GCwaitforever
02-14 04:15 PM
[QUOTE=gjoe;223388]How many of us who contributed to IV mentioned that in the AOS application form I485. I guess you are supposed to disclose your affiliation to IV, atleast when you are a contributing member. If this is true most of us will automatically disqualify for a GC because we failed to disclose information truthfully
I did! full disclosure....:)
I could be a member of drink-raw-milk Club. Am I supposed to declare that on I-485? ;)
I did! full disclosure....:)
I could be a member of drink-raw-milk Club. Am I supposed to declare that on I-485? ;)
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
belmontboy
05-29 06:37 PM
I have been saying this for the past one year, let us forget everything else, let us not come up with new rules or ideas or suggestions (new quotas, fraud detection, sue USCIS fund, exteneded APs etc). Focus all our energies on the one issue that will help everyone from all affected countries....Recapture of Unused Visas.
Recapture campaign will not divide us in EB 1 Vs 2 Vs 3 or countries. Over the past year a number of people have quit because of the bickering.
Recapture has a precedent because it was approved by Clinton earlier.
Recapture is free of country caps and it does not affect the existing visas. Murthy's article mentions that 120k are stuck in limbo and we know that there are around 400k visas available...i dont know what more motivation people need to fight for this issues.
On our own each one of us can do the following:
a) Try to arrange a meeting with your congressman and senators
b) write a letter to all members of the Judicary committee
after that do whatever IV tells you to do
If its recapture, then so be it.
BTW, 120k is just indians. What about chinese, mexicans??
instead of try on our own, why don't we group ourselves - as someone suggested 100-150 should be good enough.
Lets group and mail president, chief of staff, your local senator, and few others (who favor legal immigration).
can some good english pundits draw a sample letter highlighting our cause and need for visa recapture?
Also lets have a poll and get list of participants.
The plan shall be mail one letter to each every week. All it would cost you is a printout, an envelope, a 42cents stamp and 5 minutes. Its not too much asking though
Any body has better suggestions?
Recapture campaign will not divide us in EB 1 Vs 2 Vs 3 or countries. Over the past year a number of people have quit because of the bickering.
Recapture has a precedent because it was approved by Clinton earlier.
Recapture is free of country caps and it does not affect the existing visas. Murthy's article mentions that 120k are stuck in limbo and we know that there are around 400k visas available...i dont know what more motivation people need to fight for this issues.
On our own each one of us can do the following:
a) Try to arrange a meeting with your congressman and senators
b) write a letter to all members of the Judicary committee
after that do whatever IV tells you to do
If its recapture, then so be it.
BTW, 120k is just indians. What about chinese, mexicans??
instead of try on our own, why don't we group ourselves - as someone suggested 100-150 should be good enough.
Lets group and mail president, chief of staff, your local senator, and few others (who favor legal immigration).
can some good english pundits draw a sample letter highlighting our cause and need for visa recapture?
Also lets have a poll and get list of participants.
The plan shall be mail one letter to each every week. All it would cost you is a printout, an envelope, a 42cents stamp and 5 minutes. Its not too much asking though
Any body has better suggestions?
gcgoingon
06-14 05:33 PM
I guess my 9 months old prediction is coming true (off by a month).
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/1049939-post209.html
I hope your predictions for the coming months also come true..
I do not know why the bulletin is so conservative about the EB2-I estimates for the year 2010 (March/April 2006)?
The reason I am saying this is the initial estimate they gave for EB2-I in Jan '10 bulletin is Feb/March 2005.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/1049939-post209.html
I hope your predictions for the coming months also come true..
I do not know why the bulletin is so conservative about the EB2-I estimates for the year 2010 (March/April 2006)?
The reason I am saying this is the initial estimate they gave for EB2-I in Jan '10 bulletin is Feb/March 2005.
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
eb3_nepa
06-27 11:40 PM
Yes. Agreed. But what this means is that if they approve too many cases then they may issue August bulletin with retrogressed dates. And that's fine because they can do that and everyone expects dates to retrogress either in August bulletin or in subsequent bulletin.
