change my case or should I wait for EB3 to be current ?
Does anyone want to make a guess of when EB3 India 2002 will become current ? I am thinking of changing the case to EB2.. Should I change my case or should I wait for EB3 to be current ?
more...
desi3933
01-30 09:07 PM
.....
....
She has worked only 1 month in 2009 this will be reflected on 2009 w-2. I have couple of questions:
Will she be considered as "out of status" from Feb 1 to April end?
.....
.....
Before I answer your questions, I have couple of them -
Will she get paid starting Feb 1st? If no, why not. Please explain.
Will she on unpaid leave?
Will she still be Full Time Employee?
....
She has worked only 1 month in 2009 this will be reflected on 2009 w-2. I have couple of questions:
Will she be considered as "out of status" from Feb 1 to April end?
.....
.....
Before I answer your questions, I have couple of them -
Will she get paid starting Feb 1st? If no, why not. Please explain.
Will she on unpaid leave?
Will she still be Full Time Employee?
desi3933
02-12 01:42 PM
....
The things that do make some sense is wastage of visa numbers in 2010. We have some facts to support the "theory" but not enough.
We still have 7 months left for FY2010, so only assertion that there will be EB visa unused is only a "theory" at best.
What doesn't make sense is Ron's assertion that USCIS wasted 13K EB visas in 2009. Facts simply don't support that.
I agree. He has not backed his claim on that thread as well. Someone has posted a question in that thread regarding source of the spillover. The author of the blog responded with legal statute that explains how unused numbers of FB & EB from previous years are used for next year. But no link to justify 13,000 number.
A fact in itself is nothing. It is valuable only for the idea attached to it, or for the proof which it furnishes. - Claude Bernard
I know you lawyers can, with ease, twist words and meanings as you please. - John Gay
_________________
Not a legal advice.
The things that do make some sense is wastage of visa numbers in 2010. We have some facts to support the "theory" but not enough.
We still have 7 months left for FY2010, so only assertion that there will be EB visa unused is only a "theory" at best.
What doesn't make sense is Ron's assertion that USCIS wasted 13K EB visas in 2009. Facts simply don't support that.
I agree. He has not backed his claim on that thread as well. Someone has posted a question in that thread regarding source of the spillover. The author of the blog responded with legal statute that explains how unused numbers of FB & EB from previous years are used for next year. But no link to justify 13,000 number.
A fact in itself is nothing. It is valuable only for the idea attached to it, or for the proof which it furnishes. - Claude Bernard
I know you lawyers can, with ease, twist words and meanings as you please. - John Gay
_________________
Not a legal advice.
more...
nandakumar
12-27 06:07 PM
There are couple of postings in Murthy.com
Please participate so that others can view and potentially could become members of IV
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=2704080912&m=7141062241
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=2994050912&m=5171092241
Please participate so that others can view and potentially could become members of IV
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=2704080912&m=7141062241
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=2994050912&m=5171092241
2010 music notes tattoo designs.
AirWaterandGC
07-15 03:39 PM
Talk to an attorney soon then.
I have been given a month to respond for this RFE. I dont have to provide any paystubs. Also the guy who told me that my 140 was revoked doesnt have first hand information. He is just an employee of the company. He is involved when company applies for H-1B's, 140's EAD, AP. He is never involved in revocation cases. I am trying to get a hold of the owner to see if I can get some facts about my 140.
I have no intention of doing any fraud. I will present a letter from my ex employer in case he hasnt revoked the 140. In case he did, I will send a letter from my current employer.
I plan to speak with a competent attorney once I know for sure the 140 revocation history.
I have been given a month to respond for this RFE. I dont have to provide any paystubs. Also the guy who told me that my 140 was revoked doesnt have first hand information. He is just an employee of the company. He is involved when company applies for H-1B's, 140's EAD, AP. He is never involved in revocation cases. I am trying to get a hold of the owner to see if I can get some facts about my 140.
I have no intention of doing any fraud. I will present a letter from my ex employer in case he hasnt revoked the 140. In case he did, I will send a letter from my current employer.
I plan to speak with a competent attorney once I know for sure the 140 revocation history.
more...
masouds
02-15 05:09 PM
US government thinks that Indians and Chinese don't mix up with other races. Are u on drugs ??????????????????:mad:
Look, I don't want to enter a pissing match with anyone here. Go read your history (http://americanhistory.suite101.com/article.cfm/limiting_the_huddled_masses) before jumping to conclusions.
Look, I don't want to enter a pissing match with anyone here. Go read your history (http://americanhistory.suite101.com/article.cfm/limiting_the_huddled_masses) before jumping to conclusions.
hair music tattoo ideas. music
vbkris77
04-10 12:28 PM
What you said is absolutely true. EB1 Last year and the year before saw lot more approvals than usual. My reasoning is that even though EB1 was current for all along, they never really approved I140s to give them GC. So In the overall clearing of I140s, CIS cleared lot more EB1 cases and became approved during last 2 years. If you look at the I140 completion in the dash board, it will be very much clear that the completions came down to 4 digits for each month from 5 digits. Receipts continued to be less than 5K per month.
