gc_on_demand
01-19 08:47 PM
Democrats seem to be loosing senate seat in MA. Message is clear - in this great recession, people don't want more taxes especially when they are happy with their current healthcare policies and their healthcare coverage don't change a dime for those extra taxes. Especially, when MA people are already paying for state universal healthcare. Why should WE pay for THEM?
Probably, this means healthcare reform is dead or congress embraces more conservative bill passed by senate. End of road for more tax burdensome things like cap-n-trade, climate change bill or controversial bills like immigration reform unless some less-conservative republicans are on board. If it is ever considered, be ready for more durbin-grassley measures in the final bill. Fate of the bill depends on what matters for elections in 2010, probably more populist measures like tax cuts, another stimulus, job growth measures will be focussed for rest of the year..
None of us here has little luck... We were close to CIR this year and now new math is in picture.. Two possibility for CIR in 2010...
(1) Dems will not touch it.
(2) GOP will not support it because people will think Dems passed it and that will help them to win midterm election.
Probably, this means healthcare reform is dead or congress embraces more conservative bill passed by senate. End of road for more tax burdensome things like cap-n-trade, climate change bill or controversial bills like immigration reform unless some less-conservative republicans are on board. If it is ever considered, be ready for more durbin-grassley measures in the final bill. Fate of the bill depends on what matters for elections in 2010, probably more populist measures like tax cuts, another stimulus, job growth measures will be focussed for rest of the year..
None of us here has little luck... We were close to CIR this year and now new math is in picture.. Two possibility for CIR in 2010...
(1) Dems will not touch it.
(2) GOP will not support it because people will think Dems passed it and that will help them to win midterm election.
wallpaper elvis presley wallpapers
coopheal
03-05 04:44 PM
I had two soft LUDs on 3rd and 4th of March. Did anyone else also have similar LUDs recently?
I know my PD is not current so nothing really going to happen.
I know my PD is not current so nothing really going to happen.
swapnajay
10-09 01:08 PM
Sorry to scare you in my previous reply....I did not read your question properly....
Since you are from a Non-Retrogressed Country, you may be eligible to apply for AOS. As you mentioned, you may apply I-140, I-485, I-131, and I-765 all together without any hassle. Make sure your attorney files all your applications with the right fee, since the fee structure has changed recently.
Sorry about my previous post though...
Good Luck!!
Since you are from a Non-Retrogressed Country, you may be eligible to apply for AOS. As you mentioned, you may apply I-140, I-485, I-131, and I-765 all together without any hassle. Make sure your attorney files all your applications with the right fee, since the fee structure has changed recently.
Sorry about my previous post though...
Good Luck!!
2011 Elvis Presley Birthday:
basav
08-03 03:20 PM
I came to US in March 2007 on L1B, mean time applied for H1b during April 2008 which got approved with COS effective from Oct 1 2008,
I could not work on H1b for some reasons, continued work on L1 until end of may 09 , went back to india during last week of May 2009 and returned in a month time (last week of June 09) with same L1 visa,
Now I have a valid I94 fo L1 until Feb 2010, also H1B I94 says valid until 2011 which I assume is no more valid due to re-entry on L1 n offcourse never having worked on H1b till date.
Now I would like to take up H1B in a month time, following are my questions
1. I assume that my employer need to apply for COS from L1-H1 now (form I-539) correct me if iam wrong,also is it legal to work while COS approval is in progress?
2. Is there a premium processing for COS? to make sure I get approval first and then start working,how long does it take to process premium and what is the typical time frame for normal one?
3. My family is back in India, are they legal to travel during my COS being in progress with necessary stamping ? This is in case iam legal to work while COS is in progress, or
you recommend me getting them before COS is initiated with there L2 visa n then apply COS for them too ? Risk here is if COS is not approved for some reasons everyone have to leave !
I could not work on H1b for some reasons, continued work on L1 until end of may 09 , went back to india during last week of May 2009 and returned in a month time (last week of June 09) with same L1 visa,
Now I have a valid I94 fo L1 until Feb 2010, also H1B I94 says valid until 2011 which I assume is no more valid due to re-entry on L1 n offcourse never having worked on H1b till date.
Now I would like to take up H1B in a month time, following are my questions
1. I assume that my employer need to apply for COS from L1-H1 now (form I-539) correct me if iam wrong,also is it legal to work while COS approval is in progress?
