bajjuri77
03-09 10:53 AM
Hi,
I have 6,355 miles from Delta. I want to donate these miles to someone who is travelling to DC. Please let me know if I can do this and how to do it.
Thank you and good luck to you all.
I have 6,355 miles from Delta. I want to donate these miles to someone who is travelling to DC. Please let me know if I can do this and how to do it.
Thank you and good luck to you all.
wallpaper Imagenes Anime: Angeles☆
qesehmk
02-11 08:23 PM
>> Why be rude
My apologies if my post reflected that. My intention was never that.
.
That's ok. But yes I agree that there probably was no FB spillover in 09.
Regarding assigned but not used visa number .... my guess is they are completely wasted and are not eligible for spillover. On the unused (i,e. unassigned numbers that stay with DOS) are spilled over to other category (FB to EB and EB to FB).
But this is my understanding .... not any official information :-)
My apologies if my post reflected that. My intention was never that.
.
That's ok. But yes I agree that there probably was no FB spillover in 09.
Regarding assigned but not used visa number .... my guess is they are completely wasted and are not eligible for spillover. On the unused (i,e. unassigned numbers that stay with DOS) are spilled over to other category (FB to EB and EB to FB).
But this is my understanding .... not any official information :-)
gimme_GC2006
07-15 11:12 AM
Is your case still @ Local Office
I think so..atleast there were no LUDs
Thats actually a good question..now I am thinking :confused:
I think so..atleast there were no LUDs
Thats actually a good question..now I am thinking :confused:
2011 angeles de amor anime.
gc_lover
07-18 08:00 AM
Hi Guys,
Please post any July 2nd cases on this thread so that we all know if there really are any rejections. All I heard in the past few days was "A friend of mine got rejected on 2nd... My friend's friend got his rejected..Somebody got rejected..."
I didn't see a single post from anyone who got their OWN 485 REJECTED when they filed on July 2nd.
So please post your information as to when your app is received at USCIS.
Mine reached USCIS on July 2, 2007 @ 10AM via FEDEX.
Thanks.
Mine reached on July 2nd 9:01 AM. I don't think they must have rejected any application. I think, if someone is saying "rejected" means USCIS refused to accept the fedex, in which case package should be returned back to lawyers in 3/4 days.
If your package was accepeted by USCIS then it would be on hold and based on yesterday's news, now it should be ready for processing. I am checking this with couple of lawyers and I will update this thread with anything I find out.
Please post any July 2nd cases on this thread so that we all know if there really are any rejections. All I heard in the past few days was "A friend of mine got rejected on 2nd... My friend's friend got his rejected..Somebody got rejected..."
I didn't see a single post from anyone who got their OWN 485 REJECTED when they filed on July 2nd.
So please post your information as to when your app is received at USCIS.
Mine reached USCIS on July 2, 2007 @ 10AM via FEDEX.
Thanks.
Mine reached on July 2nd 9:01 AM. I don't think they must have rejected any application. I think, if someone is saying "rejected" means USCIS refused to accept the fedex, in which case package should be returned back to lawyers in 3/4 days.
If your package was accepeted by USCIS then it would be on hold and based on yesterday's news, now it should be ready for processing. I am checking this with couple of lawyers and I will update this thread with anything I find out.
more...
Dhundhun
07-13 11:48 PM
I read somewhere that now all the applications - 485/EAD/AP, for one particular applicant, are adjudicated by the same officer. This is a new process change to improve efficiency. I think the article I read indicated that it was already working that way at TSC.
Unfortunately, i don't have the link, but I will post it if i come across it.
My case (I485) is with NSC. The e-filed EAD renewal also got LIN number, but (may be due to load distribution) it is being handled by MSC.
Does this imply everything will be handled by MSC instead of TSC? I think source article is needed to analyze, what is happening.
Unfortunately, i don't have the link, but I will post it if i come across it.
My case (I485) is with NSC. The e-filed EAD renewal also got LIN number, but (may be due to load distribution) it is being handled by MSC.
Does this imply everything will be handled by MSC instead of TSC? I think source article is needed to analyze, what is happening.
forever_waiting
02-16 04:03 PM
Completely understand.
On a related note, as pappu pointed out on another thread, it would be really nice if senior members, in general, who have got GCs in the past years continue to stay involved since their past advocacy experience is greatly valuable. Several such senior members have continued to stay involved but some have taken a back seat after "getting greened". Ideally, it should be the opposite - shouldnt getting a GC inspire us to be further involved in the process and get the issue resolved?