This year, we may see a big dip in EB1 cases and larger EB2 spillover. EB4 spillover is ruled out after this bulletin.
Here are the details for last year and years before:
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
This year, we may see a big dip in EB1 cases and larger EB2 spillover. EB4 spillover is ruled out after this bulletin.
Here are the details for last year and years before:
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
more...
karanp25
07-11 01:50 PM
I agree 100%.
again no one can explain the ridiculous date movements by DOS...so there can be no reason for this..Its just that someone saw numbers being wasted...and they randomly applied them to EB2...Now as for getting approvals for all those that are current now...forget it ...since that is USCIS and that is a whole different Animal (a lazy one!!)
again no one can explain the ridiculous date movements by DOS...so there can be no reason for this..Its just that someone saw numbers being wasted...and they randomly applied them to EB2...Now as for getting approvals for all those that are current now...forget it ...since that is USCIS and that is a whole different Animal (a lazy one!!)
hot music tattoos designs. tattoos
feedfront
10-12 04:19 PM
Hello!
I don't know if anyone is in or has been in a similar situation. But would appreciate sound advise on the next steps...
thecipher5
Do you have attorney? It will be better if he/she write letter for status of the case. I had RFE in last year (around summer'09). My PD was current since Aug, but no change in the status or specific response (tried congressman, senator, SR). But, I got new RFE (medical report required) when my attorney contacted them. I don't know what triggered it, but my attorney contacted USCIS last (after I did not get any specific info from other sources).
You can write to USCIS director. Someone here in this forum wrote to director, when he did not get any progress on his SR.
What's your receipt date? I heard that they are using receipt date. I know couple of people (including myself) whose application was picked (or generated RFE) matched the pattern of receipt date not PD.
I don't know if anyone is in or has been in a similar situation. But would appreciate sound advise on the next steps...
thecipher5
Do you have attorney? It will be better if he/she write letter for status of the case. I had RFE in last year (around summer'09). My PD was current since Aug, but no change in the status or specific response (tried congressman, senator, SR). But, I got new RFE (medical report required) when my attorney contacted them. I don't know what triggered it, but my attorney contacted USCIS last (after I did not get any specific info from other sources).
You can write to USCIS director. Someone here in this forum wrote to director, when he did not get any progress on his SR.
What's your receipt date? I heard that they are using receipt date. I know couple of people (including myself) whose application was picked (or generated RFE) matched the pattern of receipt date not PD.
more...
house X-Large Music Tattoo Designs
yadavnay
07-23 09:16 AM
Yes you can work on h1B , but you need to file for a change of status , which normally take 2-3 months in normal processing and 15 days if you file premium. Ask your H1b employer to file for the change of staus under premium.
Please note that once your status is changed you can no longer continue on L1A. Mine was the same case and I followed the same steps some year back.
Thanx
Please note that once your status is changed you can no longer continue on L1A. Mine was the same case and I followed the same steps some year back.
Thanx
tattoo music notes tattoo designs.
permfiling
02-14 01:41 AM
Canuck,
There is no divide and rule policy by US as giving H1 does not mean that you have to file for Immigration, It is the choice of the person to get immigrated to US and US has set some policies by quota system. If you don't like it then no one is forcing you to stay back (US will say that if u sue USCIS).
Thought to chip in my 2 cents as you are showing similarities of british raj and US. First of all it was the fault of the kings in India during that time who were not united enough to kick them out.
Cheers
permfiling
EB2 -INDIA
N Cal Chapter
Dear friends,
I am appalled and disgusted by the mudslinging going on between ROW and India-born applicants. If any of you remember your history lessons from high school, the English used this exact policy of "Divide and Rule" to keep control over their colonies.
For example, in India, they would go into Moslem dominated cities, discriminate against them for jobs, and put Hindus in more prestigious positions, and vice-versa. They did this after the first war for independence in 1857 where Hindus, Moslems, rich and poor fought to overthrow the British occupation.
The very same policy is used by the U.S. government to control their population:
1) Per country quotas in EB immigration cause infighting
2) Infighting causes immigrant activists like IV to lose focus and weaken the agenda
3) Infighting results in racism between ROW, India, and China, which causes Americans to watch the circus, shake their heads and lobby for more immigration control
4) Poor regulation in the H1B program cause Americans to lose their jobs and blame the Indians and Chinese
...and the elite sit back, sip their martinis, and watch the fun.
