newuser
04-20 10:49 PM
Please do attend this tomorrow and make it a successfull event.
All the best .
All the best .
wallpaper friends forever quotes funny.
qesehmk
02-11 03:03 PM
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV.pdf
Family based visa used for FY2009 = 215,343
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = 10,567
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2010.
*********
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY08-AR-TableV.pdf
Family based visa used for FY2008 = 226,105
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = ZERO
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2009.
Always go by the facts.
___________________
Not a legal advice.
I agree. I tried to see if there is a way FB category in 2009 might have received a spillover from EB. But thats almost impossible given EB is severely backlogged.
Another way to verify unused 13K in 2009 EB would be to check 2010 FB limit. If there were unused visas from EB in 2009 then they go back to FB in 2010.
Finally, per Ron unused is not same as wasted. Unused is unassigned. Wasted is .... assigned but action is not taken to close the case. If that is the case then wasted visas won't be available .... neither inside or outside category. It is frightening to think that with so many preadjudicated cases USCIS might be wasting visas! I don't believe this .... but if true ... it is outrageous.
Family based visa used for FY2009 = 215,343
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = 10,567
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2010.
*********
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY08-AR-TableV.pdf
Family based visa used for FY2008 = 226,105
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = ZERO
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2009.
Always go by the facts.
___________________
Not a legal advice.
I agree. I tried to see if there is a way FB category in 2009 might have received a spillover from EB. But thats almost impossible given EB is severely backlogged.
Another way to verify unused 13K in 2009 EB would be to check 2010 FB limit. If there were unused visas from EB in 2009 then they go back to FB in 2010.
Finally, per Ron unused is not same as wasted. Unused is unassigned. Wasted is .... assigned but action is not taken to close the case. If that is the case then wasted visas won't be available .... neither inside or outside category. It is frightening to think that with so many preadjudicated cases USCIS might be wasting visas! I don't believe this .... but if true ... it is outrageous.
gc28262
04-10 11:14 AM
Time and again I am telling. EB 3 problem is due to 245(i) cases. Once 245(i) primaries are over, their dependent will come into the picture, who are waiting back home. All 245(i) cases have PD before April 2001. For time being, EB3 I or Mexico move beyond April 01 but again retrogress back to the April 01 when cases are accumulate at CP. This is the reason why EB3 I and Mexico is not moving since last many years.
If some one is not convince with me, request under FOIA
1. How many cases filed under 245(i) in India, Mexico, and ROW
2. How many cases filed under I 824 Follow to Join since 2007?
I agree with your observations except the point that it will retrogress again to 2001.
As dates have moved beyond April 2001, I don't believe there will be any more 245(i) s coming into the queue. Dependents of 245(i) applicants would have a PD of Apr 2001 or before. They already got their GCs by now. 245(i) applicants would have filed for their dependents already. If these 245(i) applicants file for relatives, they WON'T have 2001 PD.
Please correct me if I am wrong.
If some one is not convince with me, request under FOIA
1. How many cases filed under 245(i) in India, Mexico, and ROW
2. How many cases filed under I 824 Follow to Join since 2007?
I agree with your observations except the point that it will retrogress again to 2001.
As dates have moved beyond April 2001, I don't believe there will be any more 245(i) s coming into the queue. Dependents of 245(i) applicants would have a PD of Apr 2001 or before. They already got their GCs by now. 245(i) applicants would have filed for their dependents already. If these 245(i) applicants file for relatives, they WON'T have 2001 PD.
Please correct me if I am wrong.
2011 quotes about friendship and
pappu
01-10 06:27 PM
thank you very much
more...
ewana
08-26 12:11 AM
Thanks willigetagc and sayantan76 for your reply.
According to company lawyer i am preliminary discussing this issue with, she mentioned the EB1 can take 12-18 months at best, that why the concern that the foreign office might be close by then. I'm not from India/China, so there should be no priority date issue. How realistic do you guys think is it to get the whole process done in 90 days or so as mentioned sayantan76 ?
willigetagc, you mentioned about getting the EAD quickly. Once you got your EAD , does it mean that you will be still be on status even if the foreign office is closed by that time ?
H1B is probably the last option due to low probability of success and I would probably be out of status by that time.
Can you guys recommend some good immigration lawyer that you or your friends used that I can probably consult (I'm in the LA area) ? My email is ewana@gmail.com (in case it is now allowed in the forum or for privacy purposes). I'm the only employee on working visa on the company and it seems like the company lawyer is not very adept with immigration stuff.
Thanks a lot for all your help. greatly appreciate it.
