ushkand
07-24 11:50 AM
I can't say for certain but from recent USCIS actions and the latest FAQ released, I see them issuing an RFE instead of outright rejecting the application. If they will accept applications without medical, they should be able to do the same for an employment letter. Ofcourse, this is just my humble opinion.
wallpaper House of Anubis | Flickr
Morty
08-07 02:55 PM
Application Type: I485, APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Notice mailed welcoming the new permanent resident.
On August 7, 2008, we mailed you a notice that we had registered this customer's new permanent resident status. Please follow any instructions on the notice. Your new permanent resident card should be mailed within 60 days following this registration or after you complete any ADIT processing referred to in the welcome notice, whichever is later. If you move before you get your new card call customer service. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register.
PD: July 2004
RD: July 3rd 2007
ND: Sept 12th 2007
I-140 Approved May 2007
Service Center: NSC
Name check: Pending (when I had infopass a week ago)
Thanks guys. I wish every one good luck, and I am going to contribute my advise, and suggestions.
I opended SR 3 weeks ago, On Monday I used POJ method to talk to IO. She said, my case has been assigned to officer. Today got this status updated.
Congrats Myvoice23. Enjoy the new found freedom.
I tried to contact IO using POJ method(as from your profile) but the call landed at USCIS customer service. The lady checked and said the current processing time is one month behind my notice date and she cannot do any thing at this time. She asked me to call when the processing time is past my notice date so that she can open SR.
Current Status: Notice mailed welcoming the new permanent resident.
On August 7, 2008, we mailed you a notice that we had registered this customer's new permanent resident status. Please follow any instructions on the notice. Your new permanent resident card should be mailed within 60 days following this registration or after you complete any ADIT processing referred to in the welcome notice, whichever is later. If you move before you get your new card call customer service. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register.
PD: July 2004
RD: July 3rd 2007
ND: Sept 12th 2007
I-140 Approved May 2007
Service Center: NSC
Name check: Pending (when I had infopass a week ago)
Thanks guys. I wish every one good luck, and I am going to contribute my advise, and suggestions.
I opended SR 3 weeks ago, On Monday I used POJ method to talk to IO. She said, my case has been assigned to officer. Today got this status updated.
Congrats Myvoice23. Enjoy the new found freedom.
I tried to contact IO using POJ method(as from your profile) but the call landed at USCIS customer service. The lady checked and said the current processing time is one month behind my notice date and she cannot do any thing at this time. She asked me to call when the processing time is past my notice date so that she can open SR.
suriajay12
05-11 09:42 AM
Keep writing letter, regular mail etc to president, Ms. Joe etc...
I can imagine whats in our EB2 (Feb 04-05) minds. "Lets wait and see what happens next month, or lets see Oct bulletin". I cant change your minds.
But EB2 guys from much later date:
If you looked at the pace it was moving in the last 6 months, you MAY get your GCs after 3-4 years.. which is unacceptable waiting too. So join hands with EB3 and lets move together. No point in waiting. DOnt you think all EB3s will convert into EB2 if there is no light at the end .. . So it will not serve anything if you keep quite...
I can imagine whats in our EB2 (Feb 04-05) minds. "Lets wait and see what happens next month, or lets see Oct bulletin". I cant change your minds.
But EB2 guys from much later date:
If you looked at the pace it was moving in the last 6 months, you MAY get your GCs after 3-4 years.. which is unacceptable waiting too. So join hands with EB3 and lets move together. No point in waiting. DOnt you think all EB3s will convert into EB2 if there is no light at the end .. . So it will not serve anything if you keep quite...
2011 at anubis house Gonna kiss
Rockford
08-29 03:36 PM
I moved to a desi consulting company after I got layed off in 6th year of h1b. ..................... But recently I asked my lawyer for a copy of my L/C and i 140 petition and she refused to give, then my employer requested them to give it to me. ............ and finally I had to talk to my employer and we deicded not to use their services anymore just for my case,.
Chandu,
Just for the record sake, the LC and I140 are your employers petitions and the lawyer is not supposed to give them to you without your employer's consent/approval.
I am sure there are other issues with your lawyer, but this case is kind of fair.
There may be some lawyers who are lenient in this aspect, especially in cases where the beneficiary is paying the lawyer directly.