I see and agree with what you say. I sponsored myself the last 2 times I went for advocacy days but this time the situation is different - I've got my green card already and therefore finding it difficult to justify the expenses to my wife.
On a related note, as pappu pointed out on another thread, it would be really nice if senior members, in general, who have got GCs in the past years continue to stay involved since their past advocacy experience is greatly valuable. Several such senior members have continued to stay involved but some have taken a back seat after "getting greened". Ideally, it should be the opposite - shouldnt getting a GC inspire us to be further involved in the process and get the issue resolved?
I see and agree with what you say. I sponsored myself the last 2 times I went for advocacy days but this time the situation is different - I've got my green card already and therefore finding it difficult to justify the expenses to my wife.
more...
nixstor
07-04 09:33 PM
[QUOTE=nixstor]Excellent analysis but it does have flaws
I am sure you might have read this from murthy's website (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_dosebn.html) or not, but DOS/CA/VO officials shared this piece with them. As per the above article, final quarter quota should not open until Jul 2nd. I understand that agencies can implement and interpret certain stuff, but you cannot interpret and implement one thing on Jun 13th and another on Jul 2nd. If its written into law, that the quarterly allocation is a must, USCIS is in violation and DOS/CA/VO as well for not policing them of visa number usage.
"Essentially, the numbers are spread out during the first three quarters and whatever is left is available during the last quarter"
On reading the Murthy article it appears that the biggest mistake USCIS committed was using up the visa numbers before the 4th qtr began on 7/2/07.
USCIS did it other way around...desparately rushed to use up the numbers before the 4th qtr began....only explanation is to avoid doing additional paperwork for the July filers...
Its not the paper work guys. They will love the money on EAD & AP. Its the huge backlog that will remain for ever on their hump unless a recapture occurs. Due to lack of communication or what ever, DOS made every category current. The only way they can escape from accepting our applications is by using up all numbers. Thats what they essentially did. AFAIK, DOS gets updates from USCIS and CP's across the world about the number of visas they have used in the past month. DOS then prepares the VB. Assuming USCIS told DOS that they have used 80/90K for the fiscal year so far, DOS is left with 60/50K for the last quarter of the fiscal year. How can DOS imagine/understand availability of 50/60k visas to be less demand for EB categories? This is what exactly the initial July VB said and we were all stupefied. They know this in and out and a simple request for pending number of 485's from years, approved & pending 140's since retrogression hit & that do not have a adjoining 485 should come out conservatively to 150-200K. Does DOS ask this as a part of their monthly information gathering process? Yes, they does is the simple answer. Then what led to the making VB current is the esoteric Q here. USCIS will have allocated the numbers at their own pace if the VB was not made current. As the VB was made current, USCIS was forced to use all the numbers and say that there are no numbers. Unless, we hear more stuff from the offices of DOS/USCIS in response to Rep Lofgren, every thing will be speculation.
I am sure you might have read this from murthy's website (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_dosebn.html) or not, but DOS/CA/VO officials shared this piece with them. As per the above article, final quarter quota should not open until Jul 2nd. I understand that agencies can implement and interpret certain stuff, but you cannot interpret and implement one thing on Jun 13th and another on Jul 2nd. If its written into law, that the quarterly allocation is a must, USCIS is in violation and DOS/CA/VO as well for not policing them of visa number usage.
"Essentially, the numbers are spread out during the first three quarters and whatever is left is available during the last quarter"
On reading the Murthy article it appears that the biggest mistake USCIS committed was using up the visa numbers before the 4th qtr began on 7/2/07.
USCIS did it other way around...desparately rushed to use up the numbers before the 4th qtr began....only explanation is to avoid doing additional paperwork for the July filers...
