pappu
10-23 11:01 AM
Significance of Priority date???
PD is important to get your dates current faster. Earlier PD will get a better shot at being current early.
After your PD becomes current your 485s are assigned visa numbers (if your FP, namechecks and processing are done) GCs are allocated based on 3 important factors : Dates must be current, date the I485 was received (FIFO as per their SOP but factors like namechecks make it unfeasible) and country of chargeability. It is thus tough to review approval trends on tracker threads and sites because of small and incomplete data set and no info on factors that influence faster or slower I485 approvals.
Coming back to the country quota, I do not know how country quotas are allocated throughout the year. How overflow happens each month/quarter and how future demand is predicted each month for the entire year when providing visas to oversubscribed countries from the quota of under subscribed countries. This will be a good topic to research.
PD is important to get your dates current faster. Earlier PD will get a better shot at being current early.
After your PD becomes current your 485s are assigned visa numbers (if your FP, namechecks and processing are done) GCs are allocated based on 3 important factors : Dates must be current, date the I485 was received (FIFO as per their SOP but factors like namechecks make it unfeasible) and country of chargeability. It is thus tough to review approval trends on tracker threads and sites because of small and incomplete data set and no info on factors that influence faster or slower I485 approvals.
Coming back to the country quota, I do not know how country quotas are allocated throughout the year. How overflow happens each month/quarter and how future demand is predicted each month for the entire year when providing visas to oversubscribed countries from the quota of under subscribed countries. This will be a good topic to research.
wallpaper Egyptian God, Typhon
ajay
04-05 09:54 AM
I found this in another website:
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=685c8d8b3b760210VgnVCM1000004718190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=4f719c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
"Since the beginning of this fiscal year (October 2008), USCIS has adjudicated over 75,000 employer petitions, reducing the pending caseload of petitions to under 55,000.USCIS� goal is to have adjudicated all the older employer petitions, and to be processing newer petitions within 4 months, by the end of September 2009"
The last updated date is 04/02/2009. Seems like they have updated something quite recently!!!
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=685c8d8b3b760210VgnVCM1000004718190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=4f719c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
"Since the beginning of this fiscal year (October 2008), USCIS has adjudicated over 75,000 employer petitions, reducing the pending caseload of petitions to under 55,000.USCIS� goal is to have adjudicated all the older employer petitions, and to be processing newer petitions within 4 months, by the end of September 2009"
The last updated date is 04/02/2009. Seems like they have updated something quite recently!!!
sganny
01-26 01:12 PM
Proud.
Andhra bags 7 of top 10 IIT ranks - The Times of India (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Andhra-bags-7-of-top-10-IIT-ranks/articleshow/5978951.cms)
HYDERABAD: Andhra Pradesh hit a jackpot with its students bagging seven of the top 10 ranks in IIT-Joint Entrance Examination (JEE), the results of which were declared on Wednesday. In fact, the state claimed the coveted top two ranks of IIT-JEE, with A Jitendar Reddy from Warangal emerging as the national topper followed by Uday K Shah from Hyderabad.
Others from the state who bagged top ranks include Madhu Kiran (fourth), K Satwik (sixth), Janardhan Reddy (seventh) Sabarish Nikhil (eighth) and Neeraj Gopal (ninth). An estimated 30% of the 50,000 students who wrote the examination from the state cleared the test this year, with over 500 of them making it to the top 2,000 in the open category. A total of 65,000 students had written the examination from the southern region.
Andhra students also scored well in the reserved category with OBC students from the state bagging seven out of the top 15 ranks in this section. Among reserved categories including SC, ST, OBC and physically handicapped (PH) the state secured over 50 ranks in the top 200 slab.
Officials from IIT-Madras, who were in charge of the results, said Andhra students already account for 21% of the total student strength in IITs. "One should not be surprised by the performance of these students as they have traditionally done well. This year, the percentage of students from the state in the IITs might be higher than 25%," said T S Natarajan, director, IIT-JEE.
While IIT-Madras, which conducted the examination, was criticized for the errors in mathematics and physics question papers, IIT experts said such errors could have actually worked in favour of the students from Andhra as not many would have been able to crack some of ambiguous questions. "Most front-rankers from the state cracked these ambiguous questions, which might have given them an edge over others," said K V Raghunath, vice-chairman, Narayana Group of Colleges whose students bagged five of the top seven ranks. Some other experts noted that a tough maths paper helped garner top ranks as students from the state have traditionally done well in the subject.
