newuser
05-06 03:28 PM
I got a reply from USCIS saying that they can process the request sorted by priority date and country of birth of the applicant. Processing time will be around 15 months and that they have got their answer on priority date.
what are the next steps?
15 MONTHS.....:mad:
what are the next steps?
15 MONTHS.....:mad:
wallpaper MAKEUP
chanduv23
09-10 10:40 AM
The live updates are now available on IV chat.
Please logon to
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/misc.php?do=cchatbox
Please logon to
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/misc.php?do=cchatbox
alisa
01-19 06:15 PM
Thanks jungalee43...
Bumping up this thread.
BTW, this is the best we have got so far. If anyone can improve on this, please let me know. I will look into this in detail later. An online tool that shows a person how screwed up they are (or are not) due to retrogression should also be helpful.
I had posted this statistics last year on IV. I had done good research to arrive at these figures. I hope the figures will open eyes of people who are bestowed with 'blissful ignorance'.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=1265#post1265
Bumping up this thread.
BTW, this is the best we have got so far. If anyone can improve on this, please let me know. I will look into this in detail later. An online tool that shows a person how screwed up they are (or are not) due to retrogression should also be helpful.
I had posted this statistics last year on IV. I had done good research to arrive at these figures. I hope the figures will open eyes of people who are bestowed with 'blissful ignorance'.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=1265#post1265
2011 harajuku makeup tutorial.
McGuffin
02-14 07:15 PM
I'm in.
more...
desi3933
03-10 03:22 PM
I hope I have answered your question (in red). :)
>> Once they (USCIS) reached last quarter then they(DOS) will make EB2-I/C current and distribute those spill-over visas across EB.
Thanks MDix.
You have no idea. Have a good day, sir!
______________________
US citizen of Indian origin
>> Once they (USCIS) reached last quarter then they(DOS) will make EB2-I/C current and distribute those spill-over visas across EB.
Thanks MDix.
You have no idea. Have a good day, sir!
______________________
US citizen of Indian origin
delhirocks
07-02 10:35 PM
Signed up for $50 monthly contribution today. Contributed since June 1st = $120. Hope this small contribution will be helpful in this endeavor.
more...
GotGC??
04-20 02:23 PM
[SIZE=3]Attn: California Members � Please participate in this event to support STRIVE ACT.
Will be there ! Go IV !!
Will be there ! Go IV !!
2010 harajuku makeup tutorial
Tito_ortiz
11-19 12:09 PM
Please do not take any precipitated steps that harm yours status ! Calm down. This is still the strongest economy in the world. You don't want to miss this unique opportunity !
more...
WillIBLucky
11-22 01:23 PM
I dont think that is correct - as per my lawyer this is what she says -
In order to move to a new employer and still continue with the same gc applications, you must meet all of the following conditions under AC21:
1. Your I-140 must be approved
2. Your I-485 must be filed and pending for at least 180 days
3. Your new job classification must be the same as in the old job
If you are missing any of the 3 conditions at the time you move to an employer, you will lose your gc application and you will need to start a new one.
So guys please make sure you give correct information. Also, I would suggest people who are asking various questions over here in IV should also talk to their own lawyers and take a decision. Please do not take decision based on comments given over here. So "LOOK BEFORE YOU LEAP".
In order to move to a new employer and still continue with the same gc applications, you must meet all of the following conditions under AC21:
1. Your I-140 must be approved
2. Your I-485 must be filed and pending for at least 180 days
3. Your new job classification must be the same as in the old job
If you are missing any of the 3 conditions at the time you move to an employer, you will lose your gc application and you will need to start a new one.
So guys please make sure you give correct information. Also, I would suggest people who are asking various questions over here in IV should also talk to their own lawyers and take a decision. Please do not take decision based on comments given over here. So "LOOK BEFORE YOU LEAP".
hair harajuku makeup tutorial
buehler
06-13 11:13 AM
I have seen this same footage months ago and to it don't look real, its cooked. Some facts there are just un-digestible like the gora guy will take job of a waiter immediately after working as senior exec. cmon market is not that bad unless he don't know anything else and don't have ability to get other similar job, then he should be fired anyways. and then that carlos guy, his dress up don't seems convincing that other execs will give me good response after presentation. its all cooked... showing 600k+ numbers are all bogus.