2. Is there a premium processing for COS? to make sure I get approval first and then start working,how long does it take to process premium and what is the typical time frame for normal one?
3. My family is back in India, are they legal to travel during my COS being in progress with necessary stamping ? This is in case iam legal to work while COS is in progress, or
you recommend me getting them before COS is initiated with there L2 visa n then apply COS for them too ? Risk here is if COS is not approved for some reasons everyone have to leave !
more...
HV000
08-10 12:44 AM
It is too early to tell if it definitely refers to us, but it is more likely that this IS referring to EB and naturalization background checks. Reasoning is like this - Background checks are required by Department of State (DOS) for issuing Visas. Department of homeland security (DHS) under which USCIS comes is responsible for those within the US. Now background checks are not conducted for issuing H1B visa etc. They are only for EB/N-400. So it is more likely they are referring us. Secondly, just two months back USCIS announced that it is going through Ombudsman's report and would be preparing a response. Last month FBI's miller came out and suggested they are happy with main file checks (which take less than 2 days to come back automatically) and USCIS is insisting of doing reference file checks and they would be keen to work with USCIS to find ways of reducing backlog processing times. Some options included they way background checks are done, and also borrowing workers from USCIS for FBI's NNC unit. Finally, when the fee increase was announced USCIS mentioned some of the money would go to reduce processing times and FBI asked for increasing the name check fee from $2 to $9 which means now that the fees increase has been implemented more resources to reduce time may be implemented.
With scores of cases against USCIS and thousands of letters to congressmen and president and articles in NYT and WS Times, finally they may have realized that it is time they attended to the background check delays issue.
Very good points. We should know more about this tomorrow. Hopefully they are referring to FB/EB IMMIGRATION.
With scores of cases against USCIS and thousands of letters to congressmen and president and articles in NYT and WS Times, finally they may have realized that it is time they attended to the background check delays issue.
Very good points. We should know more about this tomorrow. Hopefully they are referring to FB/EB IMMIGRATION.
yabadaba
06-01 01:54 PM
i dont get it...how come programmers guild gets a say in everything when they cant even get members to join or to even get people to be on their board of directors?
i have not seen one resume of an american tech worker that lists programmers guild as an association they belong to. Still.. how to they get solicited for opinions every day and Kim Berry keeps using strong rheotric to influence public opinion? What about his war on legal immigrants?
"Board Members
Kim Berry (Sacramento, CA)
Valerie Chau (San Diego, CA)
John Miano (New Jersey)
Mark Powell (Westminster, CA)
(three openings)
Officers
President: Mr. Kim Berry (Sacramento, CA)
Secretary: (open)
Treasurer: John Miano (New Jersey)
Membership Chairman: Valerie Chau (San Diego, CA)
V.P. Governmental Relations: Mark Powell (Westminster, CA)
Newsletter Editor: Open
Newsletter Coeditor: Open
V.P. Public Relations: Open
V.P. Advertising: Open
Press Releases: Open
Assistant webmaster: Open
(If you would like to contribute to our cause in another way, please contact us.)
The Programmers Guild is incorporated "
i have not seen one resume of an american tech worker that lists programmers guild as an association they belong to. Still.. how to they get solicited for opinions every day and Kim Berry keeps using strong rheotric to influence public opinion? What about his war on legal immigrants?
"Board Members
Kim Berry (Sacramento, CA)
Valerie Chau (San Diego, CA)
John Miano (New Jersey)
Mark Powell (Westminster, CA)
(three openings)
Officers
President: Mr. Kim Berry (Sacramento, CA)
Secretary: (open)
Treasurer: John Miano (New Jersey)
Membership Chairman: Valerie Chau (San Diego, CA)
V.P. Governmental Relations: Mark Powell (Westminster, CA)
Newsletter Editor: Open
Newsletter Coeditor: Open
V.P. Public Relations: Open
V.P. Advertising: Open
Press Releases: Open
Assistant webmaster: Open
(If you would like to contribute to our cause in another way, please contact us.)
The Programmers Guild is incorporated "
more...
jsporn
03-18 10:48 AM
test
2010 Elvis Presley
Eternal_Hope
05-11 11:20 AM
I second that. Use their tool to send your own letters.
We are already discussing this on the "Media Drive" thread.
Use one of our IV template letters and send it to the Media.
Let's do this today!
It is just a TOOL to write to senators! No one force you to use their template, and you can and SHOULD write you letter!