This is from May, 2010. when I saw the posting, I was wondering, how come IIT results in Jan and opened up the link and saw this was from 2010. what was your point about bringing this up now?
Andhra bags 7 of top 10 IIT ranks - The Times of India (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Andhra-bags-7-of-top-10-IIT-ranks/articleshow/5978951.cms)
HYDERABAD: Andhra Pradesh hit a jackpot with its students bagging seven of the top 10 ranks in IIT-Joint Entrance Examination (JEE), the results of which were declared on Wednesday. In fact, the state claimed the coveted top two ranks of IIT-JEE, with A Jitendar Reddy from Warangal emerging as the national topper followed by Uday K Shah from Hyderabad.
Others from the state who bagged top ranks include Madhu Kiran (fourth), K Satwik (sixth), Janardhan Reddy (seventh) Sabarish Nikhil (eighth) and Neeraj Gopal (ninth). An estimated 30% of the 50,000 students who wrote the examination from the state cleared the test this year, with over 500 of them making it to the top 2,000 in the open category. A total of 65,000 students had written the examination from the southern region.
Andhra students also scored well in the reserved category with OBC students from the state bagging seven out of the top 15 ranks in this section. Among reserved categories including SC, ST, OBC and physically handicapped (PH) the state secured over 50 ranks in the top 200 slab.
Officials from IIT-Madras, who were in charge of the results, said Andhra students already account for 21% of the total student strength in IITs. "One should not be surprised by the performance of these students as they have traditionally done well. This year, the percentage of students from the state in the IITs might be higher than 25%," said T S Natarajan, director, IIT-JEE.
While IIT-Madras, which conducted the examination, was criticized for the errors in mathematics and physics question papers, IIT experts said such errors could have actually worked in favour of the students from Andhra as not many would have been able to crack some of ambiguous questions. "Most front-rankers from the state cracked these ambiguous questions, which might have given them an edge over others," said K V Raghunath, vice-chairman, Narayana Group of Colleges whose students bagged five of the top seven ranks. Some other experts noted that a tough maths paper helped garner top ranks as students from the state have traditionally done well in the subject.
This is from May, 2010. when I saw the posting, I was wondering, how come IIT results in Jan and opened up the link and saw this was from 2010. what was your point about bringing this up now?
2011 Anubis+egyptian+god+symbol
immigrationvoice1
12-09 10:00 PM
My immigration status is H1 (485 pending EB2/INDIA). I am on the verge of completing my 2 year Masters in Computer Information Systems (MS-CIS) from Missouri State in Springfield, Missouri. Its a distance education Masters program with one week of on-campus residency every semester. The program is geared towards working IT professionals and its accredited by AACSB. The quality of education is excellent and fees is very nominal. I even got my employer to reimburse me for the tuition. Please see the following website for additional information on the program.
http://missouristate.edu/
http://mscis.missouristate.edu/default.asp
http://mscis.missouristate.edu/applicationprocess.asp
Please email me at arshstl@gmail.com for additional information.
Thanks for sharing the information!
http://missouristate.edu/
http://mscis.missouristate.edu/default.asp
http://mscis.missouristate.edu/applicationprocess.asp
Please email me at arshstl@gmail.com for additional information.
Thanks for sharing the information!
more...
eager_immi
07-18 10:57 AM
Let us all pledge to give atleast a $20, $50 monthly payments.
-new-kingdom.jpg "Anubis, Egyptian god of the")
waitin_toolong
07-29 05:04 AM
how is the baby supposed to sponsor the parents ??
more...
ash27
04-02 09:55 PM
Thanks Ams. Do you see any issues using AC21 to move to companies like TekSystems? Also, do you have any information on some of the new provisions in the pipeline.
2010 Statue of Egyptian god Anubis
-new-k.jpg "Anubis, Egyptian god of the")
ruchigup
08-22 03:11 PM
Doesnt make sense to pay $2500 for retaining the lawyer, they are trying to squeeze maximum out of you. If you are changing employer ask if the new company has an immigration lawyer and you can have him for your services. If they dont have any one you can engage services of your own immigration lawyer and have the new lawyer sign the G-28 form. Also please post the name of law firm and your employer so that others can be cautious.
