sg101
02-15 01:25 PM
sg101 :confused:
Philly BEC Case # P-04322-0xxxx
_______________________________________________
45 Days Letter recieved on 03/22/05 & Replied on 03/25/05
CA SWA PD : 07/25/2002
SF DOL RD : 06/15/2003
Cae type : RIR
Status: Waiting for Labor approval.
Philly BEC Case # P-04322-0xxxx
_______________________________________________
45 Days Letter recieved on 03/22/05 & Replied on 03/25/05
CA SWA PD : 07/25/2002
SF DOL RD : 06/15/2003
Cae type : RIR
Status: Waiting for Labor approval.
wallpaper The poem, which begins,
diptam
07-06 12:11 AM
You need to change the SUBJECT also...
/***
FBI fingerprint bumping and checks are IGNORED for IMMIGRANTS - Can not believe it ? This is called HOMELAND SECURITY ???
How come USCIS / DOS can ignore CRITICAL FBI name check steps ?
***/
This is by far the most effective story that highlights the security concerns raised by approving cases that hasn't cleared the background check yet. This could be the big story. It may, however, be the double-edged sword. I think we need to keep this going as much as we can.
Digg .. Digg.. Digg ... keep digging even in your sleep.
/***
FBI fingerprint bumping and checks are IGNORED for IMMIGRANTS - Can not believe it ? This is called HOMELAND SECURITY ???
How come USCIS / DOS can ignore CRITICAL FBI name check steps ?
***/
This is by far the most effective story that highlights the security concerns raised by approving cases that hasn't cleared the background check yet. This could be the big story. It may, however, be the double-edged sword. I think we need to keep this going as much as we can.
Digg .. Digg.. Digg ... keep digging even in your sleep.
FrankZulu
08-11 03:43 PM
Pls dont believe SriKondoji. Hez known for spreading false rumours and making lame comments thus misleading ppl. He did the same thing on the July 2 Tracker and was booted out. Hence he was hiding for over a week and now is saying that he was out on a business trip :D. Hez full of lies...Admins, Moderators pls delete this thread as the "Monday" mentioned in the title has gone by and we dont need frauds still re assuring ppl about rumours - Thanx in advance.
SriKondoji & I both being from the NE area we communicated through this thread possibility of car polling for DC and I received a call from him last thursday(Aug 9th) regarding this from some Ohio area code. So buddyinus I can at least assure you he was travelling at that time.
SriKondoji & I both being from the NE area we communicated through this thread possibility of car polling for DC and I received a call from him last thursday(Aug 9th) regarding this from some Ohio area code. So buddyinus I can at least assure you he was travelling at that time.
2011 Memoir and Poems of Phillis
gdilla
07-20 01:23 PM
From reader "MA", the blog TalkingPointsMemo.com -he's referring to the slowdown in criminal cases at the USA office in SF, not immigration. But interesting, nonetheless:
Your post . . . about the slowdown in cases in San Francisco got me thinking about the larger bureaucratic issue associated with more than half a dozen years under Bush.
This is a relatively trivial incident, but a while back I attempted to get my passport renewed and discovered the wait times had doubled (partly because of the new rule requiring travelers to Canada to have passports) -- trivial, yes, but it also highlights some of the more mundane effects of an administration run by people who have a fundamental antipathy toward government service and government programs.
This gets writ large in the case of incidents like Hurricane Katrina, the prosecution of the Iraq war and so on...but it also gets writ small in thousands of details of everyday bureaucratic life -- especially as the Bush influence trickles down through the bureaucracy from political appointees to career employees.
If the governing Bush/Cheney philosophy is that the public sector doesn't work, that it is inherently not just inefficient and corrupt, but antagonistic to citizens and individuals, this philosophy has a way of slithering its way into the workings of the system itself -- not just in the case of high profile corruption scandals, but also, again on a more mundane level, in the day-to-day operation of government bureaucracies.
And here's the weird thing, even though that sounds so unexciting, there's something almost stifling about imagining a bureaucracy that really is antagonistic to individuals -- one that not only slows down, but finds some vindication in throwing up road blocks, thwarting citizen requests, and, in the end, not serving the public. I have family members who lived in former communist countries -- and that's really how the bureaucracy was there, and life under those circumstances was made much more difficult, bureaucratic responsibilities increasingly cumbersome, much of the time the system just didn't work, and had to be gamed (or bribed).
Although I have large scale concerns about Bush's handling of the war, the economy, and so on, I also have some more micro scale concerns about what his philosophy of governance means for everyday life and our everyday interactions with the bureaucracy. Indeed, this scale, though more mundane, is also the one that in some ways affects the majority of the population more directly, even if much less dramatically. I've lived in places where the bureaucracy functions quite well, and where citizens take a certain pride in the fact that the government serves them.