I thought that the video was quite funny. Now for some one to think that it is true is even more funny. :D
I thought that the video was quite funny. Now for some one to think that it is true is even more funny. :D
more...
BlueSunD
02-27 09:47 PM
Thanks, a great place for tutorials on maya is http://www.learning-maya.com
hot doing a make-up tutorial
we_can
01-03 11:06 PM
Posted on immigration.about.com
http://forums.about.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ab-immigration&tid=13888
http://forums.about.com/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=ab-immigration&tid=13888
more...
house style, makeup, tutorial,
transpass
04-10 12:07 PM
Here are the details for last year and years before:
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
Thanks Kondur. That was a very good presentation of the numbers. I very much appreciate it.
Now,
1. Why did EB1 last year needed spillover visas, although it was current all the time? If a category is current, isn't that it has less demand than allocated numbers?
2. As per May bulletin, EB4 might need a cut off. So we cannot expect any spillover from EB4. So that is clear. Now the spillover chances are from EB5, EB2 ROW and EB1(?). I am including EB1 because, given the current economy over the past year, should there be a better possibility of more spillover from EB2 ROW and EB1 compared to last year?
3. Also why are the total EB numbers different in different fiscal years (e.g., 141020 in FY2009, 162949 in FY 2008 and 154497 in FY2007)? In FYs 2007 and 2008 did the extra visas come from Family based while it did not for FY 2009? If so, why is it so?
4. Based on Pending 485 data of March 2010, I barely see few hundred EB4s. And hardly considerable number of EB1s. What's going on? If we go by this data, we should be getting good chunk of spillover numbers...
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Green%20Card/Green%20Card%20Through%20a%20Job/Employment%20Based%20I-485%20Pending%20Inventory-Total%203-8-2010.pdf
Thanks,
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
Thanks Kondur. That was a very good presentation of the numbers. I very much appreciate it.
Now,
1. Why did EB1 last year needed spillover visas, although it was current all the time? If a category is current, isn't that it has less demand than allocated numbers?
2. As per May bulletin, EB4 might need a cut off. So we cannot expect any spillover from EB4. So that is clear. Now the spillover chances are from EB5, EB2 ROW and EB1(?). I am including EB1 because, given the current economy over the past year, should there be a better possibility of more spillover from EB2 ROW and EB1 compared to last year?
3. Also why are the total EB numbers different in different fiscal years (e.g., 141020 in FY2009, 162949 in FY 2008 and 154497 in FY2007)? In FYs 2007 and 2008 did the extra visas come from Family based while it did not for FY 2009? If so, why is it so?
4. Based on Pending 485 data of March 2010, I barely see few hundred EB4s. And hardly considerable number of EB1s. What's going on? If we go by this data, we should be getting good chunk of spillover numbers...
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Green%20Card/Green%20Card%20Through%20a%20Job/Employment%20Based%20I-485%20Pending%20Inventory-Total%203-8-2010.pdf
Thanks,
tattoo harajuku makeup tutorial. how
desi3933
03-11 11:49 AM
Don't put words in my mouth.
Now you want me to give you reply which you will understand. The SledgeHammer or Mirage way. About the link, read from the top don't just read one post.
>> Now you want me to give you reply which you will understand.
[COLOR=Black]
Thanks for using such "polite" language.
------------------------------------------------------
I think it is in our interest to punish the first insult; because an insult unpunished is the parent of many others. -- Thomas Jefferson to John Jay, 1785
Now you want me to give you reply which you will understand. The SledgeHammer or Mirage way. About the link, read from the top don't just read one post.
>> Now you want me to give you reply which you will understand.
[COLOR=Black]
Thanks for using such "polite" language.
