rajuseattle
07-14 07:48 PM
One more thing AC-21 is not a formal USCIS form which one can fill in and send it over to USCIS, its just a letter wherein you or your legal representative informs USCIS about the change in employment, be it a job promotion with same employer or u switching the Job using the AC-21 provisions.
As explained earlier in this forum, 180 day rule interpretation is solely USCIS's descretion, if USCIS adjudicator who is working on your case accepts your new EVL and approves your case you are good to go, but for some reason the adjudicator keeps sending more RFE then you will need someone who can answer them in a legal language and thats where attorney services comes in handy.
I am hoping for the best for you that once they see your new EVL, they are satisfied and sends you GC.
As explained earlier in this forum, 180 day rule interpretation is solely USCIS's descretion, if USCIS adjudicator who is working on your case accepts your new EVL and approves your case you are good to go, but for some reason the adjudicator keeps sending more RFE then you will need someone who can answer them in a legal language and thats where attorney services comes in handy.
I am hoping for the best for you that once they see your new EVL, they are satisfied and sends you GC.
wallpaper vw new beetle 2011.
ski_dude12
04-24 09:25 PM
Congrats!!!
mihird
07-09 10:37 PM
I think, we should all follow this lawsuit closely...if it gets accepted for trial in Illinois, I am seriously considering filing one myself in California...on similar grounds..
There are several attorneys who would be willing to file a lawsuit no cost with the understanding that any monetary benefits if won, be split with them....
Likewise, I think, others should stand up and consider filing separate law suits in different states....the more law suits get filed, the more media/people/congressmen attention this issue will get...
There are several attorneys who would be willing to file a lawsuit no cost with the understanding that any monetary benefits if won, be split with them....
Likewise, I think, others should stand up and consider filing separate law suits in different states....the more law suits get filed, the more media/people/congressmen attention this issue will get...
2011 new beetle 2011 interior. new
gc28262
12-20 05:39 PM
Yes, I did. In fact, many times.
If you were not laid off, it is fine. Technically you are out of status only when you are laid off. If company didn't pay you that is probably an issue for the company not you.
If you traveled out and came back to US with a proper visa stamping, your old "wrongdoings" are pardoned. That is what 245(k) is all about. If you are not filing your GC through the same employer, you are even better off.
Relax !
If you were not laid off, it is fine. Technically you are out of status only when you are laid off. If company didn't pay you that is probably an issue for the company not you.
If you traveled out and came back to US with a proper visa stamping, your old "wrongdoings" are pardoned. That is what 245(k) is all about. If you are not filing your GC through the same employer, you are even better off.
Relax !
more...
andycool
03-16 02:04 PM
141,020 visa numbers used in FY2009
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV.pdf
Look at the last page.
The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is 140,000. So the usage was actually more.
__________________
Not a legal advice.
Hello Desi,
"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 an earlier cut-off date 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.)
Furthermore, Section 202(a)(2) reads, �2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. Subject to paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed seven percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or two percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.� The seven percent per-country limit specified in INA 202(a)(2) is considered to be for both Family-sponsored and Employment-based numbers combined.
Allocation of visa numbers under Section 202(e) is accomplished as follows:
1. If based on historical patterns or current demand it appears that during a fiscal year number use by aliens chargeable to a particular country will exceed the per-country numerical limit for both the Family and Employment preferences combined, that country would be considered oversubscribed. Both the Family and Employment preferences would be subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1).
2. Sometimes during a fiscal year it may become apparent that because of a lack of demand in the Family preferences, number use by aliens chargeable to an oversubscribed country will be well within the per-country numerical limit. In such case the excess Family numbers would be made available to the Employment preferences subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1). Each of the first three Employment categories would receive 28.6% of the excess numbers, and each of the Fourth and Fifth preference categories 7.1%. (Fall-across would likewise apply if an oversubscribed country lacked sufficient demand in the Employment preferences but had excess demand in the Family preferences.)
