map_boiler
07-05 12:26 PM
I just contributed my first $100.00. Go IV!
wallpaper News: Jagged Alliance 3 in
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 ;)
inskrish
03-11 03:03 AM
You are calling me anti-immigrant! Just because someone is spreading rumor and half-cooked information and I don't agree with him, I am called anti-immigrant.
I suggest that you look at my past posts.
I do NOT agree with the complaint that desi3933 is an anti-immigrant. He has been very helpful to the immigrant community, and has good knowledge in the immigration matters, so to speak; however, his tone of the question about "they vs they" and "spill over" is not good, in my opinion.
I suggest that you look at my past posts.
I do NOT agree with the complaint that desi3933 is an anti-immigrant. He has been very helpful to the immigrant community, and has good knowledge in the immigration matters, so to speak; however, his tone of the question about "they vs they" and "spill over" is not good, in my opinion.
2011 Jagged Alliance 3 -
amsgc
05-28 07:42 PM
Here is what I would do:
- Fast track the H-1B application using premium processing so that you know for sure whether you have it or not.
- If they approve your petition, it will have a start date of Oct 1. Since your L1 is expiring in Sept, they will not approve the change of status. So, you will get the approval notice without the attached I-94.
- Once you have the approval notice in hand, set up an appointment for your H-1B visa in your home country. Leave the country before your L1 I-94 expires.
- Get the H-1B visa and come back in Oct to work for your new employer.
If you decide to do the L1 extension now, then you get into issues of which petition was approved last by the USCIS - last action rule. Keep it straightforward with minimal complications so that your future applications, such as GC, are also less complicated.
Also, a word to the wise - make sure you are not unpaid/on bench, no nonsensical bonds etc. when you come in on H-1. These things create unnecessary complications in the future.
Sorry, I think I posted in wrong place.
I'm on L1B for Company A.
My visa, Petition, I-94 are expiring this September.
I was about to begin L1-B Extension.
Now I got news from company B that my H1B petition has been selected in Lottery..
(this is for COS from my L1B to H1B).
Can I go ahead with L1B extension work ?
I do not want to do this, if it will affect the H1 Petition approval.
Please help. Thanks.
- Fast track the H-1B application using premium processing so that you know for sure whether you have it or not.
- If they approve your petition, it will have a start date of Oct 1. Since your L1 is expiring in Sept, they will not approve the change of status. So, you will get the approval notice without the attached I-94.
- Once you have the approval notice in hand, set up an appointment for your H-1B visa in your home country. Leave the country before your L1 I-94 expires.
- Get the H-1B visa and come back in Oct to work for your new employer.
If you decide to do the L1 extension now, then you get into issues of which petition was approved last by the USCIS - last action rule. Keep it straightforward with minimal complications so that your future applications, such as GC, are also less complicated.
Also, a word to the wise - make sure you are not unpaid/on bench, no nonsensical bonds etc. when you come in on H-1. These things create unnecessary complications in the future.
Sorry, I think I posted in wrong place.
I'm on L1B for Company A.
My visa, Petition, I-94 are expiring this September.
I was about to begin L1-B Extension.
Now I got news from company B that my H1B petition has been selected in Lottery..
(this is for COS from my L1B to H1B).
Can I go ahead with L1B extension work ?
I do not want to do this, if it will affect the H1 Petition approval.
Please help. Thanks.
more...
sriramkalyan
06-10 12:48 PM
May be we should do some thing dramatic. Like sending letter to Canadian Government, here we are 1000 skilled people with extensive experience and International degrees. Collectively we going to bring in $1 million or more. Can you expedite our Permanent residency!!
All US senators know that EB immigrants are going through Hell hole of USCIS. They are unable to do anything about it.
All US senators know that EB immigrants are going through Hell hole of USCIS. They are unable to do anything about it.
rajuram
03-23 04:02 PM
Economy was slow in 2001 -02, how come there are so many people from that time?
more...