According to company lawyer i am preliminary discussing this issue with, she mentioned the EB1 can take 12-18 months at best, that why the concern that the foreign office might be close by then. I'm not from India/China, so there should be no priority date issue. How realistic do you guys think is it to get the whole process done in 90 days or so as mentioned sayantan76 ?
willigetagc, you mentioned about getting the EAD quickly. Once you got your EAD , does it mean that you will be still be on status even if the foreign office is closed by that time ?
H1B is probably the last option due to low probability of success and I would probably be out of status by that time.
Can you guys recommend some good immigration lawyer that you or your friends used that I can probably consult (I'm in the LA area) ? My email is ewana@gmail.com (in case it is now allowed in the forum or for privacy purposes). I'm the only employee on working visa on the company and it seems like the company lawyer is not very adept with immigration stuff.
Thanks a lot for all your help. greatly appreciate it.
desidude
09-26 11:47 AM
I just sent an email to the editor... hope these mails open their eyes and they repost the correct article... :D
more...
PHANI_TAVVALA
05-15 10:46 AM
Thanks Phani!!.
This is great information. I will do some research. How much GMAT score is required?
Probably I will check on the site.
Are you married and kids? You are doing online one right?
GMAT score alone is not the criteria but they are a bit liberal on the online version. Your recommendations matter and your experience, essay and previous education credentials matter too. I am not sure about the cut-off for KD but I started part-time and converted to KD when I moved out of Indiana. My GMAT score was either 620 or 630, which I thought was on the lower end of the curve. I started my M.B.A a year before I got married and found it much easier to manage my time then. But these days my wife keeps complaining that I spend way too much time studying rather then with her. Managing with kids is going to be even more tough but definitely not unmanageable. I have colleagues, in my M.B.A program who are married with 2-3 young kids, who have said that I made the right move by trying to complete my M.B.A before having kids.
My intent is to just let you know that it won't be a cake-walk but then online will allow you lot more flexibility and time than regular or part-time M.B.A. You do not need to worry about attending classes and getting struck in traffic, assuming you could find a good school close by.
This is great information. I will do some research. How much GMAT score is required?
Probably I will check on the site.
Are you married and kids? You are doing online one right?
GMAT score alone is not the criteria but they are a bit liberal on the online version. Your recommendations matter and your experience, essay and previous education credentials matter too. I am not sure about the cut-off for KD but I started part-time and converted to KD when I moved out of Indiana. My GMAT score was either 620 or 630, which I thought was on the lower end of the curve. I started my M.B.A a year before I got married and found it much easier to manage my time then. But these days my wife keeps complaining that I spend way too much time studying rather then with her. Managing with kids is going to be even more tough but definitely not unmanageable. I have colleagues, in my M.B.A program who are married with 2-3 young kids, who have said that I made the right move by trying to complete my M.B.A before having kids.
My intent is to just let you know that it won't be a cake-walk but then online will allow you lot more flexibility and time than regular or part-time M.B.A. You do not need to worry about attending classes and getting struck in traffic, assuming you could find a good school close by.
2010 short friends forever quotes.
newbie09
08-05 07:57 PM
Need help!!!
I'm in US on L1 with company A, company B filed for H1B in Apr'09, H1 is not yet approved, and my L1 is also expiring in Nov'09. Since I'm not sure if I will get H1 approved, I have applied for L1 extension with company A.
My question is:
1. What will happen if I get H1 approved before Oct'09? Will I have to leave Company A and start working for compay B (H1) from 1st Oct even when L1 extension is in process?
2. If L1 extension is approved before 1st Oct, will I be able to continue working for comapny A, even if my H1 is approved?
Basically I don't want to be out of status or do anything against visa rules.
Please guide me on this situation.
I'm in US on L1 with company A, company B filed for H1B in Apr'09, H1 is not yet approved, and my L1 is also expiring in Nov'09. Since I'm not sure if I will get H1 approved, I have applied for L1 extension with company A.
My question is:
1. What will happen if I get H1 approved before Oct'09? Will I have to leave Company A and start working for compay B (H1) from 1st Oct even when L1 extension is in process?
2. If L1 extension is approved before 1st Oct, will I be able to continue working for comapny A, even if my H1 is approved?
Basically I don't want to be out of status or do anything against visa rules.
Please guide me on this situation.
more...
abhijitp
07-24 12:51 PM
It doesn't say that anywhere in the link. The 485 filing instructions clearly state what the initial evidence is.
There is no doubt the employer letter is required.
The only question is:
1) is it safer to wait for RN and then submit this letter as evidence quoting the A# assigned, OR
2) is it a better idea to submit a new I-485 rightaway along with the letter, OR
3) should such people just wait hoping they will receive an RFE (I don't like this one at all) whenever the case is opened?
