lonedesi
08-05 08:45 AM
Members, who were complaining about the slow processing of I-140's at TSC & NSC, now is the time to stand up and get counted. Please take the time to review the letter and then mail the DHS Form 7001 along with the letter to USCIS Ombudsman's office.
Members who have already done so, please encourage others suffering from these delays to join this campaign to make it effective. Also, please post on this thread once you have mailed the letters, so that others get motivated to join.
Members who have already done so, please encourage others suffering from these delays to join this campaign to make it effective. Also, please post on this thread once you have mailed the letters, so that others get motivated to join.
priti8888
07-18 04:04 PM
I am still confused in regards to who whould be eligible for a visa number.
For instance (assumption:all other factors same for both A and B(name check, country etc)
Senario A
EB3
PD 2004
485 receipt date 2005
OR
Senario B
EB3
PD 2003
485 receipt date 2006
So under present circumstances when everything is current, who whould get alloted a visa number first??
For instance (assumption:all other factors same for both A and B(name check, country etc)
Senario A
EB3
PD 2004
485 receipt date 2005
OR
Senario B
EB3
PD 2003
485 receipt date 2006
So under present circumstances when everything is current, who whould get alloted a visa number first??
stldude
08-07 01:08 PM
What's the source of of this information... Is this u'r guess or from any other source ???
July 2nd filers can expect their receipts by Friday(8/10) or Monday(8/13). It will take 3 days for them to just process July 2nd receipts.
July 2nd filers can expect their receipts by Friday(8/10) or Monday(8/13). It will take 3 days for them to just process July 2nd receipts.
ps57002
09-02 12:21 PM
Thanks all.
I'm in my mid thirties now. I came as a teen, fifteen.
So I wonder....should the dream act come through....could it work in my favor too lol? I came through no choice of my own (though legally) with my parents....
And do i get a GC for beating everyone on here :)
j/k.
I'm in my mid thirties now. I came as a teen, fifteen.
So I wonder....should the dream act come through....could it work in my favor too lol? I came through no choice of my own (though legally) with my parents....
And do i get a GC for beating everyone on here :)
j/k.
more...
virtual55
09-13 04:35 PM
http://www.andhraheadlines.com/World/BrowseArticle.aspx?ArtID=2303
sampath
04-25 01:38 PM
The priority date based on the person first entering the US on H1B visa, or converting to a H1 status from any other visa status in the US is an excellent one.
This eliminates all the issues that H1Bs face today when applying for a GC. Employer portability, Visa retrogression etc ( and not to mention employer manipulation of H1Bs workers in delaying to file GCs ) are applied in fairness to everyone. This takes the fear out of H1B workers to change jobs at will without regard to negative impact on their pending GC applications..
Way to go.. Why can't IV propose to add this one liner to any of the impending amendments or find another lawmaker to support this which can alleviate most issues faced by H1Bs today.
This eliminates all the issues that H1Bs face today when applying for a GC. Employer portability, Visa retrogression etc ( and not to mention employer manipulation of H1Bs workers in delaying to file GCs ) are applied in fairness to everyone. This takes the fear out of H1B workers to change jobs at will without regard to negative impact on their pending GC applications..
Way to go.. Why can't IV propose to add this one liner to any of the impending amendments or find another lawmaker to support this which can alleviate most issues faced by H1Bs today.
more...
andy garcia
10-01 10:23 AM
Some unused EB #s were recaptured for families in following year. For example, in 1994 there were 29,430 (column 2) unused EB #s. However, 27,721 (= 253,721 (column 3) - 226,000 (family quota)) of these #s were recaptured for families. Thus, only 29,430 - 27,721 = 1,709 (column 4) were un-recaptured.
Also, 50,000 unused EB #s from 01-04 were recaptured for Schedule A.
Finally, unused EB #s in 99 and 00 were recaptured, hopefully for EB.
Thus, unused EB #s are more important then un-recaptured EB #s (mentioned above) since some of them have not been recaptured for EB.
The unused EB #s is 506,384 (total column 2) - 98,941 (99 recaptured for EB) - 31,098 (00 recaptured for EB) = 376, 345
Annual Report to Congress June 2007 (http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/CISOMB_Annual_Report_2007.pdf)
Macaca;
Here is where the confusion lies with respect to unused, wasted, etc.
The Immigration Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-649) restructured the immigrant categories of admission and made other modifications to the Immigration and Nationality Act.