I am changing my employer and wanted to retain the services of legal firm representing current employer. Upon asking that I want to retain their services after I leave current employer, I have been told to pay upfront retainer fee of $2500.
- Is it normally the case? I have been told that this fee will be put in my account with the firm and used to pay the charges for the services I request.
- If with God's grace my case is approved without requiring attorney's help, is this retainer refundable in full (I have asked attorney this question and waiting for thier reply). Anybody has a similar experience.
New employer has Fragomen and I heard there is lot of negative air about their procedures on PERM. Current employer legal firm is Baker McKenzie.
I am kind of reluctant to have Fragomen as my attorney representation
I am changing my employer and wanted to retain the services of legal firm representing current employer. Upon asking that I want to retain their services after I leave current employer, I have been told to pay upfront retainer fee of $2500.
- Is it normally the case? I have been told that this fee will be put in my account with the firm and used to pay the charges for the services I request.
- If with God's grace my case is approved without requiring attorney's help, is this retainer refundable in full (I have asked attorney this question and waiting for thier reply). Anybody has a similar experience.
New employer has Fragomen and I heard there is lot of negative air about their procedures on PERM. Current employer legal firm is Baker McKenzie.
I am kind of reluctant to have Fragomen as my attorney representation
more...
GCSOON-Ihope
11-06 12:31 PM
Totally agree with you. However, I have been complaining abt a similar company to my local INS office for over one year now (sending letters every other month) , but to no avail. Where do we complain?
It is more a matter related to Department of Labor than USCIS.
It is more a matter related to Department of Labor than USCIS.
hair stock photo : Anubis Egypt God
GCNirvana007
09-08 05:11 PM
Thanks for starting this. I am in same boat, i called TSC and the IO told me my case was approved on 9/4/09 and i have an LUD on 9/4/09 however online status says case pending. I asked that to the IO and she says she does not know about the online status but in there system it is approved. I did that after i received a call from an IO from local field office ( i went for Infopass last week at local office) informing that my and my wife's cases were approved on 9/4/09.
I am hoping to get the cards as have to travel to India next week. The IO in Texas advised me to get the Passport stamped.
I am in India already, both my H1B and AP expires in few weeks. Waiting for the God damn mail to reach home so my buddy can fedex to india.
How many have got the physical mails already?
I am hoping to get the cards as have to travel to India next week. The IO in Texas advised me to get the Passport stamped.
I am in India already, both my H1B and AP expires in few weeks. Waiting for the God damn mail to reach home so my buddy can fedex to india.
How many have got the physical mails already?
more...
drirshad
11-16 09:24 PM
Guys whoever planning to use EAD going forward get ready for $700- per head out of pocket every year. That is the cost of renewal for EAD & AP without attorney involvement. Add additional family members and you can understand why was July bulletin made current.
Lots of revenue at our expense .......
Lots of revenue at our expense .......
hot Egyptian god Anubis, 17th
dontcareaboutGC
03-19 11:24 AM
Ignore this if this is a repost!
U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on the Judiciary
Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security,
and International Law
Hearing on Comprehensive Immigration Reform: Government Perspectives
on Immigration Statistics
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim
Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division
Visa Services Office
U.S. Department of State
June 6, 2007
2:00 p.m.
2141 Rayburn House Office Building
Chairman Lofgren, Ranking Member King, and distinguished members of
the Committee, it is a pleasure to be here this afternoon to answer
your questions and provide an overview of our immigrant visa control
and reporting program operated by the U.S. Department of State. The
Department of State is responsible for administering the provisions of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) related to the numerical
limitations on immigrant visa issuances. At the beginning of each
month, the Visa Office (VO) receives a report from each consular post
listing totals of documentarily-qualified immigrant visa applicants in
categories subject to numerical limitation. Cases are grouped in three
different categories: 1) foreign state chargeability, 2) preference,
and 3) priority date.
Foreign state chargeability for visa purposes refers to the fact that
an immigrant is chargeable to the numerical limitation for the foreign
state or dependent area in which the immigrant's place of birth is
located. Exceptions are provided for a child (unmarried and under 21
years of age) or spouse accompanying or following to join a principal
to prevent the separation of family members, as well as for an
applicant born in the United States or in a foreign state of which
neither parent was a native or resident. Alternate chargeability is
desirable when the visa cut-off date for the foreign state of a parent
or spouse is more advantageous than that of the applicant's foreign
state.
