kondur_007
04-10 10:28 AM
Does anyone have numbers for spillover last year category wise? I mean, last year how many EB4, EB5 and EB1 left out visas got spilled over to EB2? Thanks...
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.
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.
wallpaper i love you quotes wallpapers
techmia
07-01 04:40 PM
Everyone is busy partying.
same_old_guy
07-09 04:47 PM
And we are not in deep shit right now ???? Where have you been all the time ?
Why are you so scared ? Is it because you think USCIS wil do harm to you and others ? Well, what the hell it was doing while allocating all the quota in 15 days to avoid the rush ?
I wish USCIS would get down on it's knee and issue an apologies to all those people it's screwed over !
Why are you so scared ? Is it because you think USCIS wil do harm to you and others ? Well, what the hell it was doing while allocating all the quota in 15 days to avoid the rush ?
I wish USCIS would get down on it's knee and issue an apologies to all those people it's screwed over !
2011 love you quotes wallpaper.
onemorecame
10-18 12:38 PM
yes they received RFE and status changed to "Response Review"
more...
rb_248
04-09 07:26 PM
No change. Wohi purani kahaani. Old wine in new bottle.
Old wine tastes good. Does this VB tastes good to you?
Old wine tastes good. Does this VB tastes good to you?
MahaBharatGC
10-22 04:40 PM
:p
All - plz take it easy as this is solely individual opinion.
When a country is prospering means the jobs are getting created. That is what happened until Clinton Era. But I know that this cannot be forever. Every field is going to reach the peak, falls back and hopefully straightens.
Our IT field is somewhat dependent on other industries to create jobs. So, if other industries are all shipping the operations to foreign soil or loosing steam due to competition in free trade how well a country can prosper. You cannot have 100% service oriented country...it is only possible for small countries like Singapore...but not for big countries like US of A where they have plenty of land.
So, my point here is if you want GC you should have job now (EBn) and future. So, if jobs are getting created then you will have job today and tomorrow too.
So, simply saying "I support immigration" does not mean anything. It could be a REAL political statement like our famous Indian politicians. So, at this time I do not believe nobody as this is all still nacent. once someone takes office, we should be ready to push with our goals in mind.
It is good to debate between one another but let us have plans to how to deal for our existence...
All - plz take it easy as this is solely individual opinion.
When a country is prospering means the jobs are getting created. That is what happened until Clinton Era. But I know that this cannot be forever. Every field is going to reach the peak, falls back and hopefully straightens.
Our IT field is somewhat dependent on other industries to create jobs. So, if other industries are all shipping the operations to foreign soil or loosing steam due to competition in free trade how well a country can prosper. You cannot have 100% service oriented country...it is only possible for small countries like Singapore...but not for big countries like US of A where they have plenty of land.
So, my point here is if you want GC you should have job now (EBn) and future. So, if jobs are getting created then you will have job today and tomorrow too.
So, simply saying "I support immigration" does not mean anything. It could be a REAL political statement like our famous Indian politicians. So, at this time I do not believe nobody as this is all still nacent. once someone takes office, we should be ready to push with our goals in mind.
It is good to debate between one another but let us have plans to how to deal for our existence...
more...
-114214-tama-neko-preview-3e8137c8.jpg "i love you quotes wallpapers. i love you quotes wallpapers.")
bigboy007
07-18 12:47 PM
I think all of us cautious at this time is very imp and we keep calling uscis pref next week so that we ensure we have enough backup avail and we have 30 days till.
2010 love you quotes wallpaper. i
logiclife
12-20 04:54 PM
Please lookup 245(k).
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001255----000-.html
(k) Inapplicability of certain provisions for certain employment-based immigrants
An alien who is eligible to receive an immigrant visa under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 1153 (b) of this title (or, in the case of an alien who is an immigrant described in section 1101 (a)(27)(C) of this title, under section 1153 (b)(4) of this title) may adjust status pursuant to subsection (a) of this section and notwithstanding subsection (c)(2), (c)(7), and (c)(8) of this section, if—
(1) the alien, on the date of filing an application for adjustment of status, is present in the United States pursuant to a lawful admission;
(2) the alien, subsequent to such lawful admission has not, for an aggregate period exceeding 180 days—
(A) failed to maintain, continuously, a lawful status;
(B) engaged in unauthorized employment; or
(C) otherwise violated the terms and conditions of the alien’s admission.