------------------------------------------------------
I think it is in our interest to punish the first insult; because an insult unpunished is the parent of many others. -- Thomas Jefferson to John Jay, 1785
more...
pictures harajuku makeup tutorial. possible to get harajuku
MDix
03-11 11:43 AM
Don't put words in my mouth.
Now you want me to give you reply which you will understand. The SledgeHammer or Mirage way.
About the link, read from the top don't just read one post.
Hey Joker -
I joined IV 5 years after getting my GC. Please look at my 900+ posts and pull out one (just one) that justify your stupid thoughts.
If that's make you happy - PD will be current next month. Now start dreaming again.
-- desi3933
Now you want me to give you reply which you will understand. The SledgeHammer or Mirage way.
About the link, read from the top don't just read one post.
Hey Joker -
I joined IV 5 years after getting my GC. Please look at my 900+ posts and pull out one (just one) that justify your stupid thoughts.
If that's make you happy - PD will be current next month. Now start dreaming again.
-- desi3933
dresses make up tutorial pt2
kutra
03-03 06:51 PM
Some of the data can be obtained from here
http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/pdf/PERM_Data_FY07_Announcement.pdf
of course it is not complete but gives a good glimpse.
Now, you show me your 10 billion dollars :)
My 10 billion dollars can be found here: http://www.prankplace.com/funnymoney.htm :D
BTW, your PDF is data for people who filed under PERM in 2007, and not for the audience you are including in your letter.
Anyway, I am going to stop playing devil's advocate and let you manage this. Just make sure you don't invite unnecessary attention by asking outlets to come peeking here.
http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/pdf/PERM_Data_FY07_Announcement.pdf
of course it is not complete but gives a good glimpse.
Now, you show me your 10 billion dollars :)
My 10 billion dollars can be found here: http://www.prankplace.com/funnymoney.htm :D
BTW, your PDF is data for people who filed under PERM in 2007, and not for the audience you are including in your letter.
Anyway, I am going to stop playing devil's advocate and let you manage this. Just make sure you don't invite unnecessary attention by asking outlets to come peeking here.
more...
makeup Makeup Tutorial::#2
asdfred
12-23 04:23 PM
funny as heck..
"did he actually do it?"
no...he did not..
are you waiting to get your green card if he gives up his life on capitol hill on hunger strike
"did he actually do it?"
no...he did not..
are you waiting to get your green card if he gives up his life on capitol hill on hunger strike
girlfriend house harajuku makeup
coopheal
10-15 05:09 PM
I will send the letter tommorow.
hairstyles harajuku makeup tutorial.
gc_on_demand
11-12 03:24 PM
Under the regulation No reference to Calendar year. It mentions explicitly calendar quarter.
Immigration and Nationality Act: Section ACT 202 - Numerical Limitation to any single foreign state under Sec. 202. [8 U.S.C. 1152]
(3) Exception if additional visas available. - If because of the application of paragraph (2) with respect to one or more foreign states or dependent areas, the total number of visas available under both subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who otherwise may be issued such a visa, paragraph (2) shall not apply to visas made available to such states or areas during the remainder of such calendar quarter.
(5) 2/ RULES FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS
(A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
(B) LIMITING FALL ACROSS FOR CERTAIN COUNTRIES SUBJECT TO SUBSECTION (e)- In the case of a foreign state or dependent area to which subsection (e) applies, if the total number of visas issued under section 203(b) exceeds the maximum number of visas that may be made available to immigrants of the state or area under section 203(b)consistent with subsection (e) (determined without regard to this paragraph),in applying subsection (e) all visas shall be deemed to have been required for the classes of aliens specified in section 203(b).
Isn't there a limit of 27% of visas per quarter per country per calendar year ? If that limit is there then who will take precedence ? Quarterly Spill over or that limit ?
To me I think DOS is doing 27% quota limit for first 3 quarters then they are doing spill over so there is no quarterly spill. What if they will show us that there is a limit per quarter in law and they have to follow it. Is it something like deadlock. that trying to follow one law breaks another one.
