krishmunn
09-30 11:58 AM
Unfortunately NO. you cannot declare anything while leaving India.
Not correct. You can declare your stuff , including Jewellery, right after immigration check at customs counter when leaving India. I did it once for my laptop long back.
Also, carry your Indian receipts.
Not correct. You can declare your stuff , including Jewellery, right after immigration check at customs counter when leaving India. I did it once for my laptop long back.
Also, carry your Indian receipts.
wallpaper .com/wallpaper/Trabajo-por
ronnie0479
03-31 02:39 PM
Immigration and Tax Filing are not at all related.
Can we file taxes seperately on married status?
I mean, my CPA did estimates seperately and we found substantial difference...
Is there any problem in we filing seperately as we r into 485 peding stuff?...
From an Immigration perspective, what are the ramifications when 'Married and filing Jointly' versus 'Married and filing seperately'.
First of all, are they related?
Can we file taxes seperately on married status?
I mean, my CPA did estimates seperately and we found substantial difference...
Is there any problem in we filing seperately as we r into 485 peding stuff?...
From an Immigration perspective, what are the ramifications when 'Married and filing Jointly' versus 'Married and filing seperately'.
First of all, are they related?
Blog Feeds
07-09 12:30 PM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
2011 SE LAS ASEGURO Y CHISTOSAS
krishmunn
04-26 06:01 PM
between the USA: worldwide, except Europe --- 2 pieces of baggage max. 23kg
Lufthansa - Free baggage allowance (http://www.lufthansa.com/online/portal/lh/us/info_and_services/baggage?nodeid=2892236&l=en&cid=1000390&blt_p=US&blt_l=en&blt_t=Info_and_Services&blt_e=Info%20Service%20Sitemap&blt_n=Baggage&blt_z=Free%20baggage%20allowan&blt_c=US%7Cen%7CInfo_and_Services%7CInfo%20Service %20Sitemap%7CBaggage%7CFree%20baggage%20allowan#an cAbT3)
Lufthansa - Free baggage allowance (http://www.lufthansa.com/online/portal/lh/us/info_and_services/baggage?nodeid=2892236&l=en&cid=1000390&blt_p=US&blt_l=en&blt_t=Info_and_Services&blt_e=Info%20Service%20Sitemap&blt_n=Baggage&blt_z=Free%20baggage%20allowan&blt_c=US%7Cen%7CInfo_and_Services%7CInfo%20Service %20Sitemap%7CBaggage%7CFree%20baggage%20allowan#an cAbT3)
more...
reddy_h
01-07 10:38 PM
You will only be counted against the cap once unless your 6 year limit of H-1 is over and you are out of US for another year. So no problems you can file for your new H-1. Just make sure you send a copy of the old H-1 approval copy as well to prove you are already counted towards cap.
stupendousman11
08-22 01:14 PM
EB2 India from NC.
Filed EAD renewal at TSC (my 485, however, is pending at NSC) on Aug 6. RD Aug 7. No LUDs since the notice was issued.
Filed EAD renewal at TSC (my 485, however, is pending at NSC) on Aug 6. RD Aug 7. No LUDs since the notice was issued.
more...
miguy
04-18 08:37 AM
Are companies hiring people on H1b for permanent jobs? I seem to have a tough time finding companies that sponsor H1b. I thought the Big 5 Consulting firms did not sponsor H1b or GC? But, it seems from this post that I was wrong. Can someone tell me what companies (Fortune 500) companies sponsor H1b/GC or is there a list I can get from somewhere.
thanks,
thanks,
2010 wallpapers chistosos. Wallpaper Decorating Ideas; Wallpaper Decorating Ideas
fide_champ
03-22 08:17 AM
don't know where I should put my request. My husband is on H1B visa ...and I was on H4 .I went India but my H4 was rejected. I don't know what to do...is USCIS also going to reject my husband H1B .. please help
what's the reason for rejection?
what's the reason for rejection?
more...