There is no doubt the employer letter is required.
The only question is:
1) is it safer to wait for RN and then submit this letter as evidence quoting the A# assigned, OR
2) is it a better idea to submit a new I-485 rightaway along with the letter, OR
3) should such people just wait hoping they will receive an RFE (I don't like this one at all) whenever the case is opened?
hair friends forever quotes for facebook. friends forever quotes. cute friends
kumar1
03-16 05:56 PM
I am impressed to see that our buddy Infinite_Patience_GC is not using F** words today. Good job!
Infinite_Patience_GC,
Though I don't like your language and attitude, you have a valid point. I honestly feel that those who have used labor substitution should not get their green cards earlier than me.
Infinite_Patience_GC,
Though I don't like your language and attitude, you have a valid point. I honestly feel that those who have used labor substitution should not get their green cards earlier than me.
more...
eb3retro
08-17 12:14 PM
Chill guys just kidding no point getting worked up about all this.I know it's causing a lot of angst.The best course of action is to get back to our lives and let the chips fall as they may.
you write some ridiculous stuff in your first post and you want us to chill out. Get a sense of this board and its professional members, before you post any nonsense like that.
you write some ridiculous stuff in your first post and you want us to chill out. Get a sense of this board and its professional members, before you post any nonsense like that.
hot short friends forever quotes.
little_willy
10-15 06:14 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.
more...
house friends forever quotes for
yetanotherguyinline
05-15 04:26 PM
I agree this is a bad year but this was an article from 2006. I also completely agree that people need to pursue M.B.A with the aim of improving their skills or with a aim of improving their marketability or future career growth but then once you pay the big bucks it alwyas filters down to ROI. But spending 2 years of one's life at a full-time school shelling out 100's of thousands of dollars (especially if it is out of their own pocket) will make sense only if one can justify the investment in terms of dollars. People expect sunk costs to be recovered in the future. Investment banking and finance offered that opportunity to M.B.A professionals where they could draw anywhere between $300k-450k in base salary alone apart from millions of dollars in bonuses. Going into the future, the current socialistic government will keep tabs on such exuberant pays.
I weighed all these when deciding to start part-time. I always wanted to be a Mechanical Engineer and I want to be associated with my field for rest of my life. My intent of pursuing M.B.A is to move up the ladder quickly in Engineering/Technology Management.
You nailed it when you said you want to be in your field and you need an MBA to move up. My argument was that ROI should not be the major factor but reasoning as you mentioned above should be.
I weighed all these when deciding to start part-time. I always wanted to be a Mechanical Engineer and I want to be associated with my field for rest of my life. My intent of pursuing M.B.A is to move up the ladder quickly in Engineering/Technology Management.
You nailed it when you said you want to be in your field and you need an MBA to move up. My argument was that ROI should not be the major factor but reasoning as you mentioned above should be.
tattoo girlfriend friends forever quotes. friends forever quotes; friends forever
MDix
02-11 06:56 PM
Dude,
Calm down, PresidenO gave you good comment and you got carried away thinking that President Obama praise you. Just vent your frustration somewhere else.
PresidentO,
I saw your past comment and it seems like you have an Attitude problem.
If something your are not agree or disagree that's fine but there is now way to go this far.
Thanks so much for your kind words.
I don't blame readers who start making noise without basic verification. Most people have difficulty understanding the difference between cap and quota Or Permanent job vs W2 job.
_________________
Not a legal advice.
Calm down, PresidenO gave you good comment and you got carried away thinking that President Obama praise you. Just vent your frustration somewhere else.
PresidentO,
I saw your past comment and it seems like you have an Attitude problem.
If something your are not agree or disagree that's fine but there is now way to go this far.
Thanks so much for your kind words.
I don't blame readers who start making noise without basic verification. Most people have difficulty understanding the difference between cap and quota Or Permanent job vs W2 job.
_________________
Not a legal advice.
more...
pictures Friends Forever,
h1techSlave
06-12 09:55 PM
Any meaningful change in the current immigration policies are very unlikely.
This is what I have read in "The Week".
"Republican donon revolt: The Republican National Committee has suffered a 40 percent falloff in small-donor contributions, largely because of anger over President Bush's immigration reform push, The Washington Times reported last week. The donor backlash prompted the committee to fire all 65 of its telephone solicitors, RNC sources said. The GOP base is up in arms over Bush's plan to create a method for nearly 12 million illegal immigrants to gain legal status - a process critics consider amnesty. An RNS spokesperson said the firings were due to problems with the phone bank equipment and not from any drop-off in donations."