The idea of living in a country where the administration's goal is to demonstrate just how bad government is/can be scares me at this very prosaic level -- I want my schools and courts and inspection agencies and passport agencies and so on to be run by people who really believe in government service and in the fact that the government can work effectively to serve the populace. Bush seems to be doing everything he can to dismantle such a world -- and he risks fueling a vicious circle in so doing
Your post . . . about the slowdown in cases in San Francisco got me thinking about the larger bureaucratic issue associated with more than half a dozen years under Bush.
This is a relatively trivial incident, but a while back I attempted to get my passport renewed and discovered the wait times had doubled (partly because of the new rule requiring travelers to Canada to have passports) -- trivial, yes, but it also highlights some of the more mundane effects of an administration run by people who have a fundamental antipathy toward government service and government programs.
This gets writ large in the case of incidents like Hurricane Katrina, the prosecution of the Iraq war and so on...but it also gets writ small in thousands of details of everyday bureaucratic life -- especially as the Bush influence trickles down through the bureaucracy from political appointees to career employees.
If the governing Bush/Cheney philosophy is that the public sector doesn't work, that it is inherently not just inefficient and corrupt, but antagonistic to citizens and individuals, this philosophy has a way of slithering its way into the workings of the system itself -- not just in the case of high profile corruption scandals, but also, again on a more mundane level, in the day-to-day operation of government bureaucracies.
And here's the weird thing, even though that sounds so unexciting, there's something almost stifling about imagining a bureaucracy that really is antagonistic to individuals -- one that not only slows down, but finds some vindication in throwing up road blocks, thwarting citizen requests, and, in the end, not serving the public. I have family members who lived in former communist countries -- and that's really how the bureaucracy was there, and life under those circumstances was made much more difficult, bureaucratic responsibilities increasingly cumbersome, much of the time the system just didn't work, and had to be gamed (or bribed).
Although I have large scale concerns about Bush's handling of the war, the economy, and so on, I also have some more micro scale concerns about what his philosophy of governance means for everyday life and our everyday interactions with the bureaucracy. Indeed, this scale, though more mundane, is also the one that in some ways affects the majority of the population more directly, even if much less dramatically. I've lived in places where the bureaucracy functions quite well, and where citizens take a certain pride in the fact that the government serves them.
The idea of living in a country where the administration's goal is to demonstrate just how bad government is/can be scares me at this very prosaic level -- I want my schools and courts and inspection agencies and passport agencies and so on to be run by people who really believe in government service and in the fact that the government can work effectively to serve the populace. Bush seems to be doing everything he can to dismantle such a world -- and he risks fueling a vicious circle in so doing
more...
gk_2000
08-24 01:35 AM
GK, All I can say about your disconnected arguments are one thing. Myself and Nathan are talking about fairness about the system and on how corporates exploit the loophole thereby exploiting the hardworking individuals like you and me. We never here scolded and ranted about the program and as a matter of fact we are having issues with the so called "LoopHole" But your arguments are going in a completely different direction. You can re-read all of our posts again and see where we mentioned anything about ranting against the program.
If you really want, you can make sense of the "disconnected" arguments, as they all address various points of your counter-arguments.
And again, we are unable to get enough members to fight for visa recapture or i-485 filing and you want to go about closing loopholes?
And BTW FYI, I never worked for TCS.
There was no way for me to know, but my "guess" is close enough, dont you think?
And to let you know, I did my Masters in Soft Engg from BITS and Bachelors in Technology. When I say I got paid 65k for the kind of service I did to the company(5 yrs ago) , itself says a lot of things on how companies exploit which has no relation to the number of yrs of experience and qualifications.
To remind you, this platform is for what purpose? This argument is tangential, as is the loophole one. We want to focus on what? I will let the below argument pass, after saying this much. But yes, I do emphasize with you on what happened. But I also have my share of tragedies
All that matters for those companies is whether client is made happy or not, irrespective of what you undergo. FYI I worked company starting with W (top 3 IT companies in India at that time) .
Let me explain you how this works.....Exactly as to how it happened in my case.
First you are given ransom salary offer say 30-40% more that what you might be earning and an immediate on-site offer within 12 months of joining the company. You feel pretty happy with all of those initially.
Later they send you onsite as promised on L1 by making you wait for 1 yr, (even when they can sponsor you H1) so person would be eligible on L1. Things will look good until now.
While sending you to onsite, no one will let you know what kind of salary you would be paid. Things will start to get interesting from the moment you land in US.