Quadrucle
09-15 12:39 PM
Hi All,
Pardon my ignorance, but after seeing the initial steps of the CIR, I feel there's some hope for the Employment based immigrants, but no one seems to be discussing anything positive about it. Am I missing something here? :confused:
Thanks
Pardon my ignorance, but after seeing the initial steps of the CIR, I feel there's some hope for the Employment based immigrants, but no one seems to be discussing anything positive about it. Am I missing something here? :confused:
Thanks
hair /wallpaper/Oso-Chistoso.
sp76
06-20 04:46 PM
If there is sufficeint time left on H1B, can one go for stamping at consulate although I485 is filed.
Just wanted to add more to above question: Is 5 months enough time remaining in H1 to get stamping from India?.
Can I use my advaanced parole document once I get it if my visa gets rejected in India?
Just wanted to add more to above question: Is 5 months enough time remaining in H1 to get stamping from India?.
Can I use my advaanced parole document once I get it if my visa gets rejected in India?
more...
kartikiran
05-06 03:55 PM
ganguteli,
there was a donor conference call a couple of weeks back, in which aman, pappu etc participated.
your thoughts of rally was discussed, but unfortunately the numbers are not quiet adding up as it did during the July 2007 fiasco.
As per what I learned from that discussion was when IV sees the "thousands" as per your quote they are willing to support the rally idea. Otherwise, it may not make the noise as we expect it to do.
Yes, I agree with IV core's line of thought in the "rally" idea. I too wish we can do a "rally" but...:-(
If people really want to do something, then how about we organize a rally in DC and show up in thousands?
Then everyone will know you and you do not need to go to meetings just to show your faces and expect that someone will have mercy on us and think about us next time.
there was a donor conference call a couple of weeks back, in which aman, pappu etc participated.
your thoughts of rally was discussed, but unfortunately the numbers are not quiet adding up as it did during the July 2007 fiasco.
As per what I learned from that discussion was when IV sees the "thousands" as per your quote they are willing to support the rally idea. Otherwise, it may not make the noise as we expect it to do.
Yes, I agree with IV core's line of thought in the "rally" idea. I too wish we can do a "rally" but...:-(
If people really want to do something, then how about we organize a rally in DC and show up in thousands?
Then everyone will know you and you do not need to go to meetings just to show your faces and expect that someone will have mercy on us and think about us next time.
hot wallpapers chistosos.
b072707
10-29 10:20 AM
Got the receipts by calling USCIS. good luck to all.
more...
house images shippuden wallpaper
hopefulgc
04-10 02:58 PM
The sorting for priority date is not working right.
For e.g. it is first displaying Apr-00, then all Apr-01, then Apr-02 and so on. Then it displays Aug-00, then Aug-01 and so on.
It is doing alphabetical sorting.
It needs to sort by date or the month-year combination.
Its getting better!
For e.g. it is first displaying Apr-00, then all Apr-01, then Apr-02 and so on. Then it displays Aug-00, then Aug-01 and so on.
It is doing alphabetical sorting.
It needs to sort by date or the month-year combination.
Its getting better!
tattoo colours wallpaper. fondos de
nozerd
09-06 04:39 PM
Well thats the quiestion does USCIS consider Company ABC USA and ABC Canada as the same company ??? Remember I will be paid in Canada on Canadian payroll.
more...
pictures wallpapers chistosos.
nkavjs
11-15 10:04 AM
Lynne,
I live in Fishers (126st), but work on West side of Indy (US 36 road towards Avon).
I will make it next time for sure. I am not familiar with Carmel roads, but after yesterday's confusion, i have got some idea.
DPP
Hello : Pls. include me too. I am from Indypls.. (from Fishers)
Thanks
RPH
I live in Fishers (126st), but work on West side of Indy (US 36 road towards Avon).
I will make it next time for sure. I am not familiar with Carmel roads, but after yesterday's confusion, i have got some idea.
DPP
Hello : Pls. include me too. I am from Indypls.. (from Fishers)
Thanks
RPH
dresses wallpapers chistosos
piyu7444
07-03 01:59 AM
it is advisable not to leave the country while H1 extension is pending and you cannot lie to the immigration officer at the port of entry. if they take your I-94 while leaving (if going to Mexico, they generally do not take I-94) then you may have a problem reentering and you may have to wait until H1 extension is approved and then reenter using the new H1 approval.