The 1990 Act divided the preference classes into two general categories: family-sponsored(FS) and
employment-based(EB). Limits on the number of visas issued in these two categories are determined annually.
FS limits�The worldwide level for FS preferences is calculated as:
480,000 minus the number of aliens who were issued visas or adjusted to legal permanent residence in the previous fiscal year as
immediate relatives of U.S.citizens
children born subsequent to the issuance of a visa to an accompanying parent
children born abroad to lawful permanent residents on temporary trips abroad
plus unused EB preferences in the previous fiscal year.
The 1990 Act specifies that the family-sponsored limit may not go below a minimum of 226,000 in any year.
EB limits�The 1990 Act specifies that the worldwide limit on EB preference immigrants is equal to 140,000 plus unused FS-preference visas in the previous year.
Also, 50,000 unused EB #s from 01-04 were recaptured for Schedule A.
Finally, unused EB #s in 99 and 00 were recaptured, hopefully for EB.
Thus, unused EB #s are more important then un-recaptured EB #s (mentioned above) since some of them have not been recaptured for EB.
The unused EB #s is 506,384 (total column 2) - 98,941 (99 recaptured for EB) - 31,098 (00 recaptured for EB) = 376, 345
Annual Report to Congress June 2007 (http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/CISOMB_Annual_Report_2007.pdf)
Macaca;
Here is where the confusion lies with respect to unused, wasted, etc.
The Immigration Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-649) restructured the immigrant categories of admission and made other modifications to the Immigration and Nationality Act.
The 1990 Act divided the preference classes into two general categories: family-sponsored(FS) and
employment-based(EB). Limits on the number of visas issued in these two categories are determined annually.
FS limits�The worldwide level for FS preferences is calculated as:
480,000 minus the number of aliens who were issued visas or adjusted to legal permanent residence in the previous fiscal year as
immediate relatives of U.S.citizens
children born subsequent to the issuance of a visa to an accompanying parent
children born abroad to lawful permanent residents on temporary trips abroad
plus unused EB preferences in the previous fiscal year.
The 1990 Act specifies that the family-sponsored limit may not go below a minimum of 226,000 in any year.
EB limits�The 1990 Act specifies that the worldwide limit on EB preference immigrants is equal to 140,000 plus unused FS-preference visas in the previous year.
Jimi_Hendrix
11-16 06:12 PM
Hi everyone,
I would like to have a conference call this Sunday between 3pm-3:30 pm. Please tell me if this will work out for you all? Please shoot me an e-mail at amitg_2000@hotmail.com with your availability, your phone number and most accessed e-mail account.
Once everyone confirms I will forward some discussion points for the call.
I look foward to hearing back from you.
Thanks,
JH
I would like to have a conference call this Sunday between 3pm-3:30 pm. Please tell me if this will work out for you all? Please shoot me an e-mail at amitg_2000@hotmail.com with your availability, your phone number and most accessed e-mail account.
Once everyone confirms I will forward some discussion points for the call.
I look foward to hearing back from you.
Thanks,
JH
more...
gccube
07-18 05:11 PM
Consider I-485 Processing as a 2 Door Room. Front Door is for people who's PD has been current for the given month and can apply & Back Door is for Adjudicating People who are already applied & still current for that month.
The size of the room depends on what date they retrogress it to. If Cutoff date is say 2002, there are few people in that room who would be ready for adjudication. Instead if cutoff date is say 2006, there will be a huge number of people in the room.
As long as you stay in that room for more month (be current), the more chance you have of getting adjudicated fast, but also depends on how many people are ahead of you per RD.
Assuming that the date is retrogressed from 'C' to 2000 Jan, they start accepting the AOS apps with that PD and then do we assume that they are also working on them or say they donot work on it until the receipt date becomes current.
If the answer to the question above is 'NO' (that is the receipt date has to become current to adjudicate an AOS app, ofcourse PD has to be current too) then why is that USCIS accepting apps with a specified PD cut off date. In this case I am not looking at the people who are already in the room but am wondering why they are letting more people into the room, particularly when there is no room.
If the answer to the question above it 'YES', that means PD does play a significant role in the AOS adjudication process when there is retrogression, in my opinion.
The size of the room depends on what date they retrogress it to. If Cutoff date is say 2002, there are few people in that room who would be ready for adjudication. Instead if cutoff date is say 2006, there will be a huge number of people in the room.
As long as you stay in that room for more month (be current), the more chance you have of getting adjudicated fast, but also depends on how many people are ahead of you per RD.