Chandu,
Just for the record sake, the LC and I140 are your employers petitions and the lawyer is not supposed to give them to you without your employer's consent/approval.
I am sure there are other issues with your lawyer, but this case is kind of fair.
There may be some lawyers who are lenient in this aspect, especially in cases where the beneficiary is paying the lawyer directly.
more...
Ramba
07-14 10:02 PM
--
I do not think what you are saying is correct. Ac21 does not allow you to leave before 180 days of your 485 filing.
Have you read the USCIS question? If not, read few times to understand how your interpretation is wrong.
Question 10. Should service centers or district offices deny portability cases on the sole basis that the alien has left his or her employment with the I-140 petitioner prior to the I-485 application pending for 180 days?
Answer: No. The basis for adjustment is not actual (current) employment but prospective employment. Since there is no requirement that the alien have ever been employed by the petitioner while the I-140 and/or I-485 was pending, the fact that an alien left the I-140 petitioner before the I-485 has been pending 180 days will not necessarily render the alien ineligible to port. However, in all cases an offer of employment must have been bona fide. This means that, as of the time the I-140 was filed and at the time of filing the I-485 if not filed concurrently, the I-140 petitioner must have had the intent to employ the beneficiary, and the alien must have intended to undertake the employment, upon adjustment. Adjudicators should not presume absence of such intent and may take the I-140 and supporting documents themselves as prima facie evidence of such intent, but in appropriate cases additional evidence or investigation may be appropriate.
The bottom line is if his approved 140 is not revoked with in 180 days of filing the 485, his 485 is still valid even if ported the job with in a month after filing 485.
The RFE is trying to determine whether your former employer holds a bonafide future job open for you or not. If he/she does not then your application is not valid in your circumstances from what I know.
If you get a letter from him/her then that should be adequate, however you will also need to start work with that employer for a reasonable time afterward to be within the law.
If as you say the intent has to be there at the time of filing, then it would be easy for everyone to intend whatever the needed at the time of filing and then change their minds. It does not work that way.
The revocation of the 140 would not have been a problem if it happened after the 180 days, but would be an issue now.
I can see you are in a difficult spot. I would definitely suggest you stay honest, since they have all of your filing records etc. and if you fudge it, your petition can be denied for fraud, which could harm future applications.
Rather than relying on the advise here, you should seek out a good attorney experienced in AC21.
I do not think what you are saying is correct. Ac21 does not allow you to leave before 180 days of your 485 filing.
Have you read the USCIS question? If not, read few times to understand how your interpretation is wrong.
Question 10. Should service centers or district offices deny portability cases on the sole basis that the alien has left his or her employment with the I-140 petitioner prior to the I-485 application pending for 180 days?
Answer: No. The basis for adjustment is not actual (current) employment but prospective employment. Since there is no requirement that the alien have ever been employed by the petitioner while the I-140 and/or I-485 was pending, the fact that an alien left the I-140 petitioner before the I-485 has been pending 180 days will not necessarily render the alien ineligible to port. However, in all cases an offer of employment must have been bona fide. This means that, as of the time the I-140 was filed and at the time of filing the I-485 if not filed concurrently, the I-140 petitioner must have had the intent to employ the beneficiary, and the alien must have intended to undertake the employment, upon adjustment. Adjudicators should not presume absence of such intent and may take the I-140 and supporting documents themselves as prima facie evidence of such intent, but in appropriate cases additional evidence or investigation may be appropriate.
The bottom line is if his approved 140 is not revoked with in 180 days of filing the 485, his 485 is still valid even if ported the job with in a month after filing 485.
The RFE is trying to determine whether your former employer holds a bonafide future job open for you or not. If he/she does not then your application is not valid in your circumstances from what I know.
If you get a letter from him/her then that should be adequate, however you will also need to start work with that employer for a reasonable time afterward to be within the law.
If as you say the intent has to be there at the time of filing, then it would be easy for everyone to intend whatever the needed at the time of filing and then change their minds. It does not work that way.
The revocation of the 140 would not have been a problem if it happened after the 180 days, but would be an issue now.
I can see you are in a difficult spot. I would definitely suggest you stay honest, since they have all of your filing records etc. and if you fudge it, your petition can be denied for fraud, which could harm future applications.