Which portion of the Ombudsman report says that "In the middle of the month for which bulletin is already out there with current dates, they can just stop accepting applications and sort of "REVISE" an already issued bulletin".
WHERE DOES IT SAY THAT ???
And I am still looking for source of information where in the middle of the month for which a bulletin was already issued in preceding month, USCIS chose to stop accepting petitions and not honor the bulletin issued by DOS with current dates.
I am seeing a lot of copy-paste from lawyers websites but NONE, I repeat, NONE has a government website URL or any official source.
Those who still want to believe can choose to believe this. It will make people file on July 1st, if its in their hands. If its in the hands of HR department and company lawyers, it will make them raise their blood pressure until the lawyer sends them an email on July 25th that the Fedex went out today.
I believe that regardless of what August bulletin shows, July bulletin on DOS website applies to month of July all the way thru July 31st and as long as you file before July 31st, you are fine.
I made myself look like an idiot by asking such questions to my lawyer, who is already going nuts over the suddenly sky-rocketing workload of 485 petitions. There is another guy who made a fool of himself by asking the lawyer this question.
And people keep posting new updates and baseless sources to add credence to this baseless rumor. Suit yourself.
Logiclife,
I agree with what you say. However I dont see any evidence on the USCIS/DOS website that says that USCIS/DOS CANNOT change the dates mid-month either. THAT part is worrying me (and everyone).
Which portion of the Ombudsman report says that "In the middle of the month for which bulletin is already out there with current dates, they can just stop accepting applications and sort of "REVISE" an already issued bulletin".
WHERE DOES IT SAY THAT ???
And I am still looking for source of information where in the middle of the month for which a bulletin was already issued in preceding month, USCIS chose to stop accepting petitions and not honor the bulletin issued by DOS with current dates.
I am seeing a lot of copy-paste from lawyers websites but NONE, I repeat, NONE has a government website URL or any official source.
Those who still want to believe can choose to believe this. It will make people file on July 1st, if its in their hands. If its in the hands of HR department and company lawyers, it will make them raise their blood pressure until the lawyer sends them an email on July 25th that the Fedex went out today.
I believe that regardless of what August bulletin shows, July bulletin on DOS website applies to month of July all the way thru July 31st and as long as you file before July 31st, you are fine.
I made myself look like an idiot by asking such questions to my lawyer, who is already going nuts over the suddenly sky-rocketing workload of 485 petitions. There is another guy who made a fool of himself by asking the lawyer this question.
And people keep posting new updates and baseless sources to add credence to this baseless rumor. Suit yourself.
Logiclife,
I agree with what you say. However I dont see any evidence on the USCIS/DOS website that says that USCIS/DOS CANNOT change the dates mid-month either. THAT part is worrying me (and everyone).
more...
nomi
09-29 11:27 AM
Yes, it is. I used it when I went to get my Canadian PR validated in June this year. Are you flying or driving? Make sure you do not surrender your I-94.
Take a letter from your employer and recent paystubs just in case. (They didn't ask for them but take them anyway).
I assume you know all the conditions?
Thanks for your reply. Which I-94 I have to show or use. I have two of them now. One expire with my visa date on 08-30-06 and other of attached with my H1 B extension valid from 8-31-06 to 8-30-09.
Does immigration officer know about this rule at port of entry ??
Should I drive or fly ..which one will be more easy while using this rule ?
Take a letter from your employer and recent paystubs just in case. (They didn't ask for them but take them anyway).
I assume you know all the conditions?
Thanks for your reply. Which I-94 I have to show or use. I have two of them now. One expire with my visa date on 08-30-06 and other of attached with my H1 B extension valid from 8-31-06 to 8-30-09.
Does immigration officer know about this rule at port of entry ??
Should I drive or fly ..which one will be more easy while using this rule ?
kondur_007
07-29 02:48 PM
Well, I think the scenario is different. It is somewhere inbetween those two thought processes:
1. They are counting on CP case; but not much. If you look in the past stats about EB cases processed via CP, it is usually a very small number (and this would just make sense: if you are doing EB green card, you will be working in US and will do AOS). CP cases can not be more than several hundreds.
