Hope_GC
07-16 05:37 PM
I think we need to counter act and stop this kind of False Propagandas
Core Team Please draft a Letter in accordance to this we will all send Web faxes...
Not every Senator has time to learn the facts they would only believe any statement or propaganda somebody is making. we should strongly object it..
Again it is my personal view..
Core Team Please draft a Letter in accordance to this we will all send Web faxes...
Not every Senator has time to learn the facts they would only believe any statement or propaganda somebody is making. we should strongly object it..
Again it is my personal view..
wallpaper kwon yuri snsd.
looivy
01-24 03:34 PM
IV members,
We need to come up with some great ideas like "flower campaign". Something that will mobilize IV members.
Let us not be pessimistic. There are thousand of reasons that one can think of why the new administration may not act soon. But that should not stop us from making our cause being heard. The new adminsitration has been taking many decisions that are not economy related. Economy is their #1 priority but it is not their only priority.
The visa recapture issue has been pending for a long time now (atleast 3 years). Either we continue to wait and suffer and remain frustrated or we take some action. Choice is ours.
PS: Let us be civil. I second using non-accusatory language on this forum.
We need to come up with some great ideas like "flower campaign". Something that will mobilize IV members.
Let us not be pessimistic. There are thousand of reasons that one can think of why the new administration may not act soon. But that should not stop us from making our cause being heard. The new adminsitration has been taking many decisions that are not economy related. Economy is their #1 priority but it is not their only priority.
The visa recapture issue has been pending for a long time now (atleast 3 years). Either we continue to wait and suffer and remain frustrated or we take some action. Choice is ours.
PS: Let us be civil. I second using non-accusatory language on this forum.
senthil1
06-12 03:10 PM
If no H1b restrictions then mostly lottery for new H1b for every year( I think 115k is not enough as Consulting companies will rush to get the quota on first day) unless unlimited H1b was given. Lottery is very bad for good companies. Best way is to put restrictions only for new H1bs and exclude from extensions and transfers.
If people think that after CIR fails, we will have a better chance of getting favorable provisions with some other Bill or on coat tails of appropriation bills, it could be a risky gamble.
However, looking at the mood of Senate there is a very good chance that post-CIR we might be thrown a curve ball with some hard line H1B restrictions and fee increases extracted from almost passed CIR. So opposing CIR due to H1 alone is not the best strategy.
CIR is on the table because there are lot of interests driving its existence. If Compete America and us(IV) cannot drive in a small amendment into a popular bill like this, it would be a big blow. Is there enough bite in the coalition to create our own bill or fight an anti-H1 wave out there? That's up for judgement.
My point is, please do not assume H1B status quo will stay that way even if CIR fails. Like someone pointed out in these forums, big Corporations might enlist these anti-consulting restrictions/fee increases and use as compromise to increase H1 numbers(even post CIR).
And we thought life was tough now, imagine paying 10K for every H1 extension and not being able to consult and status quo on current GC system still place. Thats a hair raising thought for me.
If people think that after CIR fails, we will have a better chance of getting favorable provisions with some other Bill or on coat tails of appropriation bills, it could be a risky gamble.
However, looking at the mood of Senate there is a very good chance that post-CIR we might be thrown a curve ball with some hard line H1B restrictions and fee increases extracted from almost passed CIR. So opposing CIR due to H1 alone is not the best strategy.
CIR is on the table because there are lot of interests driving its existence. If Compete America and us(IV) cannot drive in a small amendment into a popular bill like this, it would be a big blow. Is there enough bite in the coalition to create our own bill or fight an anti-H1 wave out there? That's up for judgement.
My point is, please do not assume H1B status quo will stay that way even if CIR fails. Like someone pointed out in these forums, big Corporations might enlist these anti-consulting restrictions/fee increases and use as compromise to increase H1 numbers(even post CIR).
And we thought life was tough now, imagine paying 10K for every H1 extension and not being able to consult and status quo on current GC system still place. Thats a hair raising thought for me.