So basically if you are applying for employment based immigration adjustment of status(meaning I-485) under EB1 EB2 or EB3, (that's what they mean by paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 1153 (b) in the above text), and if you have not voilated status for over 180 days after your last legal entry into USA, and if you were in legal status at the time of applying for 485, then you may adjust status.
Now, a really good idea would be that you disclose this whole thing at the time of filing 485 and also claim the benefit under section 245(k). Since its apparent that you have not done it, I would advise to leave it alone and dont dig up old graves.
Consult an attorney for further advise, but dont go overboard in being Raja Harishchandra (the chronic truth teller) because frankly USCIS may not care about this and you can always claim the benefit under section 245(k).
However, if USCIS finds out about this (which is very very unlikely) and if the officer is a very strict person, then they may create a case of wilful misrepresentation. That's because on form I-485, it says that "have you ever been out of status or illegal and if so, provide details". In that question, if you didnt disclose your past history of being out of status ( I am assuming you were out of status and not illegal) then basically, in theory, they can say that you wilfully misrepresented (basically lied to them) by hiding this.
One option is to file an amendment to your I-485 and disclose this fact. That way, atleast they cannot make a case of wilfull misrepresentation. Nonetheless, remember, for them to find this out (about you not working and sitting at home) is difficult. Unless they somehow ask for your W-2 and paystubs for past 6-7 years and in that case it will be very easy for them to see that you were not working for 1 year.
Consult an attorney and tell the attorney all the details. I am not a lawyer and you should always ask a lawyer for legal advise.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001255----000-.html
(k) Inapplicability of certain provisions for certain employment-based immigrants
An alien who is eligible to receive an immigrant visa under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 1153 (b) of this title (or, in the case of an alien who is an immigrant described in section 1101 (a)(27)(C) of this title, under section 1153 (b)(4) of this title) may adjust status pursuant to subsection (a) of this section and notwithstanding subsection (c)(2), (c)(7), and (c)(8) of this section, if—
(1) the alien, on the date of filing an application for adjustment of status, is present in the United States pursuant to a lawful admission;
(2) the alien, subsequent to such lawful admission has not, for an aggregate period exceeding 180 days—
(A) failed to maintain, continuously, a lawful status;
(B) engaged in unauthorized employment; or
(C) otherwise violated the terms and conditions of the alien’s admission.
So basically if you are applying for employment based immigration adjustment of status(meaning I-485) under EB1 EB2 or EB3, (that's what they mean by paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 1153 (b) in the above text), and if you have not voilated status for over 180 days after your last legal entry into USA, and if you were in legal status at the time of applying for 485, then you may adjust status.
Now, a really good idea would be that you disclose this whole thing at the time of filing 485 and also claim the benefit under section 245(k). Since its apparent that you have not done it, I would advise to leave it alone and dont dig up old graves.
Consult an attorney for further advise, but dont go overboard in being Raja Harishchandra (the chronic truth teller) because frankly USCIS may not care about this and you can always claim the benefit under section 245(k).
However, if USCIS finds out about this (which is very very unlikely) and if the officer is a very strict person, then they may create a case of wilful misrepresentation. That's because on form I-485, it says that "have you ever been out of status or illegal and if so, provide details". In that question, if you didnt disclose your past history of being out of status ( I am assuming you were out of status and not illegal) then basically, in theory, they can say that you wilfully misrepresented (basically lied to them) by hiding this.
One option is to file an amendment to your I-485 and disclose this fact. That way, atleast they cannot make a case of wilfull misrepresentation. Nonetheless, remember, for them to find this out (about you not working and sitting at home) is difficult. Unless they somehow ask for your W-2 and paystubs for past 6-7 years and in that case it will be very easy for them to see that you were not working for 1 year.