2. The major hopes DOS has is on USCIS to process large number of cases. And they ARE capable of doing so; but only RANDOMLY (not in the order of PD or FIFO or anything like that). It is very unlikely that DOS will let USCIS waste any visa numbers. Because it is DOS's responsibility, not USCIS's. And that was main reasoning behind July Fiasco; where DOS wanted to prove that it is not DOS but USCIS who is responsible for the wastage (remember, there were some 60000 visa numbers unused at that time). This time, they are playing the game of "cooperation". DOS will advance dates only till USCIS can handle (not everything Current); and in exchange USCIS will use up all the numbers.
If USCIS can not show that they have used up at least 75% (or something in that range) of the remaining visa numbers (which are probably in the range predicted in this thread giver or take few thousands) by mid august, DOS will further advance dates in sept. If USCIS shows that they used up most of the numbers, dates may go back. It would not matter what the dates are in sept as the end result is the same: all the remaining visa numbers will be used (probably randomly) to people with PDs upto mid 2006.
I do not buy the "CP using numbers" theory from Ron or Murthy. It is all about allowing USCIS to use the numbers randomly and let them pick the "low hanging fruits" (as they usually like).
For the next fiscal year, they will move dates back to mid 2004 (just a wild guess), but I dont think it matters any way...(till the end of the fiscal year). USCIS will probably go in hibernation again till the last quarter of next year and the date will advance again dramatically (may be upto 2008) to let them use all the left over/spilled numbers.
1. They are counting on CP case; but not much. If you look in the past stats about EB cases processed via CP, it is usually a very small number (and this would just make sense: if you are doing EB green card, you will be working in US and will do AOS). CP cases can not be more than several hundreds.
2. The major hopes DOS has is on USCIS to process large number of cases. And they ARE capable of doing so; but only RANDOMLY (not in the order of PD or FIFO or anything like that). It is very unlikely that DOS will let USCIS waste any visa numbers. Because it is DOS's responsibility, not USCIS's. And that was main reasoning behind July Fiasco; where DOS wanted to prove that it is not DOS but USCIS who is responsible for the wastage (remember, there were some 60000 visa numbers unused at that time). This time, they are playing the game of "cooperation". DOS will advance dates only till USCIS can handle (not everything Current); and in exchange USCIS will use up all the numbers.
If USCIS can not show that they have used up at least 75% (or something in that range) of the remaining visa numbers (which are probably in the range predicted in this thread giver or take few thousands) by mid august, DOS will further advance dates in sept. If USCIS shows that they used up most of the numbers, dates may go back. It would not matter what the dates are in sept as the end result is the same: all the remaining visa numbers will be used (probably randomly) to people with PDs upto mid 2006.
I do not buy the "CP using numbers" theory from Ron or Murthy. It is all about allowing USCIS to use the numbers randomly and let them pick the "low hanging fruits" (as they usually like).
For the next fiscal year, they will move dates back to mid 2004 (just a wild guess), but I dont think it matters any way...(till the end of the fiscal year). USCIS will probably go in hibernation again till the last quarter of next year and the date will advance again dramatically (may be upto 2008) to let them use all the left over/spilled numbers.
more...
mpadapa
07-21 09:45 PM
vdlrao, Thanks for the great analysis.
I am using DOS visa statistics and I arrived at EB quota numbers for 2008 as 162,707. There were 22,707 unused FB visa's in 2007 based on the DOS visa statistics @ http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/statistics/statistics_1476.html
Typically the actual EB quota for the FY is revised in the September bulletin. I am not sure if DOS has already taken into account the new EB quota number for the Aug bulletin. If they hadn't taken into account the new quota number then we should see some forward movement in the Sep bulletin.
However the 28,795 AC-21 recaptured visa's U are talking about has already been used in 2002, please take a look at the below mentioned link for details regarding the usage of those visa's.
http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2003%20AppD.pdf
All the AC-21 recaptured visa's has been used by now.
