neelu
12-12 10:48 AM
We have asked an immigration lawyer this question. Someone even quoted all the sections of INA and CFR(code of federal regulations) to make the point -- that you can have regulation changed to file 485.
The lawyer was of the opinion that you need change in INA to be able to file 485 when dates are not current. It cannot be done with administrative changes.
Hi Logiclife,
If an attorney says that it cannot be done with administrative changes, then I guess, we dont have much to argue.
But I cannot understand the logic behind why it cant be done. I mean, disallowing concurrent processing is possible by an administrative change, why is the reverse (or something similar like allowing 485 filing without pd being current), not possible?
I am sorry for not being to let go of this, but I thought, logic-life can see some logic in this!!! :)
Thank you.
The lawyer was of the opinion that you need change in INA to be able to file 485 when dates are not current. It cannot be done with administrative changes.
Hi Logiclife,
If an attorney says that it cannot be done with administrative changes, then I guess, we dont have much to argue.
But I cannot understand the logic behind why it cant be done. I mean, disallowing concurrent processing is possible by an administrative change, why is the reverse (or something similar like allowing 485 filing without pd being current), not possible?
I am sorry for not being to let go of this, but I thought, logic-life can see some logic in this!!! :)
Thank you.
wallpaper f150 2wd lift - results 3-b-s
sc3
10-18 10:32 PM
Kumar:
Don't worry, I gave you green. I wish 'critiques' are out in open for discussion to get to our objective. But those moroons like hiding
Just imagine the cowardice of these people!. Online forums already have sufficient anonymity that you dont have to reveal your true name. Despite that people hide behind comment system to give reds (and tell things like "you suck" and what not). I hope the admins shut down this misused feature. Or make the system non-anonymous so that we can drag out these people and take up their comments in open forum.
Don't worry, I gave you green. I wish 'critiques' are out in open for discussion to get to our objective. But those moroons like hiding
Just imagine the cowardice of these people!. Online forums already have sufficient anonymity that you dont have to reveal your true name. Despite that people hide behind comment system to give reds (and tell things like "you suck" and what not). I hope the admins shut down this misused feature. Or make the system non-anonymous so that we can drag out these people and take up their comments in open forum.
Refugee_New
02-21 11:03 AM
My co-worker tried that and now has 3 RFE's to respond to.
Don't know the details but mostly it looks like a scam since why did one file Eb3 in first place and how can he add more exp. while Eb3 is pending as a factor for EB2? He is respondign since OCT. but they just keep asking for more details and they have first question for 140/PERM asking - DID YOU EVER HAD ANOTHER LABOR certification besides this one?
Be very careful-
This is what happend in my case. I converted my EB3 PD to EB2 PD.
My EB3 PD was 02/2002. LC Approved in Oct 2005. I-140 approved in 04/2006
I lost my job and joined another company. Applied PERM with MS degree. Got approved in Jan 2007. Then applied I-140 using PP, requesting to recapture older PD.
My I-140 was approved within 3 days without any trouble. Now my PD is 02/2002, EB2
So if you have a right reason then porting PD shouldn't be a problem.
Don't know the details but mostly it looks like a scam since why did one file Eb3 in first place and how can he add more exp. while Eb3 is pending as a factor for EB2? He is respondign since OCT. but they just keep asking for more details and they have first question for 140/PERM asking - DID YOU EVER HAD ANOTHER LABOR certification besides this one?
Be very careful-
This is what happend in my case. I converted my EB3 PD to EB2 PD.
My EB3 PD was 02/2002. LC Approved in Oct 2005. I-140 approved in 04/2006
I lost my job and joined another company. Applied PERM with MS degree. Got approved in Jan 2007. Then applied I-140 using PP, requesting to recapture older PD.
My I-140 was approved within 3 days without any trouble. Now my PD is 02/2002, EB2
So if you have a right reason then porting PD shouldn't be a problem.
2011 -1999 Ford F-150 XLT 4.6 2WD-
krishmunn
05-23 09:11 PM
Why we dont like gultis ? - eCharcha.Com (http://www.echarcha.com/forum/showthread.php?t=18691)
This link might help you understand the different definitions.
No body ever said you are the only m**on :rolleyes:
Disclaimer : I am not from any South Indian state.
This link might help you understand the different definitions.
No body ever said you are the only m**on :rolleyes:
Disclaimer : I am not from any South Indian state.
more...
amitpan007
06-06 11:54 AM
After long wait of 4.7 years ( i know it may not sound too long as some of the others), I finally got the card production ordered email yesterday. I was mostly a silent reader on IV but have contributed to IV few times since I started visiting since last year. I wish good luck for everybody waiting out there.
alterego
09-17 10:59 PM
It is not end of the world. But end of the economy as we know it. People smarter than me and you have said this is turning into an armageddon.
Armageddon or not, smart or fool, time will tell. My view is recession yes, outside chance of a depression. Armageddon...........not really.
Interesting thing is Berkshire stock is up while all this is going on. Gives you an idea how much high regard people have for its balance sheet, Buffet and Co. stock picking prowess and his 30 plus billion cash war chest at this time.
Armageddon or not, smart or fool, time will tell. My view is recession yes, outside chance of a depression. Armageddon...........not really.