2011 Kwon Yuri - SNSD (Girls#39;
bheemi123
10-03 01:30 PM
need to know the process of conversion of L1 to H4
apply transfer for change of status...
apply transfer for change of status...
more...
varshadas
01-22 12:31 PM
Has anyone called the Senator's office yet to schedule an appt. If not, then I will go ahead and call. I am planning to call the NY senators too
Thanks,
Varsha
Thanks,
Varsha
amitjoey
07-05 12:50 PM
Fellow IV fighters, members. I know, it seems like there is always a target for funds and we dont achieve it. Well! that is not true, we set a new target when the first one is achieved.
Funds, There are more ideas than funds. For every new campaign, plan, we need funds. So it is an ever needed commodity. The reason so many of us are so very aggresive is that we just need more funds, plain and simple.
Inspite of several hundreds contributing, it is not enough. But we will soon reach a day when we would be okay, (given a lot of us/you, sign up for a recurring contribution).
Trusting IV with funds is a major stumbling block, but remember IV is a non-profit, so every "naya-paisa" (penny) is accounted for.
People handling money (core IV) are sincere, honest hardworking people on work-visas, they have much to lose from not being accountable.
And the most important thing is, please take a look at these hard-working IV CORE PEOPLE, please. Some of them have put thousands of dollars (I mean 5 and ten thousand) into this effort. I am not counting personal expenses, travelling to DC, lost work hours etc.
So your $100 at the bowling arena wont get you much farther, but contribute it to IV to get your way ahead paved and bull-dozed over.
Funds, There are more ideas than funds. For every new campaign, plan, we need funds. So it is an ever needed commodity. The reason so many of us are so very aggresive is that we just need more funds, plain and simple.
Inspite of several hundreds contributing, it is not enough. But we will soon reach a day when we would be okay, (given a lot of us/you, sign up for a recurring contribution).
Trusting IV with funds is a major stumbling block, but remember IV is a non-profit, so every "naya-paisa" (penny) is accounted for.
People handling money (core IV) are sincere, honest hardworking people on work-visas, they have much to lose from not being accountable.
And the most important thing is, please take a look at these hard-working IV CORE PEOPLE, please. Some of them have put thousands of dollars (I mean 5 and ten thousand) into this effort. I am not counting personal expenses, travelling to DC, lost work hours etc.
So your $100 at the bowling arena wont get you much farther, but contribute it to IV to get your way ahead paved and bull-dozed over.
more...
DDD
03-13 06:44 PM
I voted eilsoe. The reason being his model and render seems more fundamentally sound. Thirdworldwoman's was cool but the proportions were off. All in good work all of ya'll
2010 Birth name: Kwon Yuri
capriol
04-25 10:55 AM
Dear Googler and others:
Since there has been some confusion about the receipt date versus the notice date in terms of the centres processing the 485s for final adjudication, my query is that which date (the receipt or the notice date) actually determines processing? Kindly let me know. Thanks.
Since there has been some confusion about the receipt date versus the notice date in terms of the centres processing the 485s for final adjudication, my query is that which date (the receipt or the notice date) actually determines processing? Kindly let me know. Thanks.
more...
va_217
01-18 11:24 AM
same happened to me in Elpaso airport longtime back, I guess when you are coming from Mexico they do that.
but no questions asked it was normal
thanks
but no questions asked it was normal
thanks
hair kwon yuri, seo joohyun |
gc28262
06-10 11:06 PM
"THEY CAME FIRST for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.
THEN THEY CAME for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.
THEN THEY CAME for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
THEN THEY CAME for me
and by that time no one was left to speak up."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came...
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.
THEN THEY CAME for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.
THEN THEY CAME for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
THEN THEY CAME for me
and by that time no one was left to speak up."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came...
more...
snakesrocks
09-10 06:16 PM
Hey Yall,
I just called the House Judiciary Committee to inquire about the webcast link not working and the reason sited was that "thats due to the hearing postponed until tomorrow".
So, no more hearing for the day and it resumes tomorrow. I did forget to ask for what time it starts, may be someone else can check on it.