Rather than relying on the advise here, you should seek out a good attorney experienced in AC21.
dummgelauft
08-21 12:51 PM
I did not marry the man I was engaged to. I came here initially for ONE month and was approved at the airport customs terminal to stay that long. When I got here, it was for a visit with my fiance only. Unfortunately, things did not work out and we broke it off. Thank God! However, I was staying with his uncle and aunt, and they had a disabled man in the house. HE turned out to be my sponsor when they asked me to care for him while they were doing long haul trucking. I agreed to do this and we immediately contacted USCIS to get instructions on what needed to be filed first. With that information in hand, we filed everything they requested. All the stuff on the RFE I received has never been mentioned before now and if it had, it would have been filed along with the rest. There are tons of applications, how is one supposed to know what to file and when if there are no specific instructions? I have gone through all the copies we have of all the required applications and I still do not see anything where all these other forms were to be filed along with the I-485.
Nothing was done illegally. He filed the application on my behalf, signed, sealed and delivered it himself. I did not do this on my own, I just signed whatever I was required to sign, he did the rest.
If all of this was illegal, then why was I not informed of this nearly 6 years ago when we filed the first application? Seems a bit odd that if I was illegal and they know where I am and who I live with that they wouldn't be quick to throw me out, but they have not done so.
My former fiance has nothing to do with this, I never intended to stay here when I first came, it was merely a visit but circumstances were such that I was needed at a moment's notice so we filed the necessary paperwork as quickly as possible and thought we were doing the right thing. No one has ever said otherwise until now and I think that is rather unfair to spring it all on me at this point and expect me to get it all done within 30 days. I know I am not the only applicant out there and I realize there is a huge backlog of other applications, I'm not that stupid to think that they will make me a priority, but one measly letter informing me that I was here illegally sometime over a 6 year period is not asking to much is it? Why would they send me all the other Notices of Action if I was here illegally and they knew it?
Something is terribly screwed up and I guess I have no choice but to find an attorney who can deal with this mess.
Okay, It is still a bit fuzzy, but lot clearer than your initial post. Almost all of us here on this forum are professionally qualified Employment Based applicants, with fairly straightforward, albeit extremently slow moving cases. Nearly all of us have been sponsored by our employers and we make sure that we are legal, in this country, every day of the year.
Now, coming to your case.
I am certain this "disabled man" you are caring for, had all good intentions, but he screwed up royally. You can not just "apply for a I-485". There has to be a basis from one of the following
(1) Family based
(2) Employment based
(3) Humanitarian / Refugee
(4) Diversity Based
It is still not clear, what CATEGORY he applied for you under.
(a) Can not be family based (you are not his spouse, child, sibling etc)
(b) You CERTAINLY DO NOT qualify under Employment based application.
(c) You absolutey CAN NOT apply under Refugee or Diversity (Canadians are shut out of diversity visa quota)
So, it is now time to stop pretending that you "were needed here". Nobody is indispensible.
Get your self back in to Cananda and work towards building your life back up.
Bon fin semaine!!
Nothing was done illegally. He filed the application on my behalf, signed, sealed and delivered it himself. I did not do this on my own, I just signed whatever I was required to sign, he did the rest.
If all of this was illegal, then why was I not informed of this nearly 6 years ago when we filed the first application? Seems a bit odd that if I was illegal and they know where I am and who I live with that they wouldn't be quick to throw me out, but they have not done so.
My former fiance has nothing to do with this, I never intended to stay here when I first came, it was merely a visit but circumstances were such that I was needed at a moment's notice so we filed the necessary paperwork as quickly as possible and thought we were doing the right thing. No one has ever said otherwise until now and I think that is rather unfair to spring it all on me at this point and expect me to get it all done within 30 days. I know I am not the only applicant out there and I realize there is a huge backlog of other applications, I'm not that stupid to think that they will make me a priority, but one measly letter informing me that I was here illegally sometime over a 6 year period is not asking to much is it? Why would they send me all the other Notices of Action if I was here illegally and they knew it?
Something is terribly screwed up and I guess I have no choice but to find an attorney who can deal with this mess.
Okay, It is still a bit fuzzy, but lot clearer than your initial post. Almost all of us here on this forum are professionally qualified Employment Based applicants, with fairly straightforward, albeit extremently slow moving cases. Nearly all of us have been sponsored by our employers and we make sure that we are legal, in this country, every day of the year.