As established by the Immigration and Nationality Act, preference is
the visa category that can be assigned based on relationships to U.S.
citizens or legal permanent residents. Family-based immigration falls
under two basic categories: unlimited and limited. Preferences
established by law for the limited category are:
Family First Preference (F1): Unmarried sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their minor children, if any.
Family Second Preference (F2): Spouses, minor children, and unmarried
sons and daughters of lawful permanent residents.
Family Third Preference (F3): Married sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their spouses and minor children.
Family Fourth Preference (F4): Brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens
and their spouses and minor children provided the U.S. citizen is at
least 21 years of age.
The Priority Date is normally the date on which the petition to accord
the applicant immigrant status was filed, generally with U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). VO subdivides the annual
preference and foreign state limitations specified by the INA into
monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily-qualified applicants
which have been reported to VO are compared each month with the
numbers available for the next regular allotment. The determination of
how many numbers are available requires consideration of several
variables, including: past number use; estimates of future number use
and return rates; and estimates of USCIS demand based on cut-off date
movements. Once this consideration is completed, the cutoff dates are
established and numbers are allocated to reported applicants in order
of their priority dates, the oldest dates first.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy
all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is
considered "Current." For example: If the monthly allocation target is
10,000, and we only have 5,000 applicants, the category can be
"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.
The cut-off date is the priority date of the first
documentarily-qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a
visa number. For example, if the monthly target is 10,000 and we have
25,000 applicants, then we would need to establish a cut-off date so
that only 10,000 numbers would be allocated. In this case, the cut-off
would be the priority date of the 10,001st applicant.
Only persons with a priority date earlier than a cut-off date are
entitled to allotment of a visa number. The cut-off dates are the 1st,
8th, 15th, and 22nd of a month, since VO groups demand for numbers
under these dates. (Priority dates of the first through seventh of a
month are grouped under the 1st, the eighth through the 14th under the
8th, etc.) VO attempts to establish the cut-off dates for the
following month on or about the 8th of each month. The dates are
immediately transmitted to consular posts abroad and USCIS, and also
published in the Visa Bulletin and online at the website
www.travel.state.gov. Visa allotments for use during that month are
transmitted to consular posts. USCIS requests visa allotments for
adjustment of status cases only when all other case processing has
been completed. I am submitting the latest Visa Bulletin for the
record or you can click on: Visa Bulletin for June 2007.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE SYSTEM AND CLARIFICATION OF SOME
FREQUENTLY MISUNDERSTOOD POINTS:
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become documentarily qualified
at their own initiative and convenience. By no means has every
applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date
been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, visa allotments
are made only on the basis of the total applicants reported
�documentarily qualified� (or, theoretically ready for interview) each
month. Demand for visa numbers can fluctuate from one month to
another, with the inevitable impact on cut-off dates.
If an applicant is reported documentarily qualified but allocation of
a visa number is not possible because of a visa availability cut-off
date, the demand is recorded at VO and an allocation is made as soon
as the applicable cut-off date advances beyond the applicant's
priority date. There is no need for such applicant to be reported a
second time.
Visa numbers are always allotted for all documentarily-qualified
applicants with a priority date before the relevant cut-off date, as
long as the case had been reported to VO in time to be included in the
monthly calculation of visa availability. Failure of visa number
receipt by the overseas processing office could mean that the request
was not dispatched in time to reach VO for the monthly allocation
cycle, or that information on the request was incomplete or inaccurate
(e.g., incorrect priority date).
Allocations to Foreign Service posts outside the regular monthly cycle
are possible in emergency or exceptional cases, but only at the
request of the office processing the case. Note that, should
retrogression of a cut-off date be announced, VO can honor
extraordinary requests for additional numbers only if the applicant's
priority date is earlier than the retrogressed cut-off date. Not all
numbers allocated are actually used for visa issuance; some are
returned to VO and are reincorporated into the pool of numbers
available for later allocation during the fiscal year. The rate of
return of unused numbers may fluctuate from month to month, just as
demand may fluctuate. Lower returns mean fewer numbers available for
subsequent reallocation. Fluctuations can cause cut-off date movement
to slow, stop, or even retrogress. Retrogression is particularly
possible near the end of the fiscal year as visa issuance approaches
the annual limitations.
Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7 percent is a
cap, which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed.
Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The
country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the
annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This
limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled,
however. A portion of the numbers provided to the Family Second
preference category is exempt from this per-country cap. The American
Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act (AC21) removed the
per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant
demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of
such numbers available.
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 a cut-off date which is earlier 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.)
The committee submitted several questions that fell outside of VO�s
area of work, therefore, I have provided in my written testimony today
the answers only to those questions that the Department of State can
answer. Thank you for this opportunity.
U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on the Judiciary
Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security,
and International Law
Hearing on Comprehensive Immigration Reform: Government Perspectives
on Immigration Statistics
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim
Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division
Visa Services Office
U.S. Department of State
June 6, 2007
2:00 p.m.
2141 Rayburn House Office Building
Chairman Lofgren, Ranking Member King, and distinguished members of
the Committee, it is a pleasure to be here this afternoon to answer
your questions and provide an overview of our immigrant visa control
and reporting program operated by the U.S. Department of State. The
Department of State is responsible for administering the provisions of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) related to the numerical
limitations on immigrant visa issuances. At the beginning of each
month, the Visa Office (VO) receives a report from each consular post
listing totals of documentarily-qualified immigrant visa applicants in
categories subject to numerical limitation. Cases are grouped in three
different categories: 1) foreign state chargeability, 2) preference,
and 3) priority date.
Foreign state chargeability for visa purposes refers to the fact that
an immigrant is chargeable to the numerical limitation for the foreign
state or dependent area in which the immigrant's place of birth is
located. Exceptions are provided for a child (unmarried and under 21
years of age) or spouse accompanying or following to join a principal
to prevent the separation of family members, as well as for an
applicant born in the United States or in a foreign state of which
neither parent was a native or resident. Alternate chargeability is
desirable when the visa cut-off date for the foreign state of a parent
or spouse is more advantageous than that of the applicant's foreign
state.
As established by the Immigration and Nationality Act, preference is
the visa category that can be assigned based on relationships to U.S.
citizens or legal permanent residents. Family-based immigration falls
under two basic categories: unlimited and limited. Preferences
established by law for the limited category are:
Family First Preference (F1): Unmarried sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their minor children, if any.
Family Second Preference (F2): Spouses, minor children, and unmarried
sons and daughters of lawful permanent residents.
Family Third Preference (F3): Married sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their spouses and minor children.
Family Fourth Preference (F4): Brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens
and their spouses and minor children provided the U.S. citizen is at
least 21 years of age.
The Priority Date is normally the date on which the petition to accord
the applicant immigrant status was filed, generally with U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). VO subdivides the annual
preference and foreign state limitations specified by the INA into
monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily-qualified applicants
which have been reported to VO are compared each month with the
numbers available for the next regular allotment. The determination of
how many numbers are available requires consideration of several
variables, including: past number use; estimates of future number use
and return rates; and estimates of USCIS demand based on cut-off date
movements. Once this consideration is completed, the cutoff dates are
established and numbers are allocated to reported applicants in order
of their priority dates, the oldest dates first.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy
all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is
considered "Current." For example: If the monthly allocation target is
10,000, and we only have 5,000 applicants, the category can be
"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.
The cut-off date is the priority date of the first
documentarily-qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a
visa number. For example, if the monthly target is 10,000 and we have
25,000 applicants, then we would need to establish a cut-off date so
that only 10,000 numbers would be allocated. In this case, the cut-off
would be the priority date of the 10,001st applicant.
Only persons with a priority date earlier than a cut-off date are
entitled to allotment of a visa number. The cut-off dates are the 1st,
8th, 15th, and 22nd of a month, since VO groups demand for numbers
under these dates. (Priority dates of the first through seventh of a
month are grouped under the 1st, the eighth through the 14th under the
8th, etc.) VO attempts to establish the cut-off dates for the
following month on or about the 8th of each month. The dates are
immediately transmitted to consular posts abroad and USCIS, and also
published in the Visa Bulletin and online at the website
www.travel.state.gov. Visa allotments for use during that month are
transmitted to consular posts. USCIS requests visa allotments for
adjustment of status cases only when all other case processing has
been completed. I am submitting the latest Visa Bulletin for the
record or you can click on: Visa Bulletin for June 2007.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE SYSTEM AND CLARIFICATION OF SOME
FREQUENTLY MISUNDERSTOOD POINTS:
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become documentarily qualified
at their own initiative and convenience. By no means has every
applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date
been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, visa allotments
are made only on the basis of the total applicants reported
�documentarily qualified� (or, theoretically ready for interview) each
month. Demand for visa numbers can fluctuate from one month to
another, with the inevitable impact on cut-off dates.