Consult an attorney and tell the attorney all the details. I am not a lawyer and you should always ask a lawyer for legal advise.
more...
Macaca
01-30 07:11 PM
Unpaid bench means you are "Out of Status". Not illegal.
I have never heard USCIS penalizing unpaid bench. If it a problem and such a common case, why don't we ever hear about penalty against unpaid bench?
Is it possible to take unpaid leave every year?
In teaching you have an option of not teaching in summer. This means you do not get 2-3 pay checks; happens every year because most faculty don't teach in summer. Faculty is not even aware that absence of pay checks can be a problem.
I have never heard USCIS penalizing unpaid bench. If it a problem and such a common case, why don't we ever hear about penalty against unpaid bench?
Is it possible to take unpaid leave every year?
In teaching you have an option of not teaching in summer. This means you do not get 2-3 pay checks; happens every year because most faculty don't teach in summer. Faculty is not even aware that absence of pay checks can be a problem.
hair love you quotes wallpaper.
DDD
03-14 07:03 PM
well someone issue the challenge. We can pick up where the BB contest was at. Basically a boxing robot or something like that. Not sure if we want to do realism and all that tho. I can pretty much only do it on weekends so a 4-6 week time frame sounds good.
more...
a_yaja
06-25 02:02 PM
Gurus,
A lot of information has been posted regarding items required for I-485 filing. However, I was not able to find one that was broken down form-wise. Hence, I came up with a list after going through the three forms individually. Please help me correct it by changing wrong info/ adding any ommisions on my part.
I-485 Check List
� Birth Certificate
� Copy of page with nonimmigrant visa
� Photos � 2 nos.
� Write A# or name with a pencil on the back of the photos
� Finger Printing (this is done after the I-485 is filed)
� Medical Exam Form (I-693)
� Form G-325A (this does not have a check list)
Evidence of Status
o Copy of I-94 showing admission to the United States
o Copy of approval of I129 extension (H1B extension notice) for primary
o Copy of approval of I539 (H4 extension)
� Employment Letter from Employer (original)
Evidence of eligibility
o Copy of I-140 approval (primary applicant)
o Copy of Marriage Certificate (derivative status)
� Filing Fee
I-131 Check List
� Govt. ID (driver�s lic. Or passport)
� AOS Receipt (not required for first time filing along with I-485 form)
� Photos � 2 nos.
� Write A# or name with a pencil on the back of the photos
� Letter explaining why you require AP
� Filing Fee
I-765 Check List (submit in following order)
� Copy of I-94 (front and back)
� Copy of last EAD (for renewal only)
� Photos � 2 nos.
� Write A# or name with a pencil on the back of the photos
� Filing Fee
A lot of information has been posted regarding items required for I-485 filing. However, I was not able to find one that was broken down form-wise. Hence, I came up with a list after going through the three forms individually. Please help me correct it by changing wrong info/ adding any ommisions on my part.
I-485 Check List
� Birth Certificate
� Copy of page with nonimmigrant visa
� Photos � 2 nos.
� Write A# or name with a pencil on the back of the photos
� Finger Printing (this is done after the I-485 is filed)
� Medical Exam Form (I-693)
� Form G-325A (this does not have a check list)
Evidence of Status
o Copy of I-94 showing admission to the United States
o Copy of approval of I129 extension (H1B extension notice) for primary
o Copy of approval of I539 (H4 extension)
� Employment Letter from Employer (original)
Evidence of eligibility
o Copy of I-140 approval (primary applicant)
o Copy of Marriage Certificate (derivative status)
� Filing Fee
I-131 Check List
� Govt. ID (driver�s lic. Or passport)
� AOS Receipt (not required for first time filing along with I-485 form)
� Photos � 2 nos.
� Write A# or name with a pencil on the back of the photos
� Letter explaining why you require AP
� Filing Fee
I-765 Check List (submit in following order)
� Copy of I-94 (front and back)
� Copy of last EAD (for renewal only)
� Photos � 2 nos.