Now, coming to your case.
I am certain this "disabled man" you are caring for, had all good intentions, but he screwed up royally. You can not just "apply for a I-485". There has to be a basis from one of the following
(1) Family based
(2) Employment based
(3) Humanitarian / Refugee
(4) Diversity Based
It is still not clear, what CATEGORY he applied for you under.
(a) Can not be family based (you are not his spouse, child, sibling etc)
(b) You CERTAINLY DO NOT qualify under Employment based application.
(c) You absolutey CAN NOT apply under Refugee or Diversity (Canadians are shut out of diversity visa quota)
So, it is now time to stop pretending that you "were needed here". Nobody is indispensible.
Get your self back in to Cananda and work towards building your life back up.
Bon fin semaine!!
more...
thirdworldman
03-09 11:55 PM
Here is my wireframe / project screenshot
http://www.inmod.com/casey/subway_wire.jpg
[.soulty - removed img tags.. lets not make the thread too wide]
http://www.inmod.com/casey/subway_wire.jpg
[.soulty - removed img tags.. lets not make the thread too wide]
2010 House+of+anubis+nina+and+
tooclose
07-12 06:49 PM
Hi,
My PD is March 1st 2006. Just wondering is March 1st is in or out? i.e. cut off is March 2nd or March 1st?
thanks,
Rwe
Well my PD is 3-Mar-2006. So close but too far. :mad:
My PD is March 1st 2006. Just wondering is March 1st is in or out? i.e. cut off is March 2nd or March 1st?
thanks,
Rwe
Well my PD is 3-Mar-2006. So close but too far. :mad:
more...
optimystic
10-16 12:47 AM
Thanks to IV Core and Nixstor in particular for following up on the FOIA subject that has been brought up in several threads over the past couple of weeks (including one by me as well !) and take this up as an action item and providing guidance for the IV members on how to do the same.
I did not realize it was this simple! Will surely send the letter by this weekend.
Btw, How will we receive the receipt numer?? Are we supposed to attach a return (prepaid stamped) envelope or something?? Or we will just get a letter from the National Center after they receive our request?
I did not realize it was this simple! Will surely send the letter by this weekend.
Btw, How will we receive the receipt numer?? Are we supposed to attach a return (prepaid stamped) envelope or something?? Or we will just get a letter from the National Center after they receive our request?
hair house of anubis nina and fabian kiss. hard jerome Fabian nina
amsgc
02-05 09:24 PM
It is very important that we point this out to Lawmakers/public when they begin drafting the CIR.
Big question:
Why not put a country cap on the CIR for all undocumented?
What are the reasons for not doing that?
Lawmakers give a rationale of diversity as the reason for country caps. Why is the reason for diversity not relevant for undocumented? I am sure there are undocumented from all countries and not just one country?
Big question:
Why not put a country cap on the CIR for all undocumented?
What are the reasons for not doing that?
Lawmakers give a rationale of diversity as the reason for country caps. Why is the reason for diversity not relevant for undocumented? I am sure there are undocumented from all countries and not just one country?
more...
dontcareanymore
12-12 03:48 PM
With all the porting nonsense going on eb2 will move backward and eb3 will inch forward slowly. We might end up with eb2 and eb3 in 2002. congrats to all the people who ported, the only thing you accomplished is you made sure eb2 does not progress (it does not mean you have have moved forward by porting, it just means that you have made sure you have prevented original eb2 guys from getting green card), the people who ported wont gain any benefit but they will make it worse for everyone, they have to file a second i140 which will take at least another 1 year to clear and after 1 year when the ported 140's clear the eb2 will go back to 2002. You have also accomplished another great feat, DOL is going to make it impossible to file eb2 in IT jobs so even genuine people are screwed. Before people start giving red dots and justifying there porting I have an message for you, your behavior is no different from the people who did labor substitution, the end result was DOL ended labor substitution and the result of all this porting is DOL has made it impossible to get eb2 even for genuine cases. Just because others are doing it does not mean you can do it, obviously it is wrong therefore dol removed labor substitution and now dol is making it impossible to get eb2 for IT jobs even for genuine cases. 90 % of people doing this porting are desi consulting employees, they wine and complain about desi consulting companies as blood suckers (justifiably) but they themselves are bloodsuckers on the EB2 community by doing this eb3 to eb2 porting.