If an applicant is reported documentarily qualified but allocation of
a visa number is not possible because of a visa availability cut-off
date, the demand is recorded at VO and an allocation is made as soon
as the applicable cut-off date advances beyond the applicant's
priority date. There is no need for such applicant to be reported a
second time.
Visa numbers are always allotted for all documentarily-qualified
applicants with a priority date before the relevant cut-off date, as
long as the case had been reported to VO in time to be included in the
monthly calculation of visa availability. Failure of visa number
receipt by the overseas processing office could mean that the request
was not dispatched in time to reach VO for the monthly allocation
cycle, or that information on the request was incomplete or inaccurate
(e.g., incorrect priority date).
Allocations to Foreign Service posts outside the regular monthly cycle
are possible in emergency or exceptional cases, but only at the
request of the office processing the case. Note that, should
retrogression of a cut-off date be announced, VO can honor
extraordinary requests for additional numbers only if the applicant's
priority date is earlier than the retrogressed cut-off date. Not all
numbers allocated are actually used for visa issuance; some are
returned to VO and are reincorporated into the pool of numbers
available for later allocation during the fiscal year. The rate of
return of unused numbers may fluctuate from month to month, just as
demand may fluctuate. Lower returns mean fewer numbers available for
subsequent reallocation. Fluctuations can cause cut-off date movement
to slow, stop, or even retrogress. Retrogression is particularly
possible near the end of the fiscal year as visa issuance approaches
the annual limitations.
Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7 percent is a
cap, which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed.
Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The
country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the
annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This
limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled,
however. A portion of the numbers provided to the Family Second
preference category is exempt from this per-country cap. The American
Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act (AC21) removed the
per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant
demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of
such numbers available.
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 a cut-off date which is earlier 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.)
The committee submitted several questions that fell outside of VO�s
area of work, therefore, I have provided in my written testimony today
the answers only to those questions that the Department of State can
answer. Thank you for this opportunity.
more...
house Statue of egyptian god anubis
logiclife
09-28 05:38 PM
Hello Everyone,
I need to find someone that can help me to file the Mandamus my name is been stuck over 2 years now and the USCIS still telling me it's PENDING....Please help me if anyone know a good lawyer that can file Mandamus.....
Thanks
Anan:confused:
Please keep in mind that your dates must be current when you file the writ of mandamus and your namecheck should be stuck at FBI atleast for 1 year during which your date is current. If your date is not current now, or it has been current for amount of time less than a year, WoM might not work.
Just google the writ of mandamus and there are lawyers who even specialize in such litigation against Government.
There are two threads on this "FBI namecheck delays signup here" thread and "FBI namecheck for dummies" thread on this forum where you will find plenty of information about lawyers. Last year I remember doing a conf call from lawyer for IV members who had FAQ on writ of Mandamus. It should be on the "FBI namecheck delays signup here" thread.
Another thing, if you have a prior misdemeanor conviction like DUI or DWI or something that is on your record, then dont file WoM as it might be counter productive (in the sense that namecheck not being cleared or 485 denial).
I need to find someone that can help me to file the Mandamus my name is been stuck over 2 years now and the USCIS still telling me it's PENDING....Please help me if anyone know a good lawyer that can file Mandamus.....
Thanks
Anan:confused:
Please keep in mind that your dates must be current when you file the writ of mandamus and your namecheck should be stuck at FBI atleast for 1 year during which your date is current. If your date is not current now, or it has been current for amount of time less than a year, WoM might not work.
Just google the writ of mandamus and there are lawyers who even specialize in such litigation against Government.
There are two threads on this "FBI namecheck delays signup here" thread and "FBI namecheck for dummies" thread on this forum where you will find plenty of information about lawyers. Last year I remember doing a conf call from lawyer for IV members who had FAQ on writ of Mandamus. It should be on the "FBI namecheck delays signup here" thread.