Cheers,
h1techSlave
This is what I have read in "The Week".
"Republican donon revolt: The Republican National Committee has suffered a 40 percent falloff in small-donor contributions, largely because of anger over President Bush's immigration reform push, The Washington Times reported last week. The donor backlash prompted the committee to fire all 65 of its telephone solicitors, RNC sources said. The GOP base is up in arms over Bush's plan to create a method for nearly 12 million illegal immigrants to gain legal status - a process critics consider amnesty. An RNS spokesperson said the firings were due to problems with the phone bank equipment and not from any drop-off in donations."
Cheers,
h1techSlave
dresses est friends forever quotes
kramesh_babu
07-27 08:44 PM
But I do understand your point though, FYI. I already left them last summer in good terms and I still have good relationship with them. I also referred few of my friends (who had bad experience with their employers and wanted to come out) to ECG and never heard any issues from them yet :)
Other than the above, I really do NOT have anything else with them, TRUST ME dude!!!
Are you sure you are no way associated with them (of course, other than being a consultant to them)? ;)
Other than the above, I really do NOT have anything else with them, TRUST ME dude!!!
Are you sure you are no way associated with them (of course, other than being a consultant to them)? ;)
more...
makeup friends forever quotes funny. funny friends forever quotes.
nojoke
10-21 04:23 PM
Obama is more a talking person. He would have given lot of information during this campaign season. But he will not execute. Everyone in the campaign said he is always on the neutral side. He is not with Yes Or No answers.
One thing I want to explain about tax decrease plan.
When the tax decreases for middle class and tax increases for upper class, then the upper class CEO and the business would like to see how they can increase their profit by not increasing the wage of a middle class.
Obama followed a non american politics giving lots and lots to public. But in reality he may sit quiet and only enjoy his benefit as a President.
If Obama elected as President, this economic mess is not going to go away.
Because it is now Global.
I will say if Obama is elected Health care change he expects may not be executed as per his plan.
And it goes on....
So by your theory don't tax the rich at all. That way we will get all the money as wage from the rich. :D LOL. Do you really believe this? How is the trickle down economy working so far? BTW Clinton taxed the rich and the economy grew.
One thing I want to explain about tax decrease plan.
When the tax decreases for middle class and tax increases for upper class, then the upper class CEO and the business would like to see how they can increase their profit by not increasing the wage of a middle class.
Obama followed a non american politics giving lots and lots to public. But in reality he may sit quiet and only enjoy his benefit as a President.
If Obama elected as President, this economic mess is not going to go away.
Because it is now Global.
I will say if Obama is elected Health care change he expects may not be executed as per his plan.
And it goes on....
So by your theory don't tax the rich at all. That way we will get all the money as wage from the rich. :D LOL. Do you really believe this? How is the trickle down economy working so far? BTW Clinton taxed the rich and the economy grew.
girlfriend quotes on friends forever.
uma001
07-28 08:32 PM
Guys,
Hope this thread will be useful for somebody who is looking for american company for green card processing. They wont get into the trap. So I am giving out the information from the known source(friends).
Company1: Deloitte
Company2: Chase
These two companies promised doing green card cards,they filed h1s, but did not file green card.Whatever reason (bad economy) may be, they did not sponsor green cards for those they promised to do. So be careful. It is not gaurantee.
Also, you can list the companies you know whoever promised, but did not file.
Hope this thread will be useful for somebody who is looking for american company for green card processing. They wont get into the trap. So I am giving out the information from the known source(friends).
Company1: Deloitte
Company2: Chase
These two companies promised doing green card cards,they filed h1s, but did not file green card.Whatever reason (bad economy) may be, they did not sponsor green cards for those they promised to do. So be careful. It is not gaurantee.
Also, you can list the companies you know whoever promised, but did not file.
hairstyles est friends forever quotes.
alterego
07-04 08:31 PM
Everyone blaming CIS/DOS needs to understand some basics behind this mess. Before going to conclude anything, first, one should read all the ombudsman reports for last 3 or 4 years. Former INS or current USCIS’s functions and operations were not questionable and not known to public till ombudsman office was established. Ombudsman has helped customers and keep helping to improve efficiency of CIS. Ombudsman main concern (or goal) have been over the 4 years are
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The “documentarily qualified 485 applications” mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made “current” for all EB categories. This is how they determine “current” or “over-subscribed” and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered “Current.”