Mine is not h1 extension but what is called transfer - Company A to company B. Can I not enter using Company A's documents as they did not cancel my h1b and wont cancel it either. Also I will get pay stub from them till jul 15 for work done till jun 20th.
Mine is not h1 extension but what is called transfer - Company A to company B. Can I not enter using Company A's documents as they did not cancel my h1b and wont cancel it either. Also I will get pay stub from them till jul 15 for work done till jun 20th.
more...
makeup Un simpático wallpaper donde
LostInGCProcess
09-15 12:03 PM
This is truly a great idea. We must show the 'family' face of our struggle. This country is built on compassion (at least that's what they claim in the mainstream media). Each one of us must send one family picture to the President of United States and urge him to take a closer look at the current USCIS process and make it better.
I also urge to send a good family picture with kids. Definitely it must impact someone who would look at the pictures.
Good Idea!!
I also urge to send a good family picture with kids. Definitely it must impact someone who would look at the pictures.
Good Idea!!
girlfriend youtube videos chistosos, Suman+ranganathan+hot+wallpapers
Blog Feeds
12-18 09:50 AM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
Last month I blogged about my convoluted math--trying to figure out the wait times for various countries, in various categories for Employment Based visas. The January Visa Bulletin was (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4597.html) just issued, with this explanation:
D. EXPLANATION OF THE NUMERICAL CONTROL SYSTEM AND CUT-DATE PROJECTIONS WHAT CAUSES THE ESTABLISHMENT OF CUT-OFF DATES?
The Visa Office (VO)subdivides the annual preference and foreign state limitations specified in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) into twelve monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily qualified applicants that have been reported to VO are compared each month with the numbers available for the next regular allotment and numbers are allocated to reported applicants in order of their priority dates, the oldest dates first.
- If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered "Current." For example, if the Employment Third preference monthly target is 3,000 and there are only 1,000 applicants, 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. The cut-off date is the priority date of the first documentarily qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a visa number. For example, if the Employment Third preference monthly target is 3,000 and there are 8,000 applicants, a cut-off date would be established so that only 3,000 numbers would be used, and the cut-off date would be the priority date of the 3,001st applicant.
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become qualified at their own initiative and convenience and upon the completion of various processing requirements. Therefore, it is extremely important to remember that by no means has every applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, visa allotments are made only on the basis of the total applicants reported qualified each month, and consideration of other variables. Demand for visa numbers can fluctuate from one month to another, with an inevitable impact on cut-off dates.
HOW IS THE PER-COUNTRY LIMIT CALCULATED?
Section 201 of the INA sets an annual minimum Family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000, while the worldwide annual level for Employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 202 sets the per-country limit for preference immigrants at 7% of the total annual Family-sponsored and Employment-based preference limits, i.e. a minimum of 25,620.
- The annual per-country limitation of 7% is a cap, meaning visa issuances to any single country may not exceed this figure. This limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled, however. The per-country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the visa numbers by applicants from only a few countries.
- INA Section 202(a)(5), added by the American Competitiveness Act in the 21st Century (AC21), removed the per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of such numbers available. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5)has occasionally allowed countries such as China-mainland born and India to utilize large amounts of Employment First and Second preference numbers which would have otherwise gone unused.
WHAT ARE THE PROJECTIONS FOR CUT-OFF DATE MOVEMENT IN THE FAMILY PREFERENCES?
Cut-off date movement in most categories continues to be greater than might ordinarily be expected, and this is anticipated to continue for at least the next few months. This is because fewer applicants are proceeding with final action on their cases at consular posts abroad, and the volume of CIS adjustment cases remains low. Once large numbers of applicants begin to have their cases brought to final action, cut-off date movements will necessarily slow or stop.
Moreover, in some categories cut-off date retrogression is a possibility. Therefore, readers should be aware that the recent rate of cut-off date advances will not continue indefinitely, but it is not possible to say at present how soon they will end.
WHY DID MOST EMPLOYMENT CUT-OFFS REMAIN UNCHANGED IN RECENT MONTHS?