Another thing, if you have a prior misdemeanor conviction like DUI or DWI or something that is on your record, then dont file WoM as it might be counter productive (in the sense that namecheck not being cleared or 485 denial).
tattoo Anubis, Egyptian god of the
Alabaman
05-15 09:17 PM
All these articles say we are hoping to get citizenship. I think this word raises more shackeles than saying getting green card. Cmon, we are only thinking GC now. Ctizinship after 5 years is somewhat of a time bound process. Why don these articles say we are waiting for GC. This atleast will be more palatable to the anti leagl immigration forces.More importanatly it refelects our true problem as of now.
Thats what annoys me... that they say we are trying to get citizenship. We just want to be free. If GC would give us that then we are fine. They can give us GC and say 10 years before we can apply for citizenship as long as we are free. Right now I feel like I am chained down. I can not plan I can not move forward... living a stagnant live.
The problem though is that there is no line to get into. Employers are not even willing to sponsor GC anymore. There is the need to be able to self petition.
Most people writing all these articles dont even know what is going on. They need to experience the immigration system for them to know. A lot of the facts they present are wrong. They say there is a legal way of getting GC. There is no defined legal way. It is dependent on employers wi
Thats what annoys me... that they say we are trying to get citizenship. We just want to be free. If GC would give us that then we are fine. They can give us GC and say 10 years before we can apply for citizenship as long as we are free. Right now I feel like I am chained down. I can not plan I can not move forward... living a stagnant live.
The problem though is that there is no line to get into. Employers are not even willing to sponsor GC anymore. There is the need to be able to self petition.
Most people writing all these articles dont even know what is going on. They need to experience the immigration system for them to know. A lot of the facts they present are wrong. They say there is a legal way of getting GC. There is no defined legal way. It is dependent on employers wi
more...
pictures Egyptian God Anubis
waitin_toolong
07-18 06:56 PM
read the last paragraph of the link you posted
Adjustment applications and ancillary benefits – The new application fee for an I-485 is a package fee that includes associated EAD and advance parole applications. Thus, if you file an I-485 with the fee listed above, while you will still need to submit applications for an EAD and advance parole, you will not need to pay a separate fee so long as your adjustment application is pending. However, if you filed your I-485 before this fee change, to apply for or renew your EAD or advance parole, you must file a new application with the new fee for those applications.
As for status information, if your wife does not want to work after she gets back it might be in her interest to enter using H4. Because if she stops working she will not be out of status but AOS pending, hence legal, but there will be no safety net in case od denial, and you will save money on AP's
Adjustment applications and ancillary benefits – The new application fee for an I-485 is a package fee that includes associated EAD and advance parole applications. Thus, if you file an I-485 with the fee listed above, while you will still need to submit applications for an EAD and advance parole, you will not need to pay a separate fee so long as your adjustment application is pending. However, if you filed your I-485 before this fee change, to apply for or renew your EAD or advance parole, you must file a new application with the new fee for those applications.
As for status information, if your wife does not want to work after she gets back it might be in her interest to enter using H4. Because if she stops working she will not be out of status but AOS pending, hence legal, but there will be no safety net in case od denial, and you will save money on AP's
dresses stock photo : Egyptian god
nirdlalegcade
02-26 11:50 AM
The above said is correct only if you have an approved AP with you.
But I have only my H4 visa. I can go out of US with the H4 right?
But I have only my H4 visa. I can go out of US with the H4 right?
more...
makeup Anubis the Egyptian God of
wandmaker
07-12 08:46 PM
Our Current EAD is expiring on 10/01/2008. So we had applied for extension in june. On july 7th our application was approved and today we recieved our EAD cards. I was expecting a one year extension , which is until 10/01/2009. But USCIS send us ead cards that will expire on 01/01/2009.
What should be the course of action here. Do i need to reapply or just contact USCIS and will they be able to fix it? Any body on similiar situation.?
Service center is nebraska
You do not have to reapply, please call USCIS and let them know of this issue. CSR will tell you how to proceed further
What should be the course of action here. Do i need to reapply or just contact USCIS and will they be able to fix it? Any body on similiar situation.?