� Write A# or name with a pencil on the back of the photos
� Filing Fee
hot tattoo i Love You Wallpaper 5
Almond
07-05 02:25 PM
What difference does the membership of people make if they do not understand the agenda/motive of the organization? May be you are being mean in not understanding the agenda and needs of your favorite organization.
I found the forum by chance and didn't realize there was more to this website until a while after I signed up. On second thought look at my sign up date, I think I'll just let you old timers battle this one out.
I found the forum by chance and didn't realize there was more to this website until a while after I signed up. On second thought look at my sign up date, I think I'll just let you old timers battle this one out.
more...
house love you quotes wallpaper. i
delhiguy
07-04 08:03 PM
Excellent
I agree with you 100 % , I believe having excessive media coverage and lawsuits , would bring the GC number and process in the open , and most americans would oppose the GC as they oppose H1B.
If i was a american i would surely be happy with USCIS/DOS creating so much trouble for the immigrants to my country , who i believe are taking my job.
Everyone blaming CIS/DOS needs to understand some basics behind this mess. Before going to conclude anything, first, one should read all the ombudsman reports for last 3 or 4 years. Former INS or current USCIS�s functions and operations were not questionable and not known to public till ombudsman office was established. Ombudsman has helped customers and keep helping to improve efficiency of CIS. Ombudsman main concern (or goal) have been over the 4 years are
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The �documentarily qualified 485 applications� mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made �current� for all EB categories. This is how they determine �current� or �over-subscribed� and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered �Current.�
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be �oversubscribed� and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories �current� for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories �current� ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of �current� there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making �current� for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as �current� in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
I agree with you 100 % , I believe having excessive media coverage and lawsuits , would bring the GC number and process in the open , and most americans would oppose the GC as they oppose H1B.
If i was a american i would surely be happy with USCIS/DOS creating so much trouble for the immigrants to my country , who i believe are taking my job.
Everyone blaming CIS/DOS needs to understand some basics behind this mess. Before going to conclude anything, first, one should read all the ombudsman reports for last 3 or 4 years. Former INS or current USCIS�s functions and operations were not questionable and not known to public till ombudsman office was established. Ombudsman has helped customers and keep helping to improve efficiency of CIS. Ombudsman main concern (or goal) have been over the 4 years are
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The �documentarily qualified 485 applications� mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made �current� for all EB categories. This is how they determine �current� or �over-subscribed� and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered �Current.�
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be �oversubscribed� and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories �current� for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories �current� ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of �current� there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making �current� for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as �current� in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
tattoo tattoo Love You Quotes
Legal_In_A_Limbo
03-07 11:27 AM
In my husband's case we dont have that much time.
Here what our plan is:-
1. Self file G-28.
2. Follow up with an infopass appt. with in a month.
Rest god willing. What ever is going to happen will happen. No one can stop it from happening.
Here what our plan is:-
1. Self file G-28.
2. Follow up with an infopass appt. with in a month.
Rest god willing. What ever is going to happen will happen. No one can stop it from happening.
more...
pictures i love you quotes wallpapers. i love you quotes wallpapers.
amitjoey
07-05 04:38 PM
Added my $100 towards our common dreams and goals! I still vote to keep this site free for everyone's benefit. Believe me ppl will come around..took me a while but as they say better late than never!
IV you have our support! United we stand!
Paypal Confirmation Number: 8GH00265XS5850731
PD: Aug 04
RD: ????
Thanks Rohit!.
IV you have our support! United we stand!
Paypal Confirmation Number: 8GH00265XS5850731
PD: Aug 04
RD: ????
Thanks Rohit!.
dresses love you quotes wallpaper.
rexjamla
03-07 08:49 AM
There is no need to let USCIS know about changing job after 180 days of 485 filing. U should have offer / empl letter from the employer when your priority date becomes current.
Job title can be different but job duties must be similar.
Salary difference is ok but it should not be less than what is mentioned in labor certification.
In addition to this couple of my close friends got GC recently and they never notify USCIs about new job(AC 21).