Many of the categories were "unavailable" at the end of FY which resulted in excessive demand being received during October and November. Coupled with the fact that CIS Offices have been doing an excellent job of processing cases, this has had an impact on cut-off date movements. Some forward movement has begun for January as we enter the second quarter of the fiscal year.
WILL THERE BE ANY ADDITIONAL CUT-OFF DATES FOR FOREIGN STATES IN THE EMPLOYMENT FIRST OR SECOND PREFERENCE CATEGORIES?
At this time it is unlikely that there will be any cut-off dates in the Employment First preferences. It also appears unlikely that it will be necessary to establish a cut-off date other than those already in effect for the Second preference category. Cut-off dates apply to the China and India Second preference categories due to heavy demand, and each has the potential to become "unavailable" should demand cause the annual limit for that category to be reached.
INA Section 202(a)(5) provides that if total demand will be insufficient to use all available numbers in a particular employment preference category in a calendar quarter, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limits. For example, if it is determined that based on the level of demand being received at that time there would be otherwise unused numbers in the Employment Second preference category, then numbers could be provided to oversubscribed countries without regard to per-country limitations. Should that occur, the same cut-off date would be applied to each country, since numbers must be provided strictly in priority date order regardless of chargeability. In this instance, greater number use by one country would indicate a higher rate of demand by applicants from that country with earlier priority dates.
Should Section 202(a)(5) be applied, the rate of number use in the Employment preference category would continue to be monitored to determine whether subsequent adjustments are needed in visa availability for oversubscribed countries. This action provides the best possible assurance that all available Employment preference numbers will be used, while still ensuring that numbers remain available for applicants from all other countries that have not yet reached their per-country limit.
WHAT ARE THE PROJECTIONS FOR CUT-OFF DATE MOVEMENT IN THE EMPLOYMENT PREFERENCES FOR THE REMAINDER OF FY-2010?
Based on current indications of demand, the best case scenarios for cut-off dates which will be reached by the end of FY-2010 are as follows:
Employment Second:
China: July through October 2005
India: February through early March 2005
If Section 202(a)(5)were to
apply: China and India: October through December 2005
Employment Third:
Worldwide: April through August 2005
China: June through September 2003
India: January through February 2002
Mexico: January through June 2004
Philippines: April through August 2005
Please be advised that the above date ranges are only estimates which
are subject to fluctuations in demand during the coming months. The actual
future cut-off dates cannot be guaranteed, and it is possible that some annual
limits could be reached prior to the end of the fiscal year.
So, there you have it. The "official" guesses for FY 2010! It would be terrific, however, if the Visa Bulletin would tell us, based upon its knowledge of pending cases, and estimates on time, how long a case would take in the given categories, if started today. When the Department of State releases THAT information, then perhaps Congress will sit up and take notice that we are facing a literal crisis in our employment based immigration program, and hurting ourselves as a result.https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-2329407886555470879?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/12/from-department-of-state-with-love-visa.html)
Last month I blogged about my convoluted math--trying to figure out the wait times for various countries, in various categories for Employment Based visas. The January Visa Bulletin was (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4597.html) just issued, with this explanation:
D. EXPLANATION OF THE NUMERICAL CONTROL SYSTEM AND CUT-DATE PROJECTIONS WHAT CAUSES THE ESTABLISHMENT OF CUT-OFF DATES?
The Visa Office (VO)subdivides the annual preference and foreign state limitations specified in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) into twelve monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily qualified applicants that have been reported to VO are compared each month with the numbers available for the next regular allotment and numbers are allocated to reported applicants in order of their priority dates, the oldest dates first.
- If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered "Current." For example, if the Employment Third preference monthly target is 3,000 and there are only 1,000 applicants, 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. The cut-off date is the priority date of the first documentarily qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a visa number. For example, if the Employment Third preference monthly target is 3,000 and there are 8,000 applicants, a cut-off date would be established so that only 3,000 numbers would be used, and the cut-off date would be the priority date of the 3,001st applicant.
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become qualified at their own initiative and convenience and upon the completion of various processing requirements. Therefore, it is extremely important to remember that by no means has every applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, visa allotments are made only on the basis of the total applicants reported qualified each month, and consideration of other variables. Demand for visa numbers can fluctuate from one month to another, with an inevitable impact on cut-off dates.