We are already discussing this on the "Media Drive" thread.
Use one of our IV template letters and send it to the Media.
Let's do this today!
It is just a TOOL to write to senators! No one force you to use their template, and you can and SHOULD write you letter!
more...
PERM12
10-25 07:01 PM
Will USCIS release updated Pending I-485 numbers as published that they will do every quarter....
hair Wallpaper
vxb2004
12-25 01:42 PM
Very happy for you. Have a great new year!...finally free..;)
more...
allegator
03-19 10:08 PM
Thank You very much for your suggestion but how can he know that I am working on different project. I just want to buy a months time and then he himself will remove me from his payroll as these desi employers can't pay a single days salary on bench. Also just after a week of joining I am planning to visit India on my AP for four weeks. I want to resign after coming back. I want the initiative to be taken from his side and not mine. I have ben working with him since last five year and just for holding my H1B he has been taking a huge cut from my billing rate witout doing any thing.
Thanks
Thanks,
Sudhakar
Thanks
Thanks,
Sudhakar
hot elvis-presley wallpaper
jkays94
04-18 07:49 AM
The McCain-Kennedy bill is what had the EB provisions in the first place long before Frist or Martinez-Hagel put their bills. Senator Kennedy has been fighting for immigrants rights for almost 40 years (longer than someone of us have been alive) including legal immigration. His own brother President John F. Kennedy wrote a book called - We are a nation of immigrants.
I am sorry but with all due respect to Sen Kennedy he could address the rally of bunch of illegals waiving Mexican Flag and demanding their "RIGHTS" in Spanish. We have sent faxes in English to Senetor Kennedy requesting to support Bill that will provide relief to Legal immigrant communites but still nothing specific to our cause.
Please let us refrain from making conclusions as to who was at the rally, there were many legal immigrants and citizens at the DC rally of many nationalities and backgrounds, it was covered live on CSPAN twice for its entire 4 hr duration -- CSPAN as you know is funded by US public funds and would not cover an event dominated by illegals. The US constitution guarantees constitutional freedoms and rights to all who are within its borders and that would include the right to assembly and freedom of speech. FYI, there are 43 million Hispanic-Americans in the US. The DC rally had just as many American flags as many other rallies around the country on April 10. Senator Kennedy has done a lot for legal immigrants, but lets face it, with no CIR, there will be no separate bill for legal immigrants, we would have to rely on ammendments to other bills and those ammendments would be subject to the fate of sections 8001 and 8002 of S1932. CIR originated in the Senate through McCain-Kennedy, the EB number provisions were in this bill, so lets give credit where its due and not say that nothing has been done for legal immigrants by the Senator.
I am sorry but with all due respect to Sen Kennedy he could address the rally of bunch of illegals waiving Mexican Flag and demanding their "RIGHTS" in Spanish. We have sent faxes in English to Senetor Kennedy requesting to support Bill that will provide relief to Legal immigrant communites but still nothing specific to our cause.
Please let us refrain from making conclusions as to who was at the rally, there were many legal immigrants and citizens at the DC rally of many nationalities and backgrounds, it was covered live on CSPAN twice for its entire 4 hr duration -- CSPAN as you know is funded by US public funds and would not cover an event dominated by illegals. The US constitution guarantees constitutional freedoms and rights to all who are within its borders and that would include the right to assembly and freedom of speech. FYI, there are 43 million Hispanic-Americans in the US. The DC rally had just as many American flags as many other rallies around the country on April 10. Senator Kennedy has done a lot for legal immigrants, but lets face it, with no CIR, there will be no separate bill for legal immigrants, we would have to rely on ammendments to other bills and those ammendments would be subject to the fate of sections 8001 and 8002 of S1932. CIR originated in the Senate through McCain-Kennedy, the EB number provisions were in this bill, so lets give credit where its due and not say that nothing has been done for legal immigrants by the Senator.
more...
house Elvis Presley Poster 002
mbartosik
05-30 01:28 PM
I understand if someone was stuck in BEC, we all got s****ed with that.
But why given that the H1B is only intended to be for a maximum of 6 years would anyone leave it until the last year to apply.
PERM has been around for a while now, and anyone approaching 6 years should have already filed PERM or be ready to leave after year 6.
But why given that the H1B is only intended to be for a maximum of 6 years would anyone leave it until the last year to apply.