You are paid just a week of hotel stay(extended stay) and 1 week car rental(only if you have valid DL). You have to beg / borrow for a ride or take public commute if available.
After 2 days of settling you will be given a salary letter stating that your salary is 50k with a bonus of 5k.
This is the catch. The companies feel that sending a guy on site itself is a big deal. Logically you think that person earning more at offshore than the other person will also get paid more. Its not the case, everyone at onsite are paid the same, irrespective of what their salary is are offshore(only 2 salary ranges exist).And there is no offshore component, and the pathetic thing about it is, you are paid basic salary at offshore deducting from your onsite salary.
Also, just so you know, and onsite person playing a manager role is just an additional responsibility and not a dedicated role. So this is on top of your regular technical role.
And now comes your GC step. After you spend 5 yrs onsite, since you have to leave back after 6 yrs, the company will file in EB1-A and thereby getting your GC. After you get your GC, you are already out of touch from the rest of the world except from your daily offshore/onsite issues and so on and you would not be able to know as to what exactly you can do with your GC. All that happens is you will not be fit to work anywhere except the place you were working at. This has happened to many of my colleagues. I was lucky enough to get out of that chaos after my 1 yr at onsite. All I can say is I'm very much happy now with GC filed in EB2 and making much more that what I used to ...
BTW your comment on someone working for $1 or 30k is for their own noble cause and you cannot expect everyone to have that.
So can you force everyone to take higher pay? It's a matter between private persons, isn't it? I guess it is a bigger deal for small guys, as the labor market comes into play. No sense applying it to executives
And coming to a conclusion about someone who you do not know about is uncalled for...
If you really want, you can make sense of the "disconnected" arguments, as they all address various points of your counter-arguments.
And again, we are unable to get enough members to fight for visa recapture or i-485 filing and you want to go about closing loopholes?
And BTW FYI, I never worked for TCS.
There was no way for me to know, but my "guess" is close enough, dont you think?
And to let you know, I did my Masters in Soft Engg from BITS and Bachelors in Technology. When I say I got paid 65k for the kind of service I did to the company(5 yrs ago) , itself says a lot of things on how companies exploit which has no relation to the number of yrs of experience and qualifications.
To remind you, this platform is for what purpose? This argument is tangential, as is the loophole one. We want to focus on what? I will let the below argument pass, after saying this much. But yes, I do emphasize with you on what happened. But I also have my share of tragedies
All that matters for those companies is whether client is made happy or not, irrespective of what you undergo. FYI I worked company starting with W (top 3 IT companies in India at that time) .
Let me explain you how this works.....Exactly as to how it happened in my case.
First you are given ransom salary offer say 30-40% more that what you might be earning and an immediate on-site offer within 12 months of joining the company. You feel pretty happy with all of those initially.
Later they send you onsite as promised on L1 by making you wait for 1 yr, (even when they can sponsor you H1) so person would be eligible on L1. Things will look good until now.
While sending you to onsite, no one will let you know what kind of salary you would be paid. Things will start to get interesting from the moment you land in US.
You are paid just a week of hotel stay(extended stay) and 1 week car rental(only if you have valid DL). You have to beg / borrow for a ride or take public commute if available.
After 2 days of settling you will be given a salary letter stating that your salary is 50k with a bonus of 5k.
This is the catch. The companies feel that sending a guy on site itself is a big deal. Logically you think that person earning more at offshore than the other person will also get paid more. Its not the case, everyone at onsite are paid the same, irrespective of what their salary is are offshore(only 2 salary ranges exist).And there is no offshore component, and the pathetic thing about it is, you are paid basic salary at offshore deducting from your onsite salary.
Also, just so you know, and onsite person playing a manager role is just an additional responsibility and not a dedicated role. So this is on top of your regular technical role.
And now comes your GC step. After you spend 5 yrs onsite, since you have to leave back after 6 yrs, the company will file in EB1-A and thereby getting your GC. After you get your GC, you are already out of touch from the rest of the world except from your daily offshore/onsite issues and so on and you would not be able to know as to what exactly you can do with your GC. All that happens is you will not be fit to work anywhere except the place you were working at. This has happened to many of my colleagues. I was lucky enough to get out of that chaos after my 1 yr at onsite. All I can say is I'm very much happy now with GC filed in EB2 and making much more that what I used to ...
BTW your comment on someone working for $1 or 30k is for their own noble cause and you cannot expect everyone to have that.
So can you force everyone to take higher pay? It's a matter between private persons, isn't it? I guess it is a bigger deal for small guys, as the labor market comes into play. No sense applying it to executives
And coming to a conclusion about someone who you do not