If a foreign state other than an oversubscribed country has little Family preference demand but considerable Employment preference demand, the otherwise unused Family numbers fall across to Employment (and vice versa) for purposes of that foreign state�s annual numerical limit. For example, in FY-2009 South Korea used a grand total of 15,899 Family and Employment preference numbers, of which 1,688 were Family numbers and 14,211 were Employment numbers. This grand total was well within the FY-2009 per-country numerical limit of 25,620 Family and Employment numbers combined, so South Korea was not oversubscribed. The unused Family numbers were distributed within the Employment categories, allowing South Korea to be considerably over the 9,800 Employment limit which would have been in effect had it been an oversubscribed country.
This is from April Visa Bulletin , according to this S korea got 14,211 visas from FB ( spill over from FB - EB) then dont you think the total EB visas issued in 2009 should be around 150000 instead of 141000....
I am little confused...
your comment will be greatly appreciated ;)
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV.pdf
Look at the last page.
The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is 140,000. So the usage was actually more.
__________________
Not a legal advice.
Hello Desi,
"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 an earlier cut-off date 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.)
Furthermore, Section 202(a)(2) reads, �2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. Subject to paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed seven percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or two percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.� The seven percent per-country limit specified in INA 202(a)(2) is considered to be for both Family-sponsored and Employment-based numbers combined.
Allocation of visa numbers under Section 202(e) is accomplished as follows:
1. If based on historical patterns or current demand it appears that during a fiscal year number use by aliens chargeable to a particular country will exceed the per-country numerical limit for both the Family and Employment preferences combined, that country would be considered oversubscribed. Both the Family and Employment preferences would be subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1).
2. Sometimes during a fiscal year it may become apparent that because of a lack of demand in the Family preferences, number use by aliens chargeable to an oversubscribed country will be well within the per-country numerical limit. In such case the excess Family numbers would be made available to the Employment preferences subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1). Each of the first three Employment categories would receive 28.6% of the excess numbers, and each of the Fourth and Fifth preference categories 7.1%. (Fall-across would likewise apply if an oversubscribed country lacked sufficient demand in the Employment preferences but had excess demand in the Family preferences.)
If a foreign state other than an oversubscribed country has little Family preference demand but considerable Employment preference demand, the otherwise unused Family numbers fall across to Employment (and vice versa) for purposes of that foreign state�s annual numerical limit. For example, in FY-2009 South Korea used a grand total of 15,899 Family and Employment preference numbers, of which 1,688 were Family numbers and 14,211 were Employment numbers. This grand total was well within the FY-2009 per-country numerical limit of 25,620 Family and Employment numbers combined, so South Korea was not oversubscribed. The unused Family numbers were distributed within the Employment categories, allowing South Korea to be considerably over the 9,800 Employment limit which would have been in effect had it been an oversubscribed country.
This is from April Visa Bulletin , according to this S korea got 14,211 visas from FB ( spill over from FB - EB) then dont you think the total EB visas issued in 2009 should be around 150000 instead of 141000....
I am little confused...
your comment will be greatly appreciated ;)
shreekhand
07-12 10:15 PM
What is the need for all this ? The visa bulletin is out but no one cares to read it I guess. Every bulletin has these or words to this effect.
"Only applicants who have a priority date earlier than the cut-off date may be allotted a number."
So the date that you see in the table is NOT eligible for visa numbers.
Thanks for good wishes and congratulations to all who become current.
Regarding cutoff date I'm hearing multiple theories -
A. if it says 1st March - then prior to that consider as active - 1st of March is not included
B. some says 1st March is included because it is like UNTIL 1st March
C. Someone told me if cutoff date fall on weekend then consider that date in. 1st March in 2006 was Wednesday - just FYI.
D. someone also told me if it falls during weekdays then consider whole week - until Friday. USCIS taking cases for whole week for processing.
Wow so many options looks like I need to poll this and then wait until next bulletin :)
Once again thanks for good wishes and Congratulations who were waiting for longer period.
-Rwe
"Only applicants who have a priority date earlier than the cut-off date may be allotted a number."
So the date that you see in the table is NOT eligible for visa numbers.
Thanks for good wishes and congratulations to all who become current.
Regarding cutoff date I'm hearing multiple theories -
A. if it says 1st March - then prior to that consider as active - 1st of March is not included
B. some says 1st March is included because it is like UNTIL 1st March
C. Someone told me if cutoff date fall on weekend then consider that date in. 1st March in 2006 was Wednesday - just FYI.