Its not the paper work guys. They will love the money on EAD & AP. Its the huge backlog that will remain for ever on their hump unless a recapture occurs. Due to lack of communication or what ever, DOS made every category current. The only way they can escape from accepting our applications is by using up all numbers. Thats what they essentially did. AFAIK, DOS gets updates from USCIS and CP's across the world about the number of visas they have used in the past month. DOS then prepares the VB. Assuming USCIS told DOS that they have used 80/90K for the fiscal year so far, DOS is left with 60/50K for the last quarter of the fiscal year. How can DOS imagine/understand availability of 50/60k visas to be less demand for EB categories? This is what exactly the initial July VB said and we were all stupefied. They know this in and out and a simple request for pending number of 485's from years, approved & pending 140's since retrogression hit & that do not have a adjoining 485 should come out conservatively to 150-200K. Does DOS ask this as a part of their monthly information gathering process? Yes, they does is the simple answer. Then what led to the making VB current is the esoteric Q here. USCIS will have allocated the numbers at their own pace if the VB was not made current. As the VB was made current, USCIS was forced to use all the numbers and say that there are no numbers. Unless, we hear more stuff from the offices of DOS/USCIS in response to Rep Lofgren, every thing will be speculation.
2010 Imagenes De Angeles Anime.
abhijitp
07-25 02:29 PM
http://www.google.com/answers/threadview?id=559556
If an applicant for adjustment wishes to take a new job in the same
or similar occupational classification at the job that was the basis
of his or her employment-based I-140 AND the I-485 has been pending
180 days or more, the new employer may be substituted into the
existing I-485 application without disrupting the application at all.
This is accomplished very easily - NO new petition and no new fees.
Step 1: The applicant notifies INS of the change in intent by letter.
Step 2: The Service should then make a request for a letter of
employment from the new employer.
Voila! Done deal."
http://www.ilw.com/articles/2001,0705-Latour.shtm
If an applicant for adjustment wishes to take a new job in the same
or similar occupational classification at the job that was the basis
of his or her employment-based I-140 AND the I-485 has been pending
180 days or more, the new employer may be substituted into the
existing I-485 application without disrupting the application at all.
This is accomplished very easily - NO new petition and no new fees.
Step 1: The applicant notifies INS of the change in intent by letter.
Step 2: The Service should then make a request for a letter of
employment from the new employer.
Voila! Done deal."
http://www.ilw.com/articles/2001,0705-Latour.shtm
more...
saveimmigration
01-16 09:29 PM
GC process is like a monkey on the shoulder. You only realize when he gets off, that how much burden you were carrying all along.
hair girlfriend mas angeles anime
StarSun
02-07 12:47 PM
IV calls for a couple of volunteers to collect the miles and purchase tickets to confirmed participants. Please contact me.
more...
DDD
03-13 06:44 PM
I voted eilsoe. The reason being his model and render seems more fundamentally sound. Thirdworldwoman's was cool but the proportions were off. All in good work all of ya'll
hot imagenes de angeles anime.
gauravster
11-12 04:58 PM
WRONG.
YOU are an EB2 India guy for sure and your PD is close.
If spillover happens, all visas will get used up by EB2 India only. EB3 India gets nothing. There are way too many Indians in the system. Even if something is left from EB2 India, EB3 ROW will get breadcrums.
EB3 India gets nothing. So stop giving wrong logic. I will oppose IV helping EB2 guys with close priority dates and not caring about everyone else.
If spillover happens, it will go to EB2 India sure. But getting the visas used is better than having them wasted. Also, though remote, everyone in EB3 does have a remote chance that at sometime, they might be ported to EB2. For example, those who have EAD, but working with a different employer now (after getting EAD) can ask for the employer to file a new application and be eligible for EB2. Some in same company may also be able to apply for porting.
There is no problem in having multiple fronts of attack to the problem.
YOU are an EB2 India guy for sure and your PD is close.
If spillover happens, all visas will get used up by EB2 India only. EB3 India gets nothing. There are way too many Indians in the system. Even if something is left from EB2 India, EB3 ROW will get breadcrums.
EB3 India gets nothing. So stop giving wrong logic. I will oppose IV helping EB2 guys with close priority dates and not caring about everyone else.
If spillover happens, it will go to EB2 India sure. But getting the visas used is better than having them wasted. Also, though remote, everyone in EB3 does have a remote chance that at sometime, they might be ported to EB2. For example, those who have EAD, but working with a different employer now (after getting EAD) can ask for the employer to file a new application and be eligible for EB2. Some in same company may also be able to apply for porting.
There is no problem in having multiple fronts of attack to the problem.
more...
house angeles de amor anime. angel
ItIsNotFunny
04-04 09:22 AM
I think this Bill will die like 2006 SKIL bill.
I don't think so. Here is my view:
I believe GC issue is root cause of the problem. Because people can not get GC for 6-7 years, employers (body-shoppers in real words) wants only H1 holder as they will work as slaves with them for years due to GC. This encourages them only to take H1B holders and not GC holders or citizens on payroll.