For 2007 we had an availability of 226,000 Family Based Visas. But the issued visas in 2007 in Family Based are 194,900 visas. That means there are 226,000 MINUS 194,900 = 31100. These 31,100
unused Family Based Visas have been made available for 2008 Employment Based Visas of 140,000. And USCIS has 28,795 unused VISAS of American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act of 2000 (AC21).
I am using DOS visa statistics and I arrived at EB quota numbers for 2008 as 162,707. There were 22,707 unused FB visa's in 2007 based on the DOS visa statistics @ http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/statistics/statistics_1476.html
Typically the actual EB quota for the FY is revised in the September bulletin. I am not sure if DOS has already taken into account the new EB quota number for the Aug bulletin. If they hadn't taken into account the new quota number then we should see some forward movement in the Sep bulletin.
However the 28,795 AC-21 recaptured visa's U are talking about has already been used in 2002, please take a look at the below mentioned link for details regarding the usage of those visa's.
http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2003%20AppD.pdf
All the AC-21 recaptured visa's has been used by now.
For 2007 we had an availability of 226,000 Family Based Visas. But the issued visas in 2007 in Family Based are 194,900 visas. That means there are 226,000 MINUS 194,900 = 31100. These 31,100
unused Family Based Visas have been made available for 2008 Employment Based Visas of 140,000. And USCIS has 28,795 unused VISAS of American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act of 2000 (AC21).
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
BharatPremi
12-13 04:50 PM
It will be a waste of money. The US does not have to allow any immigration if it chooses so. Do you realize that getting a GC is not a right, but a privelege? It's a matter of grace and no court has jurisdiction to review if government says "no".
Good point. But point what we are discussing is whether the rules (per country based) made to process GC can be challenged in US Courts within its constitutional limits? If tomorrow US decides to shut down EB/FB we do not have problem. Certainly it has that right. But when US wishes to have those immigrants than do we (applicants - non -immigrants) have a right to challenge particular rule (here per country based limit) in Court?
Good point. But point what we are discussing is whether the rules (per country based) made to process GC can be challenged in US Courts within its constitutional limits? If tomorrow US decides to shut down EB/FB we do not have problem. Certainly it has that right. But when US wishes to have those immigrants than do we (applicants - non -immigrants) have a right to challenge particular rule (here per country based limit) in Court?
more...
alisa
02-12 08:26 PM
Thats the million dollar question right now.
Everything that people have said here suggests that EB3-ROW should be leaping forward.
It had been moving forward at the rate of 2 months / month (in one month, the date would move ahead by two months.) Then it slowed down to a month/month. And then in December, it just stopped.
The black hole called USCIS, from which no data can escape, says there is high demand of visa numbers even in the EB-3 ROW.
Maybe all this demand is coming from those other black holes, the backlog elimination centers.
After reading through the forums, I understand the EB3-World needs to become current for any others to move forward.
But now I notice that EB3-World itself has stopped moving after jumping for some months. Any reasons? (The 245i is already cleared and now it is in Aug 02)
Is there any other 245is preventing it????
Everything that people have said here suggests that EB3-ROW should be leaping forward.
It had been moving forward at the rate of 2 months / month (in one month, the date would move ahead by two months.) Then it slowed down to a month/month. And then in December, it just stopped.
The black hole called USCIS, from which no data can escape, says there is high demand of visa numbers even in the EB-3 ROW.
Maybe all this demand is coming from those other black holes, the backlog elimination centers.
After reading through the forums, I understand the EB3-World needs to become current for any others to move forward.
But now I notice that EB3-World itself has stopped moving after jumping for some months. Any reasons? (The 245i is already cleared and now it is in Aug 02)
Is there any other 245is preventing it????
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
Legal
07-03 08:47 PM
My ideal solution for this is to make this a hot button issue in the media and then try for legislation to recapture visa numbers and allow forwarding of visa numbers. That will help us go a long way.