D. someone also told me if it falls during weekdays then consider whole week - until Friday. USCIS taking cases for whole week for processing.
Wow so many options looks like I need to poll this and then wait until next bulletin :)
Once again thanks for good wishes and Congratulations who were waiting for longer period.
-Rwe
more...
perm2gc
01-10 06:04 PM
http://www.immigrationboards.com/viewtopic.php?p=70468#70468
2010 New Beetle 2011 – Blog de
shiankuraaf
04-10 10:07 PM
Employment-based immigrants visa issued in last 10 Years from 1998 to 2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 1998----1999----2000-----2001------2002-----2003----2004-----2005-----2006-----2007
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quota 140,000-140,000-140,000--140,000--140,000--140,000-140,000--140,000--140,000--140,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issued 77,413--56,678--106,642--178,702--173,814--81,727--155,330--246,877--159,081--162,176
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unused 62,587--83,322---33,358----------------------58,273-------------------------------------------------- 237,540
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Excess -------------------------------38,702---33,814------------15,330--106,877---19,,081--22,176 ----- 235,980
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note:
-------
The number of unused employment visa numbers from the previous fiscal year is computed by
determining the difference between 1) the worldwide level of employment-based visas established
for the previous fiscal year and 2) the number of employment-based visas actually issued during the
previous fiscal year.
Source for the statistics:
http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publicatio...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 1998----1999----2000-----2001------2002-----2003----2004-----2005-----2006-----2007
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quota 140,000-140,000-140,000--140,000--140,000--140,000-140,000--140,000--140,000--140,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issued 77,413--56,678--106,642--178,702--173,814--81,727--155,330--246,877--159,081--162,176
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unused 62,587--83,322---33,358----------------------58,273-------------------------------------------------- 237,540
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Excess -------------------------------38,702---33,814------------15,330--106,877---19,,081--22,176 ----- 235,980
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note:
-------
The number of unused employment visa numbers from the previous fiscal year is computed by
determining the difference between 1) the worldwide level of employment-based visas established
for the previous fiscal year and 2) the number of employment-based visas actually issued during the
previous fiscal year.
Source for the statistics:
http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publicatio...
more...
willwin
07-28 01:02 PM
I did shake hands with Donald Duck, so did my 4-yr old daughter (in Disney Land), in hindsight I should have washed my hands well after that :(
You are one funny guy in this thread with high sense of humor!! I like that!!!
Only thing I don't like about you is - EB2. (Need to say I am EB3?)
LOL.
You are one funny guy in this thread with high sense of humor!! I like that!!!
Only thing I don't like about you is - EB2. (Need to say I am EB3?)
LOL.
hair VW New beetle 2011 use “LED
pointlesswait
11-17 03:49 PM
why cant they spell out the damn rule.. instead of leaving it out for speculations...
insane!
insane!
more...
aristotle
07-18 03:11 AM
Can all the July 2nd filers update this thread if
- you have your application rejected and returned.
OR
- you get a receipt number or have your check cashed.
Please login and subscribe to this thread.
- you have your application rejected and returned.
OR
- you get a receipt number or have your check cashed.
Please login and subscribe to this thread.
hot new new beetle 2011. new
kaella
06-11 10:43 AM
Just did it.
more...
house Volkswagen New Beetle 2011
bijualex29
07-24 09:31 AM
I think that is a very good idea, we should have several backup plans.
I never thought that �Ability to file I-485� is within USCIS power.
I too have researched and found out that the just � Memo � was issued to change the procedure to file I-485/I-140 concurrent filing.
Here � Ability to file will be within USCIS power� , but granting a green card is controlled by law.
I never thought that �Ability to file I-485� is within USCIS power.
I too have researched and found out that the just � Memo � was issued to change the procedure to file I-485/I-140 concurrent filing.
Here � Ability to file will be within USCIS power� , but granting a green card is controlled by law.
tattoo VW New Beetle 2011 | Blog
inthehole
07-18 12:07 PM
Called USCIS just 5 mins back.. first a lady answered and asked me questions about the reason of calling..