Cheers!
Job title can be different but job duties must be similar.
Salary difference is ok but it should not be less than what is mentioned in labor certification.
In addition to this couple of my close friends got GC recently and they never notify USCIs about new job(AC 21).
Cheers!
more...
makeup love you quotes wallpaper.
Abhinaym
07-03 12:01 PM
I admit, it seems discriminatory to say you can't get your GC now because you're from this country or that country but these "high volume" countries have created the current back log through their sheer numbers and sometimes multiple applications, not the system. The system is fair to ALL and for some group to say that it isn't fair because all of that group isn't getting what they want is unjust to the rest of us. I knew I would be pounced upon when I submitted my original post and it only proves my point of personal agendas; sometimes I wonder what the "I" in "IV" really stands for? Don't be so arrogant as to believe that your higher education should give you more rights than others - that doesn't fly with me! I am frustrated with this forum because of this arrogance and I may not visit too much longer!
I do have one question for all of you who are in favor of eliminating the per country limit; do you support an eventual road to citizenship for the large group of people who dominate the "other side" of immigration? If you don't, some may think you hipocritical to want the rules changed for yourselves!
Ridiculous, nobody ever mentioned education here. Did any one here mention higher education at all?
You want to get ahead of me in the line just because where I was born even if we're equally qualified, and you're calling me arrogant???
Yes, our countries are 'high volume', how does it matter? Who are you blaming for what? Now what, you want to be commended and applauded for your countries' low population? :D LOL!
Why is it so unjust to wait your turn?
BS! IV has done so much for all immigrants and not just Indians. You should get your facts straight here. Besides this is a thread created for this purpose, there are plenty of threads which help you, if you ignore all of those and make your opinions on this you're being obnoxious. Also, the number of people in support of this petition is a tiny proportion of IV'ers. So stop stereotyping man, it is showing.
You say that we applicants are to blame for our countries' populations? I.e. we're responsible for circumstances that happened before our birth? Could you get any more ridiculous please?
I hope you begin to understand who is sounding arrogant here.
I do have one question for all of you who are in favor of eliminating the per country limit; do you support an eventual road to citizenship for the large group of people who dominate the "other side" of immigration? If you don't, some may think you hipocritical to want the rules changed for yourselves!
Ridiculous, nobody ever mentioned education here. Did any one here mention higher education at all?
You want to get ahead of me in the line just because where I was born even if we're equally qualified, and you're calling me arrogant???
Yes, our countries are 'high volume', how does it matter? Who are you blaming for what? Now what, you want to be commended and applauded for your countries' low population? :D LOL!
Why is it so unjust to wait your turn?
BS! IV has done so much for all immigrants and not just Indians. You should get your facts straight here. Besides this is a thread created for this purpose, there are plenty of threads which help you, if you ignore all of those and make your opinions on this you're being obnoxious. Also, the number of people in support of this petition is a tiny proportion of IV'ers. So stop stereotyping man, it is showing.
You say that we applicants are to blame for our countries' populations? I.e. we're responsible for circumstances that happened before our birth? Could you get any more ridiculous please?
I hope you begin to understand who is sounding arrogant here.
girlfriend love you quotes wallpaper. i
onemorecame
10-18 12:15 PM
any one else.. who got any update after filling RFE?
I got soft LUD on Oct 12.... nothing after that :confused:
I got soft LUD on Oct 12.... nothing after that :confused:
hairstyles girlfriend love you quotes
alex99
11-12 03:55 PM
bump....
vandanaverdia
09-11 12:04 PM
Help IV help you...
Come to DC....
Lets join hands & lets be heard!!!!
GET UP!!!
STAND UP FOR YOUR RIGHTS!!
Come to DC....
Lets join hands & lets be heard!!!!
GET UP!!!
STAND UP FOR YOUR RIGHTS!!
belmontboy
05-23 02:19 PM
That is what these computer workers do. Go to forums, steal code, copy that at the appropriate place, change variable names and screw up all the copyright issues.
what is your job?
what is your job?
0 comments:
Post a Comment