So you have two choices before you:
1) Keep fighting, achieve none of the 3 main IV objectives, and continue your bonded slavery or
2) Unite as one to achieve all 3 objectives, and throw off your shackles
Remember, "Injustice Anywhere is a Threat to Justice Everywhere" - Martin Luther King
There is no divide and rule policy by US as giving H1 does not mean that you have to file for Immigration, It is the choice of the person to get immigrated to US and US has set some policies by quota system. If you don't like it then no one is forcing you to stay back (US will say that if u sue USCIS).
Thought to chip in my 2 cents as you are showing similarities of british raj and US. First of all it was the fault of the kings in India during that time who were not united enough to kick them out.
Cheers
permfiling
EB2 -INDIA
N Cal Chapter
Dear friends,
I am appalled and disgusted by the mudslinging going on between ROW and India-born applicants. If any of you remember your history lessons from high school, the English used this exact policy of "Divide and Rule" to keep control over their colonies.
For example, in India, they would go into Moslem dominated cities, discriminate against them for jobs, and put Hindus in more prestigious positions, and vice-versa. They did this after the first war for independence in 1857 where Hindus, Moslems, rich and poor fought to overthrow the British occupation.
The very same policy is used by the U.S. government to control their population:
1) Per country quotas in EB immigration cause infighting
2) Infighting causes immigrant activists like IV to lose focus and weaken the agenda
3) Infighting results in racism between ROW, India, and China, which causes Americans to watch the circus, shake their heads and lobby for more immigration control
4) Poor regulation in the H1B program cause Americans to lose their jobs and blame the Indians and Chinese
...and the elite sit back, sip their martinis, and watch the fun.
So you have two choices before you:
1) Keep fighting, achieve none of the 3 main IV objectives, and continue your bonded slavery or
2) Unite as one to achieve all 3 objectives, and throw off your shackles
Remember, "Injustice Anywhere is a Threat to Justice Everywhere" - Martin Luther King
more...
pictures music tattoo ideas.
cool_desi_gc
03-17 04:15 PM
This clearly shows that EB3 India pipe is clogged becuase of lot of pending cases in 2001/02.Many of them are 245i cases as well.Once the PD crosses 2002, EB3 should go a little smoother.
BTW, mine is Dec 2002
BTW, mine is Dec 2002
dresses Music Tattoo design ideas at
sprash
02-02 01:42 PM
Out of status is usually checked until date of I-485 filing. One exception being working without valid and active EAD when I-485 is pending.
H1 status, one should be paid what is mention in H1 LCA and it is not related to LC Salary for green card. LC Salary comes into picture for ability-to-pay issues.
Thanks for your inputs Desi.
I have been following this thread with great interest. I'm the guy who posted the RFE scans on Pg1.
In my case the RFE was issued 1.5 years after filing for AOS (I filed in July 07 and this RFE was on Oct 08). Also, I'm not the only person who got this. I know many folks who work for big companies like Intel etc, who got such an RFE.
Also if I remember correctly, Belle on Murthy Forums (who also seems in the know) mentioned that one must be employed at all times on EAD. I didn't find any specific timeframe -- most people said you could get into trouble if an RFE (such as mine) is raised and you're out of a job. On the other hand, it is might be safe till such an RFE is issued (???)
I tried to look for that thread, but couldn't find it. However I did find another similar thread on which she (he?) has said the same thing:
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=4654000912&m=9941019581&r=3791069581#3791069581
In tumultuous times such as these, I would expect USCIS to raise many more such RFEs.
H1 status, one should be paid what is mention in H1 LCA and it is not related to LC Salary for green card. LC Salary comes into picture for ability-to-pay issues.
Thanks for your inputs Desi.
I have been following this thread with great interest. I'm the guy who posted the RFE scans on Pg1.
In my case the RFE was issued 1.5 years after filing for AOS (I filed in July 07 and this RFE was on Oct 08). Also, I'm not the only person who got this. I know many folks who work for big companies like Intel etc, who got such an RFE.
Also if I remember correctly, Belle on Murthy Forums (who also seems in the know) mentioned that one must be employed at all times on EAD. I didn't find any specific timeframe -- most people said you could get into trouble if an RFE (such as mine) is raised and you're out of a job. On the other hand, it is might be safe till such an RFE is issued (???)
I tried to look for that thread, but couldn't find it. However I did find another similar thread on which she (he?) has said the same thing:
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=4654000912&m=9941019581&r=3791069581#3791069581
In tumultuous times such as these, I would expect USCIS to raise many more such RFEs.
more...
makeup music tattoo ideas. music note
eb3_nepa
07-05 01:46 PM
OK, you two, I see what you're saying. So one has to pay for the right to start a new thread. In that case those who have questions will start PMing those who seem to know stuff or going offtopic in random threads.