TRUE . I wish they review even approved EB2s (not just ported , but all) and deny them if they are not legitimate or "genuine" in your speak. I also wish they compare the job duties of all these EB2s with others and even perform on-site checks. Then all ORIGINAL and GENUINE EB2s can get the GC.
TRUE . I wish they review even approved EB2s (not just ported , but all) and deny them if they are not legitimate or "genuine" in your speak. I also wish they compare the job duties of all these EB2s with others and even perform on-site checks. Then all ORIGINAL and GENUINE EB2s can get the GC.
hot Fabian on his bed.jpg
rpatel
07-24 12:08 PM
I concur with the fact that manner in which the law is written/interpreted currently, its going to be an uphill task to convince the USCIS of letting us file I485 without a visa number available. Did the core group make any effort in this direction or is it their foregone conclusion that its non starter at all?
I believe we should try to make an effort in this direction however small the chance of success may be. My reasons are following:
1. Even if the USCIS director might not have an authority to change the procedure without congressional intervention first, the effort required to convince a congress man/ congressional committe on this issue will be smaller compared to pushing them to take up SKIL immediately.
2. I dont know if Dept of Homeland Security might have any say in this but again we can try getting an audience with Negroponte to appraise him of the situation.
3. Thirdly since CIR/SKIL are currently in dormant stage, coregroup/volunteers might be more open to pursuing low potential/high yield effort like this one is.
I believe we should try to make an effort in this direction however small the chance of success may be. My reasons are following:
1. Even if the USCIS director might not have an authority to change the procedure without congressional intervention first, the effort required to convince a congress man/ congressional committe on this issue will be smaller compared to pushing them to take up SKIL immediately.
2. I dont know if Dept of Homeland Security might have any say in this but again we can try getting an audience with Negroponte to appraise him of the situation.
3. Thirdly since CIR/SKIL are currently in dormant stage, coregroup/volunteers might be more open to pursuing low potential/high yield effort like this one is.
more...
house house of anubis fabian. house of anubis fabian. house of anubis fabian.
ajthakur
07-15 02:30 PM
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.
How much time do you have to respond to the RFE ? Do you have to provide pay stubs too from your old employer ?
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.
How much time do you have to respond to the RFE ? Do you have to provide pay stubs too from your old employer ?
tattoo Watch House of Anubis on Nick
greyhair
09-09 02:36 PM
With republican House there is zero chance of anything happening on any kind of immigration bill. Nothing other than border security will be taken up. It will be best to kiss good bye to GC dreams if republicans win the House.
more...
pictures amber and fabian
GCard_Dream
12-13 11:46 AM
I should have known this. The procedure is right on the IV home page. Does anyone know when the next conference call is?
How to submit your questions:
Please read the disclaimer below before submitting your questions via email.Please provide us with the following information, preferably in the following format, and keep it consise and crisp:
Email with Subject Line saying : Seeking Legal Opinion.
Email Address: legal_advise@immigrationvoice.org
Your Info: Please mention your first Name, City and State, so that we can use it to announce your question in the call. That way, your question would be distinguished from similar sounding questions.
Your Country of Citizenship: If your spouse is from a country other than yours, please specify both your countries of citizenship
Your Questions: Provide some clear background. Avoid questions with long and complicated case-specific situations that are like "Can I do X? If yes then is option A or option B better? If option A then can I file this? IF option B then can I file this? If B fails then can I refile A?". Such flow-chart and if-then-else type questions would be taken up only if time is left and attorney is comfortable in answering questions with limited information of your situation.
How to submit your questions:
Please read the disclaimer below before submitting your questions via email.Please provide us with the following information, preferably in the following format, and keep it consise and crisp:
Email with Subject Line saying : Seeking Legal Opinion.
Email Address: legal_advise@immigrationvoice.org
Your Info: Please mention your first Name, City and State, so that we can use it to announce your question in the call. That way, your question would be distinguished from similar sounding questions.
Your Country of Citizenship: If your spouse is from a country other than yours, please specify both your countries of citizenship
Your Questions: Provide some clear background. Avoid questions with long and complicated case-specific situations that are like "Can I do X? If yes then is option A or option B better? If option A then can I file this? IF option B then can I file this? If B fails then can I refile A?". Such flow-chart and if-then-else type questions would be taken up only if time is left and attorney is comfortable in answering questions with limited information of your situation.
dresses House+of+anubis+amber+and+
cowboy
07-18 11:14 AM
My case was sent by my attorney June 29th (current July bulletin) USPS certified mail.