What if we end up getting response that there is some action needed from Lawmakers to correct law..
just random thoughts.
Immigration and Nationality Act: Section ACT 202 - Numerical Limitation to any single foreign state under Sec. 202. [8 U.S.C. 1152]
(3) Exception if additional visas available. - If because of the application of paragraph (2) with respect to one or more foreign states or dependent areas, the total number of visas available under both subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who otherwise may be issued such a visa, paragraph (2) shall not apply to visas made available to such states or areas during the remainder of such calendar quarter.
(5) 2/ RULES FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS
(A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
(B) LIMITING FALL ACROSS FOR CERTAIN COUNTRIES SUBJECT TO SUBSECTION (e)- In the case of a foreign state or dependent area to which subsection (e) applies, if the total number of visas issued under section 203(b) exceeds the maximum number of visas that may be made available to immigrants of the state or area under section 203(b)consistent with subsection (e) (determined without regard to this paragraph),in applying subsection (e) all visas shall be deemed to have been required for the classes of aliens specified in section 203(b).
Isn't there a limit of 27% of visas per quarter per country per calendar year ? If that limit is there then who will take precedence ? Quarterly Spill over or that limit ?
To me I think DOS is doing 27% quota limit for first 3 quarters then they are doing spill over so there is no quarterly spill. What if they will show us that there is a limit per quarter in law and they have to follow it. Is it something like deadlock. that trying to follow one law breaks another one.
What if we end up getting response that there is some action needed from Lawmakers to correct law..
just random thoughts.
akred
01-21 02:26 AM
Assuming everyone stays the course, under these timelines
1. At least 5% of applicants will be sponsored by their American children.
2. Another 5% will have their first million and move to the investor's category.
The timelines would be a maximum of 20 years or so, at which point people would be sponsored by their children.
1. At least 5% of applicants will be sponsored by their American children.
2. Another 5% will have their first million and move to the investor's category.
The timelines would be a maximum of 20 years or so, at which point people would be sponsored by their children.
chanduv23
09-28 03:48 PM
Those Asian Americans who are against new Asian immigrants, which include some of my relatives, sadly to tell you, are just helping White Americans in this fight. It is their wish and their passion. But if White Americans don't want it, they will have no chance of getting their voice heard. Not all White Americans are against immigration. But there is a big percentage of White Americans who are either fiercely against it or do not want it. I can hardly find any White American who says they want more immigrants. And a small percentage of White Americans are fiercely against immigrations. They would curse at anyone who they think is a new immigrant at any opportunity they have.
Well, unfortunately they all vote and their votes are important to all the candidates. Even Senators like Obama, Hillary etc... are playing the same vote bank politics. They seem to be loving immigrants of different ethnicities, but not skilled immigrants waiting for green card - VERY SIMPLE EQUATION - NO VOTING POWER NO SUPPORT - and people like Durbin and Grassley go a step ahead and damage the entire industry and attack tech companies. They do all these just for the sake of votes.
Our only mistake is that we are in the queue, followed all rules, contribute to economy and we do not vote. They do not see anything else but votes. They are not controlling brain drain, not recognizing skills, tried to break their own rules during the July bulletin fiasco - why so much hatred towards us? Just because we are competitive?
Well, unfortunately they all vote and their votes are important to all the candidates. Even Senators like Obama, Hillary etc... are playing the same vote bank politics. They seem to be loving immigrants of different ethnicities, but not skilled immigrants waiting for green card - VERY SIMPLE EQUATION - NO VOTING POWER NO SUPPORT - and people like Durbin and Grassley go a step ahead and damage the entire industry and attack tech companies. They do all these just for the sake of votes.
Our only mistake is that we are in the queue, followed all rules, contribute to economy and we do not vote. They do not see anything else but votes. They are not controlling brain drain, not recognizing skills, tried to break their own rules during the July bulletin fiasco - why so much hatred towards us? Just because we are competitive?