1) Moderators have the ability to delete stuff and the rest of the IV members need to smart up and not answer off-topic questions
2) About PMs. It is up to the receiver of the PM whether to answer it or not. EVEN better NO PM for non paid members :)
1) Moderators have the ability to delete stuff and the rest of the IV members need to smart up and not answer off-topic questions
2) About PMs. It is up to the receiver of the PM whether to answer it or not. EVEN better NO PM for non paid members :)
girlfriend Cross Tattoo Pictures and
gimmegc
07-13 08:36 PM
Lucky you, you might start seeing LUDs on you case by the end of this month. If you do please send me a message.
Reg correcting the dates, USCIS usually takes months to respond to such things. I'm not gonna do anything about it for my case, unless the processing dates show virtually no movement.
My understanding of process.date is that it is the oldest date of completed cases - which means they might be caught up with processing on most cases received till that date (July-20th 2007 ?) I could be wrong, we'll see..
Thanks, I will keep you posted. My PD is Nov 04 and I am hopeful that something good is gonna come out of this one......
Reg correcting the dates, USCIS usually takes months to respond to such things. I'm not gonna do anything about it for my case, unless the processing dates show virtually no movement.
My understanding of process.date is that it is the oldest date of completed cases - which means they might be caught up with processing on most cases received till that date (July-20th 2007 ?) I could be wrong, we'll see..
Thanks, I will keep you posted. My PD is Nov 04 and I am hopeful that something good is gonna come out of this one......
hairstyles tattoo ideas for moms. tattoo
andy garcia
01-26 09:40 AM
I had trouble sifting through all that data and figuring out what that was all about.
Could you give the specific report that you used for these numbers. And, if possible, any hints on how you arrived at the data below. I would appreciate that.
Thanks....
FISCAL ------ Employment ------- EB3
YEAR ----- Total ---- INDIA | Total --- India
2000 ----- 111,024 | 15888 | 51,711 | -5567 :IV FY 2000 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2000%20table%20V.pdf)
2001 ----- 186,536 | 41720 | 90,274 | 16405 :IV FY 2001 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2001%20table%20V.pdf)
2002 ----- 171,583 | 41919 | 87,574 | 17428 :IV FY 2002 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2002%20table%20V.pdf)
2003 ----- -83,020 | 20818 | 47,354 | 10680 :IV FY 2003 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2003%20table%20V.pdf)
2004 ----- 157,107 | 39496 | 88,114 | 19962 :IV FY 2004 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY04tableV.pdf)
2005 ----- 242,335 | 47160 |122,130 | 23399 :IV FY 2005 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY05tableV.pdf)
6 yr total - 951,605| 207001| 487,157| 93441
Annual Avg --------- 34500 | -------- 15574
If this trend would have continued. There should not be any MAJOR retrogression problem, but if you remember from the Nov 05 VB. The warning was very clear:
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.
If you plug this number into your analysis the result might be a couple of years of advance for your predictions.
andy
Could you give the specific report that you used for these numbers. And, if possible, any hints on how you arrived at the data below. I would appreciate that.
Thanks....
FISCAL ------ Employment ------- EB3
YEAR ----- Total ---- INDIA | Total --- India
2000 ----- 111,024 | 15888 | 51,711 | -5567 :IV FY 2000 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2000%20table%20V.pdf)
2001 ----- 186,536 | 41720 | 90,274 | 16405 :IV FY 2001 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2001%20table%20V.pdf)
2002 ----- 171,583 | 41919 | 87,574 | 17428 :IV FY 2002 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2002%20table%20V.pdf)
2003 ----- -83,020 | 20818 | 47,354 | 10680 :IV FY 2003 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2003%20table%20V.pdf)
2004 ----- 157,107 | 39496 | 88,114 | 19962 :IV FY 2004 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY04tableV.pdf)
2005 ----- 242,335 | 47160 |122,130 | 23399 :IV FY 2005 (http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY05tableV.pdf)
6 yr total - 951,605| 207001| 487,157| 93441
Annual Avg --------- 34500 | -------- 15574
If this trend would have continued. There should not be any MAJOR retrogression problem, but if you remember from the Nov 05 VB. The warning was very clear:
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.
If you plug this number into your analysis the result might be a couple of years of advance for your predictions.
andy
Jaime
09-11 03:38 PM
If people were looking for yet another reason to attend the rally, here it is! If you are EB3 your wait just got much longer! We need to get that changed! By going to Washington!!!
amitps
09-26 11:27 AM
Eilene Zimmerman
freelance journalist
v and f: 619.582.2192
ezimmerman@sbcglobal.net
IV Leaders and Core are working on it...but feel free to call her / email her.
freelance journalist
v and f: 619.582.2192
ezimmerman@sbcglobal.net
IV Leaders and Core are working on it...but feel free to call her / email her.
No comments:
Post a Comment