I explained that i am calling to find out the status of my i-485 application that i filed on June 25th. And I would like to know when will i get my receipt no.
The lady asked me to stay on the line and transferred to another person.
Another lady picked up and asked my last name.. I told my last name. (i did not spell my last name)
She asked for reason for calling..
I said to I filed i-485 on June 25th and I did not get my receipt no yet..i said
i would like to know when can i expect my receipt no..
She put me on hold for few mins and came back and said
"You have till August 17 to file your i-485. If we have visa numbers available and if your application is accepted, you will receive your receipt no before August 17"
I said I aready filed my application on June 25, before the July bulletin.
She said "listen carefully" and explained the same thing again.
I said thank you and hung up..
It doesn't make any sense.. I think(hope) she doesn't understand my question properly or she doesn't know the process..
I explained that i am calling to find out the status of my i-485 application that i filed on June 25th. And I would like to know when will i get my receipt no.
The lady asked me to stay on the line and transferred to another person.
Another lady picked up and asked my last name.. I told my last name. (i did not spell my last name)
She asked for reason for calling..
I said to I filed i-485 on June 25th and I did not get my receipt no yet..i said
i would like to know when can i expect my receipt no..
She put me on hold for few mins and came back and said
"You have till August 17 to file your i-485. If we have visa numbers available and if your application is accepted, you will receive your receipt no before August 17"
I said I aready filed my application on June 25, before the July bulletin.
She said "listen carefully" and explained the same thing again.
I said thank you and hung up..
It doesn't make any sense.. I think(hope) she doesn't understand my question properly or she doesn't know the process..
more...
pictures new new beetle 2011. new new
spicy_guy
08-11 11:56 AM
Guys,
All EB3 Is are coming forward. Thats a good thing.
But do we have:
- A leader to lead this effort
- Agenda to follow
- Specific Goals
- Action Items
- Immediate Goals
Without these we are not going anywhere. But just wasting our time on top of our already surmounting frustration.
All EB3 Is are coming forward. Thats a good thing.
But do we have:
- A leader to lead this effort
- Agenda to follow
- Specific Goals
- Action Items
- Immediate Goals
Without these we are not going anywhere. But just wasting our time on top of our already surmounting frustration.
dresses Volkswagen New Beetle
abhijitp
07-24 12:16 AM
Pappu, Others:
My lawyer confirmed they were "unable to" include the Employment Verification Letter along with the AOS/ EAD/ AP packet that was submitted in time to reach USCIS on July 2.
What are my options now? If you have any insight please let me know.
I was wondering about doing one or both of the following two things:
1. Send Employment Verification Letter even before Receipt Notice is received for I-485. This is likely to be lost in the mess that it is now, but does not hurt trying!
2. Prepare and send another I-485 with all documents including Employment Verification Letter. Even if this is not recommended by some lawyers, I would think this is better than simply relying on the "common" practice of issuing an RFE instead of outright rejecting the I-485.
Thanks!
My lawyer confirmed they were "unable to" include the Employment Verification Letter along with the AOS/ EAD/ AP packet that was submitted in time to reach USCIS on July 2.
What are my options now? If you have any insight please let me know.
I was wondering about doing one or both of the following two things:
1. Send Employment Verification Letter even before Receipt Notice is received for I-485. This is likely to be lost in the mess that it is now, but does not hurt trying!
2. Prepare and send another I-485 with all documents including Employment Verification Letter. Even if this is not recommended by some lawyers, I would think this is better than simply relying on the "common" practice of issuing an RFE instead of outright rejecting the I-485.
Thanks!
more...
makeup new new beetle 2011. vw new
rweworld1
07-12 04:38 PM
Hi,
My PD is March 1st 2006. Just wondering is March 1st is in or out? i.e. cut off is March 2nd or March 1st?
thanks,
Rwe
My PD is March 1st 2006. Just wondering is March 1st is in or out? i.e. cut off is March 2nd or March 1st?
thanks,
Rwe
girlfriend Tags: 2011 VW New Beetle,
kaisersose
02-21 04:12 PM
I had one question. If there 140 K quota and 400 k employment AOS pending shuldnt they be cleared in 2-3 years (140k*3) since no matter what 140 k visas are going to get used (for example if there are leftovers others will get it)?