As per USPS online tracking record it was delivered July 2nd 12.45 PM.
No receipt yet. So far sounds okay.
But I got the copy of actual delivery receipt stamped by F.Heinauer (Director NSC USCIS) with the date 062907.
It is a stamp so some of their employee clearly has stamped it.
Now I am confused if that’s the receipt date they are going to go with and may reject the application.
And with this many application it may take more than AUG 17th to receive anything back.
I am very sure it was reached on July 2nd. It was only sent June 29th afternoon.
And USPS is telling there is no delivery can reach so fast. According to USPS the guy who might have stamped the delivery did not changed the stamp date from 0629 to 0702 since it was a weekend.
Anybody in the same situation? Any advice?
Thanks
As per USPS online tracking record it was delivered July 2nd 12.45 PM.
No receipt yet. So far sounds okay.
But I got the copy of actual delivery receipt stamped by F.Heinauer (Director NSC USCIS) with the date 062907.
It is a stamp so some of their employee clearly has stamped it.
Now I am confused if that’s the receipt date they are going to go with and may reject the application.
And with this many application it may take more than AUG 17th to receive anything back.
I am very sure it was reached on July 2nd. It was only sent June 29th afternoon.
And USPS is telling there is no delivery can reach so fast. According to USPS the guy who might have stamped the delivery did not changed the stamp date from 0629 to 0702 since it was a weekend.
Anybody in the same situation? Any advice?
Thanks
more...
makeup House of Anubis
ajay
04-13 10:12 AM
A very useful piece of information has been brought to our attention by shiankuraaf.
Thank you very much!
http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/LPR08.shtm
Table 6 Persons Obtaining Legal Permanent Resident Status by Type and Major Class of Admission: Fiscal Years 1999 to 2008
http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/YrBk04Im.shtm
Table 4 Immigrants admitted by type and selected class of admission: fiscal years 1986-2004
Employment-based preferences (Total Number)
Year QUOTA ISSUED Unused/Excessively used
1986 140000 56617 83383
1987 140000 57519 82481
1988 140000 58727 81273
1989 140000 57741 82259
1990 140000 58192 81808
1991 140000 59525 80475
1992 140000 116198 23802
1993 140000 147012 -7012
1994 140000 123291 16709
1995 140000 85336 54664
1996 140000 117499 22501
1997 140000 90607 49393
1998 140000 77517 62483
1999 140000 56678 83322
2000 140000 106642 33358
2001 140000 178702 -38702
2002 140000 173814 -33814
2003 140000 81727 58273
2004 140000 155330 -15330
2005 140000 246877 -106877
2006 140000 159081 -19081
2007 140000 162176 -22176
2008 140000 166511 -26511
Sum total of the differences from 1986 to 2008: 626,681. Vow!!!
So when looked between the period of 1986 and 2008,
there were a total of 626,681 un-used visa numbers that can be re-captured.
This is based on the BIG assumption that the yearly quota for EB categories is 140,000 from 1986 to 2008.
Does anybody know how to verify this important assumption online --a link to a gov website perhaps?
It would be good to verify when the law specifying 140,000 visa numbers per year was passed and
what were the criteria for visa number usage prior to the existence of the law.
It is clearly a well prepared format and nobody has brought this kind of helpful information to our group. We would need people like you and I am sure I will also support this if we are aggressively pursuing it. But again as somebody here said in this discussion that we should be careful about the seriousness of the situation being counted by the lawmakers.
Kudos to you.