The House Judiciary Committee today completed mark up of four immigration bills:
H.R. 6020 would provide immigration benefits for immigrant soldiers and their families; (Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-CA and Rep. Mac Thornberry R-TX)
H.R. 5882 would recapture employment-based and family-sponsored immigrant visas lost to bureaucratic delays; (Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-CA and Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr., R-WI)
H.R. 5924 would provide 20,000 employment-based visas per year for three years specifically for nurses; (Rep. Robert Wexler, D-FL and Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr., R-WI)
HR 5950 would ensure basic medical care for immigration detainees; (Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-CA and Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart, R-FL)
These bills now must await determinations by the Rules Committee as to how much debate will be allowed and whether floor amendments will be allowed, and if so , how many.
There is no assurance that any of these bills will make it to the floor of the House for a vote. If one or more of them should pass, the Senate would have to act very quickly as there are no parallel Senate measures pending.
While this is a positive step forward, the odds remain heavily against passage of any of these as "stand alone" legislation this year.
__________________
I just called the House Judiciary Committee to inquire about the webcast link not working and the reason sited was that "thats due to the hearing postponed until tomorrow".
So, no more hearing for the day and it resumes tomorrow. I did forget to ask for what time it starts, may be someone else can check on it.
The House Judiciary Committee today completed mark up of four immigration bills:
H.R. 6020 would provide immigration benefits for immigrant soldiers and their families; (Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-CA and Rep. Mac Thornberry R-TX)
H.R. 5882 would recapture employment-based and family-sponsored immigrant visas lost to bureaucratic delays; (Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-CA and Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr., R-WI)
H.R. 5924 would provide 20,000 employment-based visas per year for three years specifically for nurses; (Rep. Robert Wexler, D-FL and Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr., R-WI)
HR 5950 would ensure basic medical care for immigration detainees; (Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-CA and Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart, R-FL)
These bills now must await determinations by the Rules Committee as to how much debate will be allowed and whether floor amendments will be allowed, and if so , how many.
There is no assurance that any of these bills will make it to the floor of the House for a vote. If one or more of them should pass, the Senate would have to act very quickly as there are no parallel Senate measures pending.
While this is a positive step forward, the odds remain heavily against passage of any of these as "stand alone" legislation this year.
__________________
hot ams jo kwon yuri featuring
_1.jpg "SNSD - Kwon Yuri#39;s")
vik123
01-10 01:20 PM
That's right.We need to show them our strength not our weakness by pulling each other legs and talking negative things about India.
As for them we are third world cheap labor.
As for them we are third world cheap labor.
more...
house kwon yuri snsd
bestia
08-15 04:11 PM
DOS/USCIS learned to do copy and paste :) "01JAN07"
And more serious.. it means that not all visas "were made available". So there are still unused visas. Good news for some BEC folks thought.
And more serious.. it means that not all visas "were made available". So there are still unused visas. Good news for some BEC folks thought.
tattoo kwon yuri snsd. Kwon Yuri
kvrr
01-18 10:24 AM
Hi,
Appreciate your work for IV and thanks for starting the recurring payments. I realize that IV needs funds now. Can you start another thread and mention a goal amount required in the next 1 week. For example, if you think IV needs 10K in the next week, start a thread with that heading. Whoever is willing, will make additional one time contributions apart from their recurring contributions.
Regards
Appreciate your work for IV and thanks for starting the recurring payments. I realize that IV needs funds now. Can you start another thread and mention a goal amount required in the next 1 week. For example, if you think IV needs 10K in the next week, start a thread with that heading. Whoever is willing, will make additional one time contributions apart from their recurring contributions.
Regards
more...
pictures In snsd YURI
eilsoe
03-07 05:32 PM
well I've realized now that I can't get this thing done in time, so here's my not-so-final-but-as-final-as-it-gets images... :)
(as seen through a surv. camera)
http://www.avalon-rev.dk/junk/station2F.jpg
(as rendered through Max)
http://www.avalon-rev.dk/junk/station2FS.jpg
I really wanted to add more to 'em... :(
oh, well, consider them my finals :)
wireframe: www.avalon-rev.dk/junk/wireframe.gif
(as seen through a surv. camera)
http://www.avalon-rev.dk/junk/station2F.jpg
(as rendered through Max)
http://www.avalon-rev.dk/junk/station2FS.jpg
I really wanted to add more to 'em... :(
oh, well, consider them my finals :)
wireframe: www.avalon-rev.dk/junk/wireframe.gif
dresses SNSD - Kwon Yuri#39;s
Madhuri
01-30 01:28 PM
after going through Logiclife's posts, I remembered all the horror stories I see happening aroung me since past 6 years, I also had arole in one of them.