HOW IS THE PER-COUNTRY LIMIT CALCULATED?
Section 201 of the INA sets an annual minimum Family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000, while the worldwide annual level for Employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 202 sets the per-country limit for preference immigrants at 7% of the total annual Family-sponsored and Employment-based preference limits, i.e. a minimum of 25,620.
- The annual per-country limitation of 7% is a cap, meaning visa issuances to any single country may not exceed this figure. This limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled, however. The per-country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the visa numbers by applicants from only a few countries.
- INA Section 202(a)(5), added by the American Competitiveness Act in the 21st Century (AC21), removed the per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of such numbers available. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5)has occasionally allowed countries such as China-mainland born and India to utilize large amounts of Employment First and Second preference numbers which would have otherwise gone unused.
WHAT ARE THE PROJECTIONS FOR CUT-OFF DATE MOVEMENT IN THE FAMILY PREFERENCES?
Cut-off date movement in most categories continues to be greater than might ordinarily be expected, and this is anticipated to continue for at least the next few months. This is because fewer applicants are proceeding with final action on their cases at consular posts abroad, and the volume of CIS adjustment cases remains low. Once large numbers of applicants begin to have their cases brought to final action, cut-off date movements will necessarily slow or stop.
Moreover, in some categories cut-off date retrogression is a possibility. Therefore, readers should be aware that the recent rate of cut-off date advances will not continue indefinitely, but it is not possible to say at present how soon they will end.
WHY DID MOST EMPLOYMENT CUT-OFFS REMAIN UNCHANGED IN RECENT MONTHS?
Many of the categories were "unavailable" at the end of FY which resulted in excessive demand being received during October and November. Coupled with the fact that CIS Offices have been doing an excellent job of processing cases, this has had an impact on cut-off date movements. Some forward movement has begun for January as we enter the second quarter of the fiscal year.
WILL THERE BE ANY ADDITIONAL CUT-OFF DATES FOR FOREIGN STATES IN THE EMPLOYMENT FIRST OR SECOND PREFERENCE CATEGORIES?
At this time it is unlikely that there will be any cut-off dates in the Employment First preferences. It also appears unlikely that it will be necessary to establish a cut-off date other than those already in effect for the Second preference category. Cut-off dates apply to the China and India Second preference categories due to heavy demand, and each has the potential to become "unavailable" should demand cause the annual limit for that category to be reached.
INA Section 202(a)(5) provides that if total demand will be insufficient to use all available numbers in a particular employment preference category in a calendar quarter, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limits. For example, if it is determined that based on the level of demand being received at that time there would be otherwise unused numbers in the Employment Second preference category, then numbers could be provided to oversubscribed countries without regard to per-country limitations. Should that occur, the same cut-off date would be applied to each country, since numbers must be provided strictly in priority date order regardless of chargeability. In this instance, greater number use by one country would indicate a higher rate of demand by applicants from that country with earlier priority dates.
Should Section 202(a)(5) be applied, the rate of number use in the Employment preference category would continue to be monitored to determine whether subsequent adjustments are needed in visa availability for oversubscribed countries. This action provides the best possible assurance that all available Employment preference numbers will be used, while still ensuring that numbers remain available for applicants from all other countries that have not yet reached their per-country limit.
WHAT ARE THE PROJECTIONS FOR CUT-OFF DATE MOVEMENT IN THE EMPLOYMENT PREFERENCES FOR THE REMAINDER OF FY-2010?
Based on current indications of demand, the best case scenarios for cut-off dates which will be reached by the end of FY-2010 are as follows:
Employment Second:
China: July through October 2005
India: February through early March 2005
If Section 202(a)(5)were to
apply: China and India: October through December 2005
Employment Third:
Worldwide: April through August 2005
China: June through September 2003
India: January through February 2002
Mexico: January through June 2004
Philippines: April through August 2005
Please be advised that the above date ranges are only estimates which
are subject to fluctuations in demand during the coming months. The actual
future cut-off dates cannot be guaranteed, and it is possible that some annual
limits could be reached prior to the end of the fiscal year.