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be “oversubscribed” and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories “current” for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories “current” ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of “current” there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making “current” for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as “current” in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
Excellent analysis and reccomendations. I feel that a visa number should be assigned at the point of 485 filing. If there is a problem it can be returned to the pool. That will be the least disruptive way to allot numbers in a timely fashion. In the end, that is likely to be the change that will come out of this.
This way, it will offer prospective applicants a more clear viewpoint of what they are up against when they consider their immigration options. i.e if you know you will have to wait 10 yrs to file an AOS even if you have an approved immigrant petition ala the family based immigrants, your plans would be different. You might not feel the wait worthwhile or even if you do, you do it fully aware of the consequences, 10 yrs exploitative employer on h1b etc.
If you notice, the level of hubris and cry is less in family based immigration even though the waits are longer. Atleast they know before they apply!
Your last point about a visa recapture is on the money. It is the least disruptive and easiest of the possible changes for current EB applicants in the current hostile atmosphere. It comes across as a rectification of USCIS inefficiency rather than a request for more immigration, which the public has clearly rejected at this time. If we can get 100-150K visas recaptured, this will greatly help EVERYONE in the EB queue for various reasons. It will buy us the 1-2 yrs needed before immigration is seriously addressed again. It will help those waiting to file 485 to file, those in 485 to have a hope to get out etc. It will help heavily retrogressed countries to keep getting more visas than the annual caps etc. I think that is something everyone can agree on as well.
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The “documentarily qualified 485 applications” mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made “current” for all EB categories. This is how they determine “current” or “over-subscribed” and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered “Current.”
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be “oversubscribed” and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories “current” for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories “current” ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of “current” there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making “current” for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as “current” in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
Excellent analysis and reccomendations. I feel that a visa number should be assigned at the point of 485 filing. If there is a problem it can be returned to the pool. That will be the least disruptive way to allot numbers in a timely fashion. In the end, that is likely to be the change that will come out of this.
This way, it will offer prospective applicants a more clear viewpoint of what they are up against when they consider their immigration options. i.e if you know you will have to wait 10 yrs to file an AOS even if you have an approved immigrant petition ala the family based immigrants, your plans would be different. You might not feel the wait worthwhile or even if you do, you do it fully aware of the consequences, 10 yrs exploitative employer on h1b etc.
If you notice, the level of hubris and cry is less in family based immigration even though the waits are longer. Atleast they know before they apply!
Your last point about a visa recapture is on the money. It is the least disruptive and easiest of the possible changes for current EB applicants in the current hostile atmosphere. It comes across as a rectification of USCIS inefficiency rather than a request for more immigration, which the public has clearly rejected at this time. If we can get 100-150K visas recaptured, this will greatly help EVERYONE in the EB queue for various reasons. It will buy us the 1-2 yrs needed before immigration is seriously addressed again. It will help those waiting to file 485 to file, those in 485 to have a hope to get out etc. It will help heavily retrogressed countries to keep getting more visas than the annual caps etc. I think that is something everyone can agree on as well.
gc03
07-24 03:36 PM
Mr. Gonz�lez,
I have a question on retrogression in Employment Based (EB) Visas. I am in the USA LEGALLY for the past 7 + years and am still waiting for my Green Card (Permanent Residency) in the employment based category. How long do I have to wait? With current retrogression of the dates, I cannot apply for adjustment of status for another 5 or more year. My green card process is going on and on for the past 4 + years. The situation is very disappointing one and all. My spouse is having Research Doctorate and waiting for my Permanent Residency to contribute to the economy and society.
My Question:
Is it possible to you allowing filing of I-485/EAD even if the visa number is not available? The Adjust Status of the case would obviously happen only after visa number becomes available.
Regards,
I have a question on retrogression in Employment Based (EB) Visas. I am in the USA LEGALLY for the past 7 + years and am still waiting for my Green Card (Permanent Residency) in the employment based category. How long do I have to wait? With current retrogression of the dates, I cannot apply for adjustment of status for another 5 or more year. My green card process is going on and on for the past 4 + years. The situation is very disappointing one and all. My spouse is having Research Doctorate and waiting for my Permanent Residency to contribute to the economy and society.
My Question:
Is it possible to you allowing filing of I-485/EAD even if the visa number is not available? The Adjust Status of the case would obviously happen only after visa number becomes available.
Regards,
chetanjumani
03-13 12:10 PM
Thank You Googler, EB2 India in April is Dec 2003. Hopefully the logic to arrive at this is what you got to know from your Call with DHS employee.
Hopefully all EB immigrants would be treated equally irrespective of their place of birth.
Hopefully all EB immigrants would be treated equally irrespective of their place of birth.
No comments:
Post a Comment