Service center is nebraska
You do not have to reapply, please call USCIS and let them know of this issue. CSR will tell you how to proceed further
girlfriend Egyptian god Anubis
waiting4gc
04-15 04:42 PM
Its nice to see good news from more and more people. Enjoy your new found freedom!!
Hi folks,
Just got back from UK on Friday after a month of family time, medicals and our embassy interview! Wanted to let you all know that we were approved and happily back in the US!!
Congrats on the latest admin wins and movements in campaigns/projects. I wanted to say a huge thank you but not farewell to the many kind folks who kept my spirits high in the short time I have been with IV:
abhijitp, needhelp, digital2k, paskal, gsc999, waiting4gc, pappu, chanduv23, santb1975, nolaindian32, walking dude, ja1hind, logiclife and many more. All of you rock and America is very lucky to have such genuine and brilliant people like you. I wish you the very best for your own journey.
I will be around for sure, just have to concentrate on securing some work and life for a bit, finally!
my best :)
Hi folks,
Just got back from UK on Friday after a month of family time, medicals and our embassy interview! Wanted to let you all know that we were approved and happily back in the US!!
Congrats on the latest admin wins and movements in campaigns/projects. I wanted to say a huge thank you but not farewell to the many kind folks who kept my spirits high in the short time I have been with IV:
abhijitp, needhelp, digital2k, paskal, gsc999, waiting4gc, pappu, chanduv23, santb1975, nolaindian32, walking dude, ja1hind, logiclife and many more. All of you rock and America is very lucky to have such genuine and brilliant people like you. I wish you the very best for your own journey.
I will be around for sure, just have to concentrate on securing some work and life for a bit, finally!
my best :)
hairstyles Egyptian God - Anubis
delax
07-16 01:21 PM
this post is a great example of diplomatically writing a lot and actually saying nothing ... way to go!
I beg to disagree - I think if you read between the lines it is quite clear that potential solutions are being discussed. A solution may be announced but NOT within the 24 hrs that we all are expecting. It may lead to a deadlock in which case the lawsuit would be one of our recourse.
I think we all got a little carried away by the 24HR time frame from Core.
I beg to disagree - I think if you read between the lines it is quite clear that potential solutions are being discussed. A solution may be announced but NOT within the 24 hrs that we all are expecting. It may lead to a deadlock in which case the lawsuit would be one of our recourse.
I think we all got a little carried away by the 24HR time frame from Core.
rjgleason
October 27th, 2003, 06:13 AM
Great shot Don....I like that image a lot.
Some shots from yeasterday at and around the Delaware Water Gap:
http://www.pbase.com/image/22684252
http://www.pbase.com/image/22684661
Some shots from yeasterday at and around the Delaware Water Gap:
http://www.pbase.com/image/22684252
http://www.pbase.com/image/22684661
pappu
08-22 04:19 PM
Paskal:
Thanks for your kind reply. I am new to Buffalo, NY. Just moved from California. I dont know much ppl here. There is lots of indian community here but dont know why none is responding. If I can find one guy also I can book a car and drive there for rally.
saravanaraj.sathya
You have not updated your profile with your full information. Please do so asap.
OK we have tons of members from Buffalo. Now it is upto you to contact them. We have several more from Rochester and Syracuse....
Can you take charge of contacting them and making phonecalls? get in touch with NY chapter and volunteer to make phonecalls to all these members:
Mkolken
Bhatya
DEVILLION696
Drajaybhora
Freidyeid
gcny2006
nkumar
brahmam
mach
GCgal
Mdforgc
But first update your profile. ONly then NY chpater will be able to help you.
Thanks for your kind reply. I am new to Buffalo, NY. Just moved from California. I dont know much ppl here. There is lots of indian community here but dont know why none is responding. If I can find one guy also I can book a car and drive there for rally.
saravanaraj.sathya
You have not updated your profile with your full information. Please do so asap.
OK we have tons of members from Buffalo. Now it is upto you to contact them. We have several more from Rochester and Syracuse....
Can you take charge of contacting them and making phonecalls? get in touch with NY chapter and volunteer to make phonecalls to all these members:
Mkolken
Bhatya
DEVILLION696
Drajaybhora
Freidyeid
gcny2006
nkumar
brahmam
mach
GCgal
Mdforgc
But first update your profile. ONly then NY chpater will be able to help you.
No comments:
Post a Comment