Winner
06-11 08:02 AM
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE SEND THE MESSAGE. WE WILL ALSO START WITH THE PHONE CAMPAIGN IN THE MORNING.
Reason being, the other side is writing letters to other Senators to seek their support. They want to see this amendment pass. Here is the letter.
************************************************** ***************
COMPANIES LAYING-OFF THOUSANDS OF AMERICAN WORKERS DON�T NEED GUEST WORKERS
Please Support the Sanders-Grassley Employ America Amendment to the Tax Extenders bill
Dear Colleague:
Since the recession started in December of 2007, nearly 8 million Americans have lost their jobs and the unemployment rate has nearly doubled. In total, 15 million Americans are officially unemployed, another 8.8 million Americans are working part-time only because they cannot find a full-time job, and more than one million workers have given up looking for work altogether.
With the unemployment rate still unacceptably high and millions of people looking for a job, we have a responsibility to ensure that companies do not use temporary visa programs to replace American workers with cheaper labor from overseas.
Therefore, during the consideration of the American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act, we will be offering an amendment that would prohibit companies which have announced mass lay-offs over the past year from hiring guest workers, unless they can prove that their overall employment will not be reduced as a result of these lay-offs.
At a time when millions of Americans are out of work, the notion that we need to import labor from abroad because there are not enough qualified, willing or able American workers in this country rings hollow.
Recently, some of the very companies that have hired tens of thousands of guest-workers from overseas have announced large scale lay-offs of American workers. The high-tech industry, a major employer of H-1B guest workers, has announced over 330,000 job cuts since 2008. The construction industry, a major employer of H-2B guest-workers, has laid-off 1.9 million workers since December of 2007.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan, signed into law last February, included a provision to prevent companies receiving assistance through the Troubled Asset Relief Program from replacing laid-off American workers with guest-workers from overseas.
The Employ America Act expands upon this provision to prevent any company engaged in a mass lay-off of American workers from importing cheaper labor from abroad through temporary guest-worker programs. Those companies that are truly facing labor shortages would not be impacted by this legislation and could continue to obtain employer-sponsored visas. Only companies that are laying-off a large number of Americans would be barred from importing foreign workers through guest worker programs.
If you would like to co-sponsor this amendment, please have your staff contact Warren Gunnels in Sen. Sanders� office at 8-6358 or Kathy Nuebel Kovarik in Sen. Grassley's office at 4-3744.
Sincerely,
____________________ ____________________
BERNARD SANDERS CHARLES E. GRASSLEY
UNITED STATES SENATOR UNITED STATES SENATOR
************************************************** ***************
This underscores the urgency. Please act on the action item NOW.
Reason being, the other side is writing letters to other Senators to seek their support. They want to see this amendment pass. Here is the letter.
************************************************** ***************
COMPANIES LAYING-OFF THOUSANDS OF AMERICAN WORKERS DON�T NEED GUEST WORKERS
Please Support the Sanders-Grassley Employ America Amendment to the Tax Extenders bill
Dear Colleague:
Since the recession started in December of 2007, nearly 8 million Americans have lost their jobs and the unemployment rate has nearly doubled. In total, 15 million Americans are officially unemployed, another 8.8 million Americans are working part-time only because they cannot find a full-time job, and more than one million workers have given up looking for work altogether.
With the unemployment rate still unacceptably high and millions of people looking for a job, we have a responsibility to ensure that companies do not use temporary visa programs to replace American workers with cheaper labor from overseas.
Therefore, during the consideration of the American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act, we will be offering an amendment that would prohibit companies which have announced mass lay-offs over the past year from hiring guest workers, unless they can prove that their overall employment will not be reduced as a result of these lay-offs.
At a time when millions of Americans are out of work, the notion that we need to import labor from abroad because there are not enough qualified, willing or able American workers in this country rings hollow.