PERM has been around for a while now, and anyone approaching 6 years should have already filed PERM or be ready to leave after year 6.
tattoo Elvis Presley wallpaper
WaldenPond
09-07 10:44 AM
If you plan on being in DC area on September 17th and if you would like IV to assist you to meet with the lawmakers from your State, please email us the following information at your earliest convenience at lobbyday@immigrationvoice.org:
Name
IV Handle
Phone Number
Zip code
State
Meeting with the office of lawmakers have to be setup much in advance and it would help the volunteers to seek meetings for you if you send us this information today.
If you have any question, please write to lobbyday@immigrationvoice.org. Please keep in mind that we are coordinating meetings for more than 500 IV members for the Lobby day and delay in sending us information about your availability would make it difficult for us to seek appointments for you. So kindly treat this request as Urgent.
Name
IV Handle
Phone Number
Zip code
State
Meeting with the office of lawmakers have to be setup much in advance and it would help the volunteers to seek meetings for you if you send us this information today.
If you have any question, please write to lobbyday@immigrationvoice.org. Please keep in mind that we are coordinating meetings for more than 500 IV members for the Lobby day and delay in sending us information about your availability would make it difficult for us to seek appointments for you. So kindly treat this request as Urgent.
more...
pictures elvis presley rock
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.
dresses elvis presley 11 singer
hopefulgc
08-21 11:26 AM
Man, I lost my patience with them long back.
My case is NSC-EAC-NSC
I keep a log of anything "useful" I am told every time I speak to them. And usually, the first few mins are wasted in them giving me wrong info, me telling them what they told me last time and them finally agreeing with it after re-checking their screens.
btw .. it is indeed super-frustrating and unacceptable they way they are bouncing your case around.
Why is USCIS forgetting that we are paying for their third grade services?
I broke my politeness today.USCIS inconsistency broke the limits for me.
My case was filed in Nebarska then tranferred to Texas then as soon as the priority date became current, last month, it was transferred to California.
I talked yesterday to customer service and it by chance got transferred to California Service Center where the officer told me that my case was transferred back to Texas Service Center on August 14, 2008. She also told me to call TSC to confirm it.
I called today the National Customer Service Center (NCSC) to confirm it and the lady tells me that the case is still in California and she has no more infomation about it. I told her about my call yesterday.
Lady: How could you have ever called CSC because their phone numbers are not public
Me: I called the same number and for some reason it got transferred to CSC.
Lady: Then you have already been told that your case has been transferred back on Aug 14, what do you need now ?
Me: The website does not show that. Plus the officer yesterday asked me to confirm it which you are not doing, you are just repeating my words about my conversation. There are so many inconsitencies . You told me just now that my case is still in California.
Lady: Can you please hold for a moment.
After hold:
Lady: I just talked to my supervisor, if the website says it is in California then it is California. Is there anything else I can help you with ?
Me: I do not understand "To speed up processing " clause in the reason to transfer it to california. It has been transferred from the center which is processing 485 applications to the center which is not processing applications. So the clause "To speed up processing" is so inconsistent.
Lady: Sir, we cannot tell you the reason why do we transfers
Me: But you have already told me the reason in the written notice as "To speed up processing"
Lady: It is not "To speed up processing " it is "for processing". Is there anything else that I can help you with ?
Me: I hang up the phone.
My case is NSC-EAC-NSC
I keep a log of anything "useful" I am told every time I speak to them. And usually, the first few mins are wasted in them giving me wrong info, me telling them what they told me last time and them finally agreeing with it after re-checking their screens.
btw .. it is indeed super-frustrating and unacceptable they way they are bouncing your case around.
Why is USCIS forgetting that we are paying for their third grade services?
I broke my politeness today.USCIS inconsistency broke the limits for me.
My case was filed in Nebarska then tranferred to Texas then as soon as the priority date became current, last month, it was transferred to California.
I talked yesterday to customer service and it by chance got transferred to California Service Center where the officer told me that my case was transferred back to Texas Service Center on August 14, 2008. She also told me to call TSC to confirm it.
I called today the National Customer Service Center (NCSC) to confirm it and the lady tells me that the case is still in California and she has no more infomation about it. I told her about my call yesterday.
Lady: How could you have ever called CSC because their phone numbers are not public
Me: I called the same number and for some reason it got transferred to CSC.
Lady: Then you have already been told that your case has been transferred back on Aug 14, what do you need now ?