Assuming that the date is retrogressed from 'C' to 2000 Jan, they start accepting the AOS apps with that PD and then do we assume that they are also working on them or say they donot work on it until the receipt date becomes current.
If the answer to the question above is 'NO' (that is the receipt date has to become current to adjudicate an AOS app, ofcourse PD has to be current too) then why is that USCIS accepting apps with a specified PD cut off date. In this case I am not looking at the people who are already in the room but am wondering why they are letting more people into the room, particularly when there is no room.
If the answer to the question above it 'YES', that means PD does play a significant role in the AOS adjudication process when there is retrogression, in my opinion.
Libra
09-11 09:54 PM
thank you desi_unlucky, you'll be lucky soon :-)
more...
scottsmith
09-15 03:33 PM
Very well said there are ppl like "GCTest", that will start this thread try to divide the whole community instead of supporting HR 5882 & calling all the Committee Members.
There are people that used
1> Labor substitution
2> Worked in LC backlogged state like CA, NY, TX etc but filed in fast moving states like Maine, NH etc..
3> Applied in EB2 when their job requirements wasn't really EB2.
4> Made up five years of experience so as to apply for EB2.
5> Packaged NIIT diploma et al as masters..
Then there are others Who applied in EB2 because they had a masters or genuine experience AND their job demanded EB2. Also people, irrespective of their categories, toiled at BECs.
I would be a bit skeptical about folks that filed EB2 thru a body-shopper or a consulting company. It doesnt mean that EB3s are holier-than-thou and hasnt resorted to fraud.
My point is, the whole system is biased against people who follow the rules.
Unless you play the system ( using the points mentioned above), you have to wait and wait and wait..
At this point, its hard to find out who belonged to the former category and who belonged to the later. Do you think people would come forward and accept?
-Peace
G
There are people that used
1> Labor substitution
2> Worked in LC backlogged state like CA, NY, TX etc but filed in fast moving states like Maine, NH etc..
3> Applied in EB2 when their job requirements wasn't really EB2.
4> Made up five years of experience so as to apply for EB2.
5> Packaged NIIT diploma et al as masters..
Then there are others Who applied in EB2 because they had a masters or genuine experience AND their job demanded EB2. Also people, irrespective of their categories, toiled at BECs.
I would be a bit skeptical about folks that filed EB2 thru a body-shopper or a consulting company. It doesnt mean that EB3s are holier-than-thou and hasnt resorted to fraud.
My point is, the whole system is biased against people who follow the rules.
Unless you play the system ( using the points mentioned above), you have to wait and wait and wait..
At this point, its hard to find out who belonged to the former category and who belonged to the later. Do you think people would come forward and accept?
-Peace
G
Caliber
05-15 03:47 PM
Finally at last today the web site shows that my Labor is certified. I am really glad at it. PBEC has shown us the HELL on earth and though I am 43 years old, I feel like much older than that due these PBEC guys. They never realize that this is our biggest milestone.
My NOF was on Prevailing Wage as my pay was 65K and PBEC wanted to increase it to 87K. But our attorney's have submitted third party surveys and we have given up thinking that PBEC will not agree for it.
I know how hard it is to live without a status. I pray that PBEC guys releases every one from their HELL. Details are in my signature.
My NOF was on Prevailing Wage as my pay was 65K and PBEC wanted to increase it to 87K. But our attorney's have submitted third party surveys and we have given up thinking that PBEC will not agree for it.
I know how hard it is to live without a status. I pray that PBEC guys releases every one from their HELL. Details are in my signature.
more...
ychousa
07-19 12:00 PM
I checked CIS procedure in the following site: http://www.imminfo.com/resources/cissop.html
According to the procedures, until they enter data into their central sytem, it seems it's pretty tough to say that they intervene somewhere and sort out by PD. Section 6: Workload Distribution might be the key to answer our questions, but the section is missing.
So they enter the applications in the order they're received, and each application is given an "RD." The "RD" indeed plays a role in the adjudication: https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=NSC
I wish I got an answer from someone in CIS.
According to the procedures, until they enter data into their central sytem, it seems it's pretty tough to say that they intervene somewhere and sort out by PD. Section 6: Workload Distribution might be the key to answer our questions, but the section is missing.