Interesting thing is Berkshire stock is up while all this is going on. Gives you an idea how much high regard people have for its balance sheet, Buffet and Co. stock picking prowess and his 30 plus billion cash war chest at this time.
more...
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.
2010 ford f150 stx lifted. ford
srinithati
03-17 11:11 AM
PD April 2004
filed 485,EAD & AP on August 15th 2007.
filed 485,EAD & AP on August 15th 2007.
more...
plassey
07-23 07:00 AM
You are one of the biggest "CROOK" I have seen in recent times. Just by writting rubbish does not makes u a real senior member. Most of the advise you have been giving to people are simply WRONG. For example in this case two visas?
If you had even slightest knowledge of immigration law, you should have known that you cannot have two active visas in you passport, unless you are a diplomat.
Do you have an i-94 for the H1B visa? Do you have 2 visas in your passport - L1 and H1? Or so you have an a receipt issued by the USCIS for the H1B
Please clarify
If you had even slightest knowledge of immigration law, you should have known that you cannot have two active visas in you passport, unless you are a diplomat.
Do you have an i-94 for the H1B visa? Do you have 2 visas in your passport - L1 and H1? Or so you have an a receipt issued by the USCIS for the H1B
Please clarify
hair I like the lift and they call
kanaihya
09-26 10:03 AM
Just Sent an email to the CNN editor ..to educate himslef/ his staff regarding the rally.
thanks
thanks
more...
svr_76
06-10 02:21 PM
Gr8 you win. now lets forge ahead on how to proceed and get similar details from other groups specially the high-tech lobby/group.
hot 2002 F150 Supercrew 2WD lifted
dohko
04-04 08:03 AM
I hope not. If they ban bodyshops the cap will never run out.
And people in Real companies will be able to get the visas.
And people in Real companies will be able to get the visas.
more...
house CST 2004-2008 F150 2wd 7quot; Lift
smuggymba
07-29 08:31 AM
A sure invitation for defamation suit. Good luck.
This is just info, OP is not defaming anyone. He might be wrong about the info, but this info is not causing any harm to those companies.
This is just info, OP is not defaming anyone. He might be wrong about the info, but this info is not causing any harm to those companies.
tattoo here is a pic of my 2wd lifted
xyzgc
01-17 12:39 PM
If he had lost his job, he wouldn't bull-shitting around like this on public forums.
Its always easy when some one else loses his/her job to go like "what! what!!!" and pretend to be shell-shocked,while your job is still intact. Sounds like some bollywood-style melodrama.
Its always easy when some one else loses his/her job to go like "what! what!!!" and pretend to be shell-shocked,while your job is still intact. Sounds like some bollywood-style melodrama.
more...
pictures tattoo parts 98+f150+lifted 97 f150 lifted. Give Your New 2009 Ford F150
shantanup
03-16 05:44 PM
Infinite_Patience_GC,
Though I don't like your language and attitude, you have a valid point. I honestly feel that those who have used labor substitution should not get their green cards earlier than me.
Though I don't like your language and attitude, you have a valid point. I honestly feel that those who have used labor substitution should not get their green cards earlier than me.
dresses 97 F150 6 Inch Lift
belmontboy
03-21 04:38 PM
Unless you have clearly written promise that they will apply for GC, you cannot fight in court. Secondly, even if they did give you in writing, there is no time limit on when they can file.....they can effectively file labor a month before 6th year of H1 and have you out of status and therefore layed off.
Taking advantage of employees by making insincere promises is not illegal, but is unethical.
It's good to know about these companies so that other's don't end-up with the same problem.
Taking advantage of employees by making insincere promises is not illegal, but is unethical.
It's good to know about these companies so that other's don't end-up with the same problem.
more...
makeup 2004 F150 4.6 V8 SingleCab
Hermione
09-26 09:32 AM
It is not about politics, it is about ignorance of the people (including reporters). It is explainable, though - what do you know about... I don't know, laws around transporting hazardous materials, something you have never been exposed or subject to? Next to nothing. That's what an average American knows about immigration - their closest brush with that law was when their co-worker adopted a child from abroad. Of course, they do not know the difference between worker visas, and employment based immigrant visas (don't they even sound alike?).
girlfriend Lifted 2wdwhat shocks?
sanju_dba
08-10 02:45 PM
Count me in!
hairstyles Short Bed 2WD LIFTED
vshar
03-12 01:56 PM
You are accusing IV for cheating before saying IV is a great platform. Can't you make up your mind. You sound more like that Congressman Massa from NY. I am no Glenn beck so now don't start to tickle me.
I never accused IV for cheating but yes I do accuse IV for misconduct on April vis bulltein issue. misconduct does not mean cheating it means that they did not do what they are supposed to do at the time when all its members were anxious.
I never accused IV for cheating but yes I do accuse IV for misconduct on April vis bulltein issue. misconduct does not mean cheating it means that they did not do what they are supposed to do at the time when all its members were anxious.
cygent
03-17 04:32 PM
Hello all,
How do you determine if the category is EB2 or EB3? How can you find that out from which document?
Thanks!
How do you determine if the category is EB2 or EB3? How can you find that out from which document?
Thanks!
sanatshah
08-10 02:52 PM
Count me in.
No comments:
Post a Comment