Recently, some of the very companies that have hired tens of thousands of guest-workers from overseas have announced large scale lay-offs of American workers. The high-tech industry, a major employer of H-1B guest workers, has announced over 330,000 job cuts since 2008. The construction industry, a major employer of H-2B guest-workers, has laid-off 1.9 million workers since December of 2007.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan, signed into law last February, included a provision to prevent companies receiving assistance through the Troubled Asset Relief Program from replacing laid-off American workers with guest-workers from overseas.
The Employ America Act expands upon this provision to prevent any company engaged in a mass lay-off of American workers from importing cheaper labor from abroad through temporary guest-worker programs. Those companies that are truly facing labor shortages would not be impacted by this legislation and could continue to obtain employer-sponsored visas. Only companies that are laying-off a large number of Americans would be barred from importing foreign workers through guest worker programs.
If you would like to co-sponsor this amendment, please have your staff contact Warren Gunnels in Sen. Sanders� office at 8-6358 or Kathy Nuebel Kovarik in Sen. Grassley's office at 4-3744.
Sincerely,
____________________ ____________________
BERNARD SANDERS CHARLES E. GRASSLEY
UNITED STATES SENATOR UNITED STATES SENATOR
************************************************** ***************
This underscores the urgency. Please act on the action item NOW.
2010 Jagged Alliance 3 preview for
royus77
07-09 04:45 PM
I hope this lawsuit fails. Looking ahead this lawsuit, if it succeeds might do us more damage than good. Law of unintended consequences states that something can happen we haven't thought of.
Supposing, if lawsuit goes ahead and wins, one outcome might be - USCIS might start adhering to strict interpretation of 7% per country, or curtail spillovers drastically. Then we are in deep shit.
what made you think so ?Do you think they are violating the law and allocating more than 7% to other countries?
Supposing, if lawsuit goes ahead and wins, one outcome might be - USCIS might start adhering to strict interpretation of 7% per country, or curtail spillovers drastically. Then we are in deep shit.
what made you think so ?Do you think they are violating the law and allocating more than 7% to other countries?
more...
ps57002
09-19 03:44 PM
For next rally...slogan
Legal vs Illegal Immigration
Do YOU know the difference?
or
Legal vs. Illegal Immigration
Know the difference...
This is to prompt people's curiosity that there is a difference in the two and to have them educate themselves. Otherwise as said, all "immigration" to most people means "illegal immigration".
Legal vs Illegal Immigration
Do YOU know the difference?
or
Legal vs. Illegal Immigration
Know the difference...
This is to prompt people's curiosity that there is a difference in the two and to have them educate themselves. Otherwise as said, all "immigration" to most people means "illegal immigration".
hair Jagged Alliance 3
Jaime
09-12 05:19 PM
Talk to us! What is preventing you from attending??? Let's GO! Let's do this!!!!
more...
Jaime
09-10 09:55 PM
Microsoft using cricket to try to stop Reverse Brain Drain!!
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070910/...oft_cricket_dc
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070910/...oft_cricket_dc
hot Jagged Alliance 3
GCStatus
09-17 10:57 PM
If you don't like my rant stop reading it. What the hell is 'born thinking america'. Why do you rant about GC then? Why do you care being on this board? You go get a life. I never compelled to comment on my rant? Did I? You must have gone crazy
when did i rant..haha, its funny when people are cornered they talk stuff which arent even relevant
you crack me up, no offence
when did i rant..haha, its funny when people are cornered they talk stuff which arent even relevant
you crack me up, no offence
more...
house Jagged Alliance 2 port using
royus77
08-11 10:58 PM
If there is a non-controversial immi. law change attempt I will donate $500. I will also bring my friends and the total may exceed $2000. We all willing to donate but only if we know that there is good chance of passing.
If there is an attempt to push ideas like recapture, forget it. It will not pass in this economy. I do not want to waste my money and time on those kind of ideas.
IMHO. Not to find fault with anyone. Please do not mistake me.
what is the percentage you are looking ? 50 -50 ?I know thousands of people who can write a check for 10K to support any law that can give them a GC in the next 3-6 months..