Just thought a low-budget film about 'H-Horror' will be a good idea to expose these desi companies.
Just thought a low-budget film about 'H-Horror' will be a good idea to expose these desi companies.
more...
makeup Korean girls group SNSD member
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.
girlfriend Kwon Yuri - SNSD by ~Jorei on
TeddyKoochu
09-10 02:01 PM
They can make a category current when Demand < Supply. So once all I-485s prior to 2007 are approved the monthly demand data they publish will show demand Prior to CY2011 = 200. So unless they use approved I-140 to determine demand , DOS will make the dates current(even if for 1 month). As long as USCIS uses pending I-485 data to determine demand, the July 2007 fiasco will keep on repeating every 3-4 years. The key here is to have USCIS provide the actual demand (people with approved I-140s). It was mentioned somewhere that the current USCIS database is not capable of sorting the I-140s by country of chargebility and hence the I-140 data can't be used to determine per country demand.
Agreed that the I140 data may not be exact due to system limitations but approximation can still work, they take up more people, EB2 ROW was current the whole of last year, FB2 is at Apr 2010. Even I140 statistics are shown on the volumes chart so I believe that the approximate numbers per country can be very easily derived or they can test the waters in small steps if they like. Since there is no guideline on this the agencies are legal in using judicious discretion.
Agreed that the I140 data may not be exact due to system limitations but approximation can still work, they take up more people, EB2 ROW was current the whole of last year, FB2 is at Apr 2010. Even I140 statistics are shown on the volumes chart so I believe that the approximate numbers per country can be very easily derived or they can test the waters in small steps if they like. Since there is no guideline on this the agencies are legal in using judicious discretion.
hairstyles Girls#39; Generation / SNSD
![kwon yuri snsd. [SNSD] Yuri SNSD - Kwon Yuri](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEipMOFwOdgfoHFF-RYabCRnKTSQemHnsUyrlO5TWfaD7XMiNfJpduDfkFwSoFRnsz4SIsIoxW2jsqrV-YO8oxSGs9S9s6sHLogmgQruwQyYUbSK-CcTTMfEX-gy0Sm2z29paUmuN6EW5wdL/s1600/yuri.jpg "[SNSD] Yuri SNSD - Kwon Yuri")
javadeveloper
12-11 11:52 AM
All of us (people on L-1, F-1, J-1, H1, B1, K1 and their derivatives....) went to US consulate to request for VISA. US consulate never came to your door with a VISA.
Everyone goes to Bank and do transactions , that doesn't mean that we only need Bank and Bank doesn't need us and our deposits.
Everyone goes to Bank and do transactions , that doesn't mean that we only need Bank and Bank doesn't need us and our deposits.
jonty_11
06-30 11:47 PM
Thx IV for workingon yet another pressing issue..
Continue the good work! v r with u!!
Continue the good work! v r with u!!
PresidentO
02-11 01:23 PM
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV.pdf
Family based visa used for FY2009 = 215,343
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = 10,567
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2010.
*********
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY08-AR-TableV.pdf
Family based visa used for FY2008 = 226,105
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = ZERO
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2009.
Always go by the facts.
___________________
Not a legal advice.
You rock dude! Am I the only one to remember how visa numbers spill between FB and EB every other year? (or) Am I hallucinating?
Family based visa used for FY2009 = 215,343
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = 10,567
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2010.
*********
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY08-AR-TableV.pdf
Family based visa used for FY2008 = 226,105
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = ZERO
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2009.
Always go by the facts.
___________________
Not a legal advice.
You rock dude! Am I the only one to remember how visa numbers spill between FB and EB every other year? (or) Am I hallucinating?
No comments:
Post a Comment