So they enter the applications in the order they're received, and each application is given an "RD." The "RD" indeed plays a role in the adjudication: https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=NSC
I wish I got an answer from someone in CIS.
pani_6
07-24 07:40 PM
EB-3 I wake up and send the letter out..we need to make relevant authorities aware of our situation. Uncertanity and doom stares us come on EB-3 I lets see some action!
more...
vareddy
07-18 10:00 PM
Joined in July and did one time contribution of $100 today with google checkout :) Google Order #975779329660977
vandanaverdia
09-13 07:16 PM
milind123...
U r doing a great job... I am sure we will have many first time contributors get inspired by your fabulous initiative!
GO IV!!!
U r doing a great job... I am sure we will have many first time contributors get inspired by your fabulous initiative!
GO IV!!!
more...
UKannan
03-03 04:37 PM
Everyone feel like giving up but none of us give up :)
scottsmith
09-15 01:08 PM
GCTest, there is a saying about you in Hindi "Kuttee Kee Dumm 12 Saall Pipe Mee Daal Kee Rakhoo Too Bhee Seedhee Nahee Hootee"
saale bhikari... can you even spell "moron"
saale bhikari... can you even spell "moron"
glus
07-05 12:44 PM
I JUST FAXED DC OFFICES OF THE FOLLOWING SENATORS WITH MY PERSONAL LETTER:
CLINTON FAX: 202-228-0282
CANTWELL FAX: 202-228-0514
SCHUMER FAX: 202-228-3027
KENNEDY FAX: 202-224-2417
CORNYN FAX: 202-228-2856
I will call their offices later and talk about the issue.
CLINTON FAX: 202-228-0282
CANTWELL FAX: 202-228-0514
SCHUMER FAX: 202-228-3027
KENNEDY FAX: 202-224-2417
CORNYN FAX: 202-228-2856
I will call their offices later and talk about the issue.
pappu
08-16 10:11 AM
I happen to be a freelance writer (not a journalist). In response to this thread, I have penned a 2,700 word commentary on the current challenges titled "The Plight of Promise". In order to beef it up with some compelling statistics, can 5 or 6 people respond to this thread with anonymized details of their specific circumstances and how they are suffering. Keep it to 2 or 3 sentences. I will cull out required data points to make the case. For ex:
- AD, a 31 yr old non immigrant worker from Poland with a wife and two kids. Unable to get into stage 3, meanwhile need to change my job and relocate to a specific city where my child's health needs can be taken care of. Unable to do so because...
If anyone would like to get the final edited version, let me know. You will be free to republish it without copyright concerns, subject to attribution.
Lastly, I will be spending a good amount of quality time in this matter. So, I will respectfully ask people to resist their desire to 'nit pick' the pieces. Constructive, candid feedback, of course, is always welcome!
hastily, but sincerely,
obviously
Thanks a lot for the post. pls PM me your contact email and phone and we will be in touch for help on some cases amongst IV members you can use for your piece.
- AD, a 31 yr old non immigrant worker from Poland with a wife and two kids. Unable to get into stage 3, meanwhile need to change my job and relocate to a specific city where my child's health needs can be taken care of. Unable to do so because...
If anyone would like to get the final edited version, let me know. You will be free to republish it without copyright concerns, subject to attribution.
Lastly, I will be spending a good amount of quality time in this matter. So, I will respectfully ask people to resist their desire to 'nit pick' the pieces. Constructive, candid feedback, of course, is always welcome!
hastily, but sincerely,
obviously
Thanks a lot for the post. pls PM me your contact email and phone and we will be in touch for help on some cases amongst IV members you can use for your piece.
mirage
08-18 08:15 AM
Yesterday I filled up the appointment form of my local congressman. I will try if I can meet him and he could probably write to the public officials or could talk to rep. Zo Lofgren. In my opinion if we can somehow inform Rep. Lofgren, she will certainly do something. She seems really(genuinely) concerned for the plight of Green Card seekers...
I would request everybody to find out ways and channels to get this information to her....
grupak/mirage/pani6
i support your efforts and have printed out and sent letters to the people mentioned. Momentum for release of information should build up even if we have 50-100 letters from affected people...otherwise people won't know of EB-3 IND's plight.
I suppose we should followup with phone calls in 15 days to cement our request. We should have a poll on who all has sent the letter and made the call.
I would request everybody to find out ways and channels to get this information to her....
grupak/mirage/pani6
i support your efforts and have printed out and sent letters to the people mentioned. Momentum for release of information should build up even if we have 50-100 letters from affected people...otherwise people won't know of EB-3 IND's plight.
I suppose we should followup with phone calls in 15 days to cement our request. We should have a poll on who all has sent the letter and made the call.
No comments:
Post a Comment