If government removes retrogression, immediately 80% of the body-shoppers (blood suckers in real words) have to close their shops and H1 quota will be available to all.
Common sense is not common.
I don't think so. Here is my view:
I believe GC issue is root cause of the problem. Because people can not get GC for 6-7 years, employers (body-shoppers in real words) wants only H1 holder as they will work as slaves with them for years due to GC. This encourages them only to take H1B holders and not GC holders or citizens on payroll.
If government removes retrogression, immediately 80% of the body-shoppers (blood suckers in real words) have to close their shops and H1 quota will be available to all.
Common sense is not common.
tattoo imagenes de angeles anime.
andycool
03-16 02:04 PM
141,020 visa numbers used in FY2009
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV.pdf
Look at the last page.
The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is 140,000. So the usage was actually more.
__________________
Not a legal advice.
Hello Desi,
"Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by documentarily qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation, that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may require the establishment of an earlier cut-off date than that which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
Furthermore, Section 202(a)(2) reads, �2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. Subject to paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed seven percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or two percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.� The seven percent per-country limit specified in INA 202(a)(2) is considered to be for both Family-sponsored and Employment-based numbers combined.
Allocation of visa numbers under Section 202(e) is accomplished as follows:
1. If based on historical patterns or current demand it appears that during a fiscal year number use by aliens chargeable to a particular country will exceed the per-country numerical limit for both the Family and Employment preferences combined, that country would be considered oversubscribed. Both the Family and Employment preferences would be subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1).
2. Sometimes during a fiscal year it may become apparent that because of a lack of demand in the Family preferences, number use by aliens chargeable to an oversubscribed country will be well within the per-country numerical limit. In such case the excess Family numbers would be made available to the Employment preferences subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1). Each of the first three Employment categories would receive 28.6% of the excess numbers, and each of the Fourth and Fifth preference categories 7.1%. (Fall-across would likewise apply if an oversubscribed country lacked sufficient demand in the Employment preferences but had excess demand in the Family preferences.)
If a foreign state other than an oversubscribed country has little Family preference demand but considerable Employment preference demand, the otherwise unused Family numbers fall across to Employment (and vice versa) for purposes of that foreign state�s annual numerical limit. For example, in FY-2009 South Korea used a grand total of 15,899 Family and Employment preference numbers, of which 1,688 were Family numbers and 14,211 were Employment numbers. This grand total was well within the FY-2009 per-country numerical limit of 25,620 Family and Employment numbers combined, so South Korea was not oversubscribed. The unused Family numbers were distributed within the Employment categories, allowing South Korea to be considerably over the 9,800 Employment limit which would have been in effect had it been an oversubscribed country.
This is from April Visa Bulletin , according to this S korea got 14,211 visas from FB ( spill over from FB - EB) then dont you think the total EB visas issued in 2009 should be around 150000 instead of 141000....
I am little confused...
your comment will be greatly appreciated ;)
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV.pdf
Look at the last page.
The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is 140,000. So the usage was actually more.
__________________
Not a legal advice.
Hello Desi,
"Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by documentarily qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation, that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may require the establishment of an earlier cut-off date than that which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
Furthermore, Section 202(a)(2) reads, �2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. Subject to paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed seven percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or two percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.� The seven percent per-country limit specified in INA 202(a)(2) is considered to be for both Family-sponsored and Employment-based numbers combined.
Allocation of visa numbers under Section 202(e) is accomplished as follows:
1. If based on historical patterns or current demand it appears that during a fiscal year number use by aliens chargeable to a particular country will exceed the per-country numerical limit for both the Family and Employment preferences combined, that country would be considered oversubscribed. Both the Family and Employment preferences would be subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1).
2. Sometimes during a fiscal year it may become apparent that because of a lack of demand in the Family preferences, number use by aliens chargeable to an oversubscribed country will be well within the per-country numerical limit. In such case the excess Family numbers would be made available to the Employment preferences subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1). Each of the first three Employment categories would receive 28.6% of the excess numbers, and each of the Fourth and Fifth preference categories 7.1%. (Fall-across would likewise apply if an oversubscribed country lacked sufficient demand in the Employment preferences but had excess demand in the Family preferences.)