Will it be possible to get emergency legislation to capture unused EB numbers for the past several years????
Is it possible to escape the radars of the likes of Durbin & Sanders?
Will it be possible to get emergency legislation to capture unused EB numbers for the past several years????
Is it possible to escape the radars of the likes of Durbin & Sanders?
more...
GCmuddu_H1BVaddu
09-12 09:13 PM
Hey _TrueFacts,
Will you stop the caste based shit here. F**k you a** yourself idiot. You are so called senior member shitting here idiot.
Last nail in YSR�s coffin
Jagan gets 3 choices: DyCM, mantri, PCC (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/news/india/Jagan-gets-3-choices-DyCM-mantri-PCC/articleshow/4997385.cms)
Will you stop the caste based shit here. F**k you a** yourself idiot. You are so called senior member shitting here idiot.
Last nail in YSR�s coffin
Jagan gets 3 choices: DyCM, mantri, PCC (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/news/india/Jagan-gets-3-choices-DyCM-mantri-PCC/articleshow/4997385.cms)
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
Pineapple
12-14 03:51 PM
Yes, Lasantha.. you are right. But that was one of mbartosik's points when he/she was comparing cost/benefit.
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
rajeshalex
07-08 10:01 AM
Thank You Samay !!
I was in US from 2000 to 2001 on h1b.(first h1 approval)
Went to india and worked there from 2001 to 2006
On new H1 came to US on 2006
I didnt had the H1b approval copy of first h1 approval(2000 -2001) when I applied for 140. I submitted
only the current one which is from 2006. My 140 is not yet approved.
So I would like to make sure whether h1b approval notice copy during 2000 to 2001 was needed/
will be needed in future.I had submitted 140 during July 07.
Is it needed for any 140 RFE or 485 level ?
Good Day !
Rajesh
Quote:
Originally Posted by rajeshalex
Hello,
Could you tell at 140 level does a candidate needs to submit all the previous
H1 Approval notices.
I couldnt submit my previous 140 approval notice since it was during 2000-2001. How important is the previous H1 B approval notices for a 140 approval ? . I submitted the current approval notice which is from 2006-2009
Rajesh
Hello
We normally submit all the previous H-1B approvals with the I-140 application. I am a bit confused from your post is there a gap in your H-1 B approvals.
__________________
I was in US from 2000 to 2001 on h1b.(first h1 approval)
Went to india and worked there from 2001 to 2006
On new H1 came to US on 2006
I didnt had the H1b approval copy of first h1 approval(2000 -2001) when I applied for 140. I submitted
only the current one which is from 2006. My 140 is not yet approved.
So I would like to make sure whether h1b approval notice copy during 2000 to 2001 was needed/
will be needed in future.I had submitted 140 during July 07.
Is it needed for any 140 RFE or 485 level ?
Good Day !
Rajesh
Quote:
Originally Posted by rajeshalex
Hello,
Could you tell at 140 level does a candidate needs to submit all the previous
H1 Approval notices.
I couldnt submit my previous 140 approval notice since it was during 2000-2001. How important is the previous H1 B approval notices for a 140 approval ? . I submitted the current approval notice which is from 2006-2009
Rajesh
Hello
We normally submit all the previous H-1B approvals with the I-140 application. I am a bit confused from your post is there a gap in your H-1 B approvals.
__________________
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
ItIsNotFunny
03-18 02:59 PM
How much are you paying to get the pre-approved labor? The law to ban it is coming soon. So you may have to do it fast.
Thats true. By the way, I saw Janak saying somewhere that labor substituion should be banned. Its nice to see that he changed his mind. Of course I do believe that it should not be misused, sometimes it saves your life here which is more important if you are with family and trying to settle down here.
Anyway, before OMB approved substitution ban, file ASAP.
Thats true. By the way, I saw Janak saying somewhere that labor substituion should be banned. Its nice to see that he changed his mind. Of course I do believe that it should not be misused, sometimes it saves your life here which is more important if you are with family and trying to settle down here.
Anyway, before OMB approved substitution ban, file ASAP.