If there is an attempt to push ideas like recapture, forget it. It will not pass in this economy. I do not want to waste my money and time on those kind of ideas.
IMHO. Not to find fault with anyone. Please do not mistake me.
what is the percentage you are looking ? 50 -50 ?I know thousands of people who can write a check for 10K to support any law that can give them a GC in the next 3-6 months..
tattoo Retro Feature: Jagged Alliance
vin13
11-11 09:23 AM
The conference call was not organized by core. It was just 2 of us who discussed on the donor forum and came up with a draft letter to get clarrification from DOS. I suggest the first step is to get clarrification of the quarterly spillover with DOS regarding their process. Can any of you get an appointment with Charles Oppenheim (Chief of Immigrant Visa Control and Reporting Division at DOS)?
After working several hours and we come up with the draft which was posted earlier on this thread. And for that, someone gives me a Red.....
vin13,
I was not aware of any conference call being organized by IV, otherwise I would have certainly been there, for I really believe quarterly spillover can ease a lot of our pain and can be a good starting point to re-galvanize the community.
I think IV leadership should show the way here so that there is a chance we might see quarterly spillover in the January Bulletin. First it was the USCIS and now its the DOS that we need to wake from its slumber.
After working several hours and we come up with the draft which was posted earlier on this thread. And for that, someone gives me a Red.....
vin13,
I was not aware of any conference call being organized by IV, otherwise I would have certainly been there, for I really believe quarterly spillover can ease a lot of our pain and can be a good starting point to re-galvanize the community.
I think IV leadership should show the way here so that there is a chance we might see quarterly spillover in the January Bulletin. First it was the USCIS and now its the DOS that we need to wake from its slumber.
more...
pictures about Jagged Alliance 3.
xbohdpukc
12-11 03:44 PM
USCIS cannot do anything on the matter. INA is clear on the AOS conditions, one of which is "An immigrant visa is IMMEDIATELY available at time of filing for adjustment of status" (INA 245, 8 USC 1225)
INA should be changed which should be done through a legislative process, not through any rule making.
INA should be changed which should be done through a legislative process, not through any rule making.
dresses 지금까지 공개된 JA 3/JA 3D의
DallasBlue
09-11 10:29 PM
The Govenors are on our side! There's thousands of us with may reasons why to attend, but here's a very important one:
This is for YOU! Only for YOU! YOU deserve this! That's why we want to see YOU in Washington! Help yourself!!! YOU have earned the right!!!!
Thank you Governor(s)!!
Congressmen/Senators please do what the nation's leaders are are asking you for a long time.
Jaime, Guess we may have to organize a walk to Crawford ? what do you think ?
This is for YOU! Only for YOU! YOU deserve this! That's why we want to see YOU in Washington! Help yourself!!! YOU have earned the right!!!!
Thank you Governor(s)!!
Congressmen/Senators please do what the nation's leaders are are asking you for a long time.
Jaime, Guess we may have to organize a walk to Crawford ? what do you think ?
more...
makeup Say goodbye to Jagged Alliance
memyselfandus
04-09 09:32 AM
Details below
girlfriend Jagged Alliance 3
cygent
03-23 10:18 PM
How do you know if labor is EB2 or EB3?
Hello all,
How do you determine if the category is EB2 or EB3? How can you find that out from which document?
Thanks!
Hello all,
How do you determine if the category is EB2 or EB3? How can you find that out from which document?
Thanks!
hairstyles Jagged Alliance 3
thirdworldman
03-12 11:01 AM
Haha, I didn't think anyone would actually pick up on that, Pink. Oh, well. Anyway, thanks for the comments and votes. I think everyone did a great job. Eilsoe, awesome wireframe.
rambo45
09-26 02:56 PM
I got a similar reply as above from CNN
srkamath
07-12 10:31 PM
Use of "01" instead of "10" has been common mistake by USCIS. I came across couple of such cases. This is typo error and they will fix it.
i guess i read too much into it........
i guess i read too much into it........
No comments:
Post a Comment