Even assuming hereafter no visa numbers will be wasted, It is not exactly FIFO for that to happen.
Consider this:
a) The Indian Applicant started back in 2003. In 2009 everything is done except assigning a visa number to this case.
b) There is a German Applicant who will start in 2008. In 2009 everything is done except assigning a visa number to this case.
The German will get a visa number assigned and a green card, but the Indian will not as he still has thousands ahead of him waiting for visa numbers.
Therefore 400K at 140K/ year is not how it works.
Even assuming hereafter no visa numbers will be wasted, It is not exactly FIFO for that to happen.
Consider this:
a) The Indian Applicant started back in 2003. In 2009 everything is done except assigning a visa number to this case.
b) There is a German Applicant who will start in 2008. In 2009 everything is done except assigning a visa number to this case.
The German will get a visa number assigned and a green card, but the Indian will not as he still has thousands ahead of him waiting for visa numbers.
Therefore 400K at 140K/ year is not how it works.
hairstyles Seen before were VW#39;s new New
nixstor
10-15 07:25 PM
Nixtor - In the poll question you talk about providing your receipt number but I don't see any mentions about that in the document. Do you expect us to include our receipt # with this request. Please clarify.
Yes, National Records Center will provide you with a receipt number for tracking purposes.
Yes, National Records Center will provide you with a receipt number for tracking purposes.
leoindiano
03-17 10:58 AM
Yes, mine was in Philly BEC too...which was approved in 2007 January.
But, there was quite a few go lucky people whose labor was getting approved in 30 days state, 30 days federal until that time. thats why i took 50-50 probability.
But, there was quite a few go lucky people whose labor was getting approved in 30 days state, 30 days federal until that time. thats why i took 50-50 probability.
sanju_dba
09-09 01:50 PM
This is a big fantasy.
EB3 is not going to get current in the next 4-5 years you said.
Backlog posted by USCIS and DOS is a lot more than posted. Their data is not totally right.
The only way EB3 India can be current if all Indians on H1B, EAD are deported by a law. Such law is likely in 4-5 years if outsourcing increase and anti-immigrants blame immigrants for their unemployment. Then EB3 I will get current. But there will be no EB3I to take advantage of it.
I say we stop dreaming and do a rally in DC.
I understand what you said, but just to consider the off numbers published by dos
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf
EB2 total pending 34325
EB3 total pending 136325
2010-2011 quota EB1+EB2 ( 85343 )
less eb2 " " 34325
--------------------------------------------
" " 51018 trickeling down for EB3 Worldwide?
2010-2011 quota EB3 ( 42671 )
less eb3 - 136325
--------------------------------------------
42636 ( eb3 pending left over from above )
2011-2012 quota eb1+eb2+eb3 128013
So, with above math Eb2 will be current by next year, and eb3 will be by end of 2012?
above math is based on
inaccurate numbers given by DOS?
assuming no new applicants applying.
Hope I am correct! :)
EB3 is not going to get current in the next 4-5 years you said.
Backlog posted by USCIS and DOS is a lot more than posted. Their data is not totally right.
The only way EB3 India can be current if all Indians on H1B, EAD are deported by a law. Such law is likely in 4-5 years if outsourcing increase and anti-immigrants blame immigrants for their unemployment. Then EB3 I will get current. But there will be no EB3I to take advantage of it.
I say we stop dreaming and do a rally in DC.
I understand what you said, but just to consider the off numbers published by dos
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf
EB2 total pending 34325
EB3 total pending 136325
2010-2011 quota EB1+EB2 ( 85343 )
less eb2 " " 34325
--------------------------------------------
" " 51018 trickeling down for EB3 Worldwide?
2010-2011 quota EB3 ( 42671 )
less eb3 - 136325
--------------------------------------------
42636 ( eb3 pending left over from above )
2011-2012 quota eb1+eb2+eb3 128013
So, with above math Eb2 will be current by next year, and eb3 will be by end of 2012?
above math is based on
inaccurate numbers given by DOS?
assuming no new applicants applying.
Hope I am correct! :)