So, there you have it. The "official" guesses for FY 2010! It would be terrific, however, if the Visa Bulletin would tell us, based upon its knowledge of pending cases, and estimates on time, how long a case would take in the given categories, if started today. When the Department of State releases THAT information, then perhaps Congress will sit up and take notice that we are facing a literal crisis in our employment based immigration program, and hurting ourselves as a result.https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-2329407886555470879?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/12/from-department-of-state-with-love-visa.html)
hairstyles Wallpapers Graciosos para tu
jonty_11
03-02 02:27 PM
Exception 4 - have a question around this statement: For German transit VISA
- are holding a valid visa or other residence permit for the USA (this includes advance paroles, but not approval notices), Canada or Switzerland and travel to the country which issued that visa or residence permit
do not need transit VISA.
Does that mean if you are travelling from India to US (with valid US Visitor VISA) u need a transit VISA.
Above exception seem to appy only if u are travelling to country that issued u the VISA (india), but in this case we are travelling from that Country to US.
never mind - Exception #3 covers it..
- are holding a valid visa or other residence permit for the USA (this includes advance paroles, but not approval notices), Canada or Switzerland and travel to the country which issued that visa or residence permit
do not need transit VISA.
Does that mean if you are travelling from India to US (with valid US Visitor VISA) u need a transit VISA.
Above exception seem to appy only if u are travelling to country that issued u the VISA (india), but in this case we are travelling from that Country to US.
never mind - Exception #3 covers it..
aristotle
07-11 10:59 AM
Hi Folks,
Just thought I'd share with the group, I recently received my I-140 approval. I did it premium processing through the Nebraska service center (I think) and the application was approved in 3 days (!) - submitted 06/25, premium processing fee check cashed 06/26, approval 06/29.
Now if only they had premium processing for I-485s ! (I was impacted by this recent visa bulletin thing unfortunately ... my PD was current in June but now I have to wait till Oct to file I-485 ... sigh).
- GS
Congratulations!! Why didn't you do Concurrent filing in June?
Just thought I'd share with the group, I recently received my I-140 approval. I did it premium processing through the Nebraska service center (I think) and the application was approved in 3 days (!) - submitted 06/25, premium processing fee check cashed 06/26, approval 06/29.
Now if only they had premium processing for I-485s ! (I was impacted by this recent visa bulletin thing unfortunately ... my PD was current in June but now I have to wait till Oct to file I-485 ... sigh).
- GS
Congratulations!! Why didn't you do Concurrent filing in June?
usdreams
05-25 02:01 PM
Hi kzinjuwadia,
Thank you for your reply, made me relaxed, hopefully, things will go smooth and without any RFE on my side, already had so many problems with my wife's case and hopefully, we will get her GC very soon thru the court (She was out of status on H4 and I-485 denied and she was put in deportation proceedings and we got retroactive H4 NPT Approval and filed the I-485 in the court and hopefully will get her GC soon since my PD is current).
Thanks Again.
I don't think infopass does any harm to you. it may give more info ahead of time. I had infopass on may 12 as one of my friends with later PD got the approval email. the IO told me the case is approved and approvals are mailed already. got the GC next day :) This is my experience. I don't know if anyone had a bad experience at infopass or something that caused additional problem for their case. I think your's is a genuine case as your PD is current and it's almost month end and many with PD after you are already approved.
Thank you for your reply, made me relaxed, hopefully, things will go smooth and without any RFE on my side, already had so many problems with my wife's case and hopefully, we will get her GC very soon thru the court (She was out of status on H4 and I-485 denied and she was put in deportation proceedings and we got retroactive H4 NPT Approval and filed the I-485 in the court and hopefully will get her GC soon since my PD is current).
Thanks Again.
I don't think infopass does any harm to you. it may give more info ahead of time. I had infopass on may 12 as one of my friends with later PD got the approval email. the IO told me the case is approved and approvals are mailed already. got the GC next day :) This is my experience. I don't know if anyone had a bad experience at infopass or something that caused additional problem for their case. I think your's is a genuine case as your PD is current and it's almost month end and many with PD after you are already approved.
No comments:
Post a Comment