Thank you very much!
http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/LPR08.shtm
Table 6 Persons Obtaining Legal Permanent Resident Status by Type and Major Class of Admission: Fiscal Years 1999 to 2008
http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/YrBk04Im.shtm
Table 4 Immigrants admitted by type and selected class of admission: fiscal years 1986-2004
Employment-based preferences (Total Number)
Year QUOTA ISSUED Unused/Excessively used
1986 140000 56617 83383
1987 140000 57519 82481
1988 140000 58727 81273
1989 140000 57741 82259
1990 140000 58192 81808
1991 140000 59525 80475
1992 140000 116198 23802
1993 140000 147012 -7012
1994 140000 123291 16709
1995 140000 85336 54664
1996 140000 117499 22501
1997 140000 90607 49393
1998 140000 77517 62483
1999 140000 56678 83322
2000 140000 106642 33358
2001 140000 178702 -38702
2002 140000 173814 -33814
2003 140000 81727 58273
2004 140000 155330 -15330
2005 140000 246877 -106877
2006 140000 159081 -19081
2007 140000 162176 -22176
2008 140000 166511 -26511
Sum total of the differences from 1986 to 2008: 626,681. Vow!!!
So when looked between the period of 1986 and 2008,
there were a total of 626,681 un-used visa numbers that can be re-captured.
This is based on the BIG assumption that the yearly quota for EB categories is 140,000 from 1986 to 2008.
Does anybody know how to verify this important assumption online --a link to a gov website perhaps?
It would be good to verify when the law specifying 140,000 visa numbers per year was passed and
what were the criteria for visa number usage prior to the existence of the law.
It is clearly a well prepared format and nobody has brought this kind of helpful information to our group. We would need people like you and I am sure I will also support this if we are aggressively pursuing it. But again as somebody here said in this discussion that we should be careful about the seriousness of the situation being counted by the lawmakers.
Kudos to you.
girlfriend house of anubis fabian.
pcjandyala
09-26 11:01 PM
Dear Reader,
Thank you for your interest in FSB. We admit that there was a
mischaracterization of the Capitol Hill rally in the story and it was
corrected as soon we realized the error.
We have changed the story to correctly identify the mission as a
protest of
the long delays in securing green cards for highly-skilled workers
already
in the U.S.
We will work to avoid errors like this in the future.
Best regards,
FSB
Thank you for your interest in FSB. We admit that there was a
mischaracterization of the Capitol Hill rally in the story and it was
corrected as soon we realized the error.
We have changed the story to correctly identify the mission as a
protest of
the long delays in securing green cards for highly-skilled workers
already
in the U.S.
We will work to avoid errors like this in the future.
Best regards,
FSB
hairstyles Interesting episode, as fabian
optimystic
03-18 03:47 PM
Just a question out of curiosity....why would someone choose 'taliban' as a login handle, knowing fully well the kind of unneccessary negative attention one can get. I do fully respect the individual's choice to choose her/her own id but just curious...And to jog the curiosity even more , this member seems to be tagged as 'banned' now.. :D...did the admins not like the chosen handle as well !!
No personal jabs here....but think of the headlines any reporter following IV or in general immigration activities can come up with when he/she sees such a login id :D
No personal jabs here....but think of the headlines any reporter following IV or in general immigration activities can come up with when he/she sees such a login id :D
delax
07-13 08:40 AM
Guys ! ! ! ! AT this stage let's take all the help we get from any possible source. Although i agree that Murthy is trying to stab in to the fame/sucess in this fabulous effort by IV, but it's better to add on more Voices to this cause...
The whole GC Seekercommunity knows that IV played a very big role in creating a public awareness and making people talk. Let's not bother commenting on Murthy's evil intentions...
"Evil Intentions" - Again - Would the Mahatma use these words before asking himself a few questions? :)
The whole GC Seekercommunity knows that IV played a very big role in creating a public awareness and making people talk. Let's not bother commenting on Murthy's evil intentions...
"Evil Intentions" - Again - Would the Mahatma use these words before asking himself a few questions? :)
immigrant2007
09-10 02:06 PM
They can make a category current when Demand < Supply. So once all I-485s prior to 2007 are approved the monthly demand data they publish will show demand Prior to CY2011 = 200. So unless they use approved I-140 to determine demand , DOS will make the dates current(even if for 1 month). As long as USCIS uses pending I-485 data to determine demand, the July 2007 fiasco will keep on repeating every 3-4 years. The key here is to have USCIS provide the actual demand (people with approved I-140s). It was mentioned somewhere that the current USCIS database is not capable of sorting the I-140s by country of chargebility and hence the I-140 data can't be used to determine per country demand.
If they are giving this reason of not being able to sort 140s then they are really stupid or lying
If they are giving this reason of not being able to sort 140s then they are really stupid or lying
No comments:
Post a Comment