If a foreign state other than an oversubscribed country has little Family preference demand but considerable Employment preference demand, the otherwise unused Family numbers fall across to Employment (and vice versa) for purposes of that foreign state�s annual numerical limit. For example, in FY-2009 South Korea used a grand total of 15,899 Family and Employment preference numbers, of which 1,688 were Family numbers and 14,211 were Employment numbers. This grand total was well within the FY-2009 per-country numerical limit of 25,620 Family and Employment numbers combined, so South Korea was not oversubscribed. The unused Family numbers were distributed within the Employment categories, allowing South Korea to be considerably over the 9,800 Employment limit which would have been in effect had it been an oversubscribed country.
This is from April Visa Bulletin , according to this S korea got 14,211 visas from FB ( spill over from FB - EB) then dont you think the total EB visas issued in 2009 should be around 150000 instead of 141000....
I am little confused...
your comment will be greatly appreciated ;)
more...
pictures imagenes de angeles anime.
gimme Green!!
07-01 10:46 AM
It is possible for every city to have at least one usps office to be open on Sunday. They have a different day off.
Just go to the USPS website and locate an office that is open on Sun.
I live in the Detroit area. I know atleast 2 postoffices that are open 24 hours.
Just go to the USPS website and locate an office that is open on Sun.
I live in the Detroit area. I know atleast 2 postoffices that are open 24 hours.
dresses angeles gt;gt; Anime Foros
GCard_Dream
01-17 02:18 PM
anurakt,
The intent of the message is appropriate but the presentation isn't. I know core team is very frustrated with the lack to contribution and it's perfectly understandable but language like this will only turn more people off and that won't help anyone.
I agree with the post earlier that may be you should just delete your post for the good of the community and I am sure you know that.
The intent of the message is appropriate but the presentation isn't. I know core team is very frustrated with the lack to contribution and it's perfectly understandable but language like this will only turn more people off and that won't help anyone.
I agree with the post earlier that may be you should just delete your post for the good of the community and I am sure you know that.
more...
makeup imagenes de angeles anime.
vin13
02-03 06:40 PM
I just watched an advertisement from americanworker.org on CNN
It is a negative campaign on legal foreign workers taking away american jobs. The website also has the commercial that was aired on CNN today.
Just an FYI
It is a negative campaign on legal foreign workers taking away american jobs. The website also has the commercial that was aired on CNN today.
Just an FYI
girlfriend anime angel wallpaper
Ahimsa
11-22 08:11 AM
... You cannot guarantee 2 years from now for those who applied in 2003 and 2004 till getting GC...
... My PD is in 2003 and I am EB-3 ROW but I don't think it will happen in two years in this pace...
Until now (from June 2005) Schedule A EB3 applicants were prioritized in GC number allocations, making the H-1B EB3 applicants' priority dates stayed put.
From Jan 2007 onwards there will be no priority for Schedule A. So I expect the EB3 dates for all countries to move from Jan 2007 onwards. 2003 and 2004 applicants may be able to file 485 with an available GC number in 2 years but may get stuck in the FBI name check.
... My PD is in 2003 and I am EB-3 ROW but I don't think it will happen in two years in this pace...
Until now (from June 2005) Schedule A EB3 applicants were prioritized in GC number allocations, making the H-1B EB3 applicants' priority dates stayed put.
From Jan 2007 onwards there will be no priority for Schedule A. So I expect the EB3 dates for all countries to move from Jan 2007 onwards. 2003 and 2004 applicants may be able to file 485 with an available GC number in 2 years but may get stuck in the FBI name check.
hairstyles Soniangel - Angeles Anime
new_gc
12-17 03:03 PM
i have no idea what is in store for me!!!!!!!!!
Khujaokutta
03-10 07:40 PM
I too agree that the flood gates will open soon...only that the gurkha who controls the gates is opening them so slowly that every bullietien there is no change or miniscule change.
We need to get the watchman to open the flood gates....:D...otherwise we will be saying this even after one year...that the gates will open soon.....when actually they open so little that its like a RAMSAY horror movie (Bandh DArwaza or something)
We need to get the watchman to open the flood gates....:D...otherwise we will be saying this even after one year...that the gates will open soon.....when actually they open so little that its like a RAMSAY horror movie (Bandh DArwaza or something)
feedfront
09-14 12:21 PM
Current PD folks, if you get RFE please share your RFE here..
No comments:
Post a Comment