Me: The website does not show that. Plus the officer yesterday asked me to confirm it which you are not doing, you are just repeating my words about my conversation. There are so many inconsitencies . You told me just now that my case is still in California.
Lady: Can you please hold for a moment.
After hold:
Lady: I just talked to my supervisor, if the website says it is in California then it is California. Is there anything else I can help you with ?
Me: I do not understand "To speed up processing " clause in the reason to transfer it to california. It has been transferred from the center which is processing 485 applications to the center which is not processing applications. So the clause "To speed up processing" is so inconsistent.
Lady: Sir, we cannot tell you the reason why do we transfers
Me: But you have already told me the reason in the written notice as "To speed up processing"
Lady: It is not "To speed up processing " it is "for processing". Is there anything else that I can help you with ?
Me: I hang up the phone.
more...
makeup Elvis Presley - Photographs
LostInGCProcess
09-19 05:51 PM
meaning I can work for company B now and even though my h1b renewal approves with company A? then when I feel like I can go out and reenter before the h1b renewal period ends?
sabr, could you be more elaborate regarding the 2 companies, where do u work, and who is offering you the job, how do they want to hire you, etc... Please explain clearly what your question is? Iam trying to say something and you are interpreting it differently and it looks like we are off pace somewhere.
sabr, could you be more elaborate regarding the 2 companies, where do u work, and who is offering you the job, how do they want to hire you, etc... Please explain clearly what your question is? Iam trying to say something and you are interpreting it differently and it looks like we are off pace somewhere.
girlfriend Name : Elvis Presley Official
eastindia
09-23 11:14 AM
As long as greedy corporations like microsoft exist noting will happen to H1B program..its the economy that's it ..once it start moving up h1b will become l1b and the import of cheap labor starts once again .....you guys are just spreading fear nothing else ....
You hate Microsoft because you cannot a job there. Why don't you spend time upgrading your skills and get rid of your hatred for H1B workers.
If you think it is too much for you and you would rather blame Immigrants for your incompetence, then you may want to try apply as a Janitor in Microsoft or Google. Maybe they will hire you. You can then tell all your friends that you work for Microsoft. :D
You hate Microsoft because you cannot a job there. Why don't you spend time upgrading your skills and get rid of your hatred for H1B workers.
If you think it is too much for you and you would rather blame Immigrants for your incompetence, then you may want to try apply as a Janitor in Microsoft or Google. Maybe they will hire you. You can then tell all your friends that you work for Microsoft. :D
hairstyles elvis presley wallpaper.
gccovet
09-05 04:53 PM
I have GC for about a month now. I plan on taking up Corp-to-Corp, Independent, 1099 and W2 contracts. For corp-to-corp contracts I would like to incorporate a company if I can save on taxes over the 1099 contracts. I am also
in the process of engaging a CPA. Do you advise incorpating a LLC or S-Corp or a C-corp ?
Thanks,
theOne
LLC is the best way to go, just one drawback , per current market situation (financial situation), banks might be reluctant to provide a loan etc. but if you have a VC or capital, go for LLC. the best way to go.
Good luck.
GCCovet
in the process of engaging a CPA. Do you advise incorpating a LLC or S-Corp or a C-corp ?
Thanks,
theOne
LLC is the best way to go, just one drawback , per current market situation (financial situation), banks might be reluctant to provide a loan etc. but if you have a VC or capital, go for LLC. the best way to go.
Good luck.
GCCovet
pappu
07-29 11:45 AM
My son is an U.S citizen (4 years old) and my Attorney successfully filed a petion on behalf of me and mywife.
But that petion is based on EB2 :p
I did not understand your answer.
How come your 4 year old son apply in EB2 category and sponsor the parents. I know the application is for future employment. But this one is stretching too far? :)
But that petion is based on EB2 :p
I did not understand your answer.
How come your 4 year old son apply in EB2 category and sponsor the parents. I know the application is for future employment. But this one is stretching too far? :)
superdude
07-17 01:46 PM
DOS and USCIS are slow. But it would be really helpful if the IV code team can provide some update on our site. I believe over 2.5 hours have passed since the last update regarding some update in 1 hour. I guess we can't do anything if it takes more time but an update always helps! Thank you.
IV Core do know the news. They are waiting for the govt officials to declare the news
IV Core do know the news. They are waiting for the govt officials to declare the news
No comments:
Post a Comment