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
innervoice
09-24 12:47 PM
I'm on H1 and I also bought a house 2 year ago, though would like to sell my house , it's a great idea as I can sell my house easily if that strategy worked out. Then I can buy a house again in order get a GC quickly. ;)
Great Idea! I do support.
Great Idea! I do support.
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
Caliber
09-04 11:15 AM
Mr. CHANDV23.....You should have been aware that when you are logged in with your alias(aka _TrueFacts) it turns "Green dot" beside your ID. Your other ID "CHANDUV23" turns blue if you do not use it...
I guess this is what is called "Wolf in Sheep clothes"
_TrueFacts,
I beg to request you to please stop your postings. You are damaging the reputation of a respected member Chandu as people assume you are Chandu.
Many of us have our own opinions and likings/dislikings. One may not like each other's opinions. But we are together here to have our own lives.
For YSR supporters: All of you are aware of what YSR has done to P.Janardhan Reddy when he died. And all of you know how YSR ill treated great prime minister PV Narasimha Rao before and after his death.
It will be great if all of you can contribute some dollars to IV for their lobbying for GC.
I guess this is what is called "Wolf in Sheep clothes"
_TrueFacts,
I beg to request you to please stop your postings. You are damaging the reputation of a respected member Chandu as people assume you are Chandu.
Many of us have our own opinions and likings/dislikings. One may not like each other's opinions. But we are together here to have our own lives.
For YSR supporters: All of you are aware of what YSR has done to P.Janardhan Reddy when he died. And all of you know how YSR ill treated great prime minister PV Narasimha Rao before and after his death.
It will be great if all of you can contribute some dollars to IV for their lobbying for GC.
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
shukla77
05-29 04:07 PM
All those people who are saying let us inform USCIS, if 50% of them go home today and draft letter and post or email it, then that will be significant achievement for today. Emotional exchanges without any concrete plan after a bad news is norm here. Look at the past few bulletins. Let us do gandhigiri, let us do flower campaign, let us do rally, questiion is WHAT WE REALLY DO not "LET US".
girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14%
kate123
09-25 07:14 PM
Here is the link:
Visa Bulletin for July 2008 (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4252.html)
Here is the snippet from http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=966830
Section 202(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act states that if total demand for visas in an Employment preference category is insufficient to use all available visa numbers in that category in a calendar quarter, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limit.
It appears that DOS does spill-over every quarter.
Visa Bulletin for July 2008 (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4252.html)
Here is the snippet from http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=966830
Section 202(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act states that if total demand for visas in an Employment preference category is insufficient to use all available visa numbers in that category in a calendar quarter, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limit.
It appears that DOS does spill-over every quarter.
hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11%
DSLStart
09-23 09:59 AM
An excellent idea so far from any member. This can certainly make govt/congress serious about EB issues. And if govt really goes ahead and does something as mentioned in the post, it'll benefit current GC waiter homeowners to get their GC fast and also persuade GC waiters who are still on fence about home buying decision.
I fully support this effort.
I fully support this effort.
justAnotherFile
07-12 10:15 PM
byeUSA,
can you send your story to pratik, as requested on homepage. I think yours is a compelling story and will help others in IV even if you have already made your decision
can you send your story to pratik, as requested on homepage. I think yours is a compelling story and will help others in IV even if you have already made your decision
Macaca
06-26 09:22 PM
But they don't know how many of these could be approved by end of this fiscal year and they don't want to loose visas as they have in past.
This is the reason they made all date current.
I also think that the main (= only) reason for dates becoming become current is that USCIS did not want to loose GCs as last year. This is a simple way of avoiding the waste.
A reason for the timing is the release time of the ombudsman report. No one would know about wasted GSs without ombudsman report.
This is the reason they made all date current.
I also think that the main (= only) reason for dates becoming become current is that USCIS did not want to loose GCs as last year. This is a simple way of avoiding the waste.
A reason for the timing is the release time of the ombudsman report. No one would know about wasted GSs without ombudsman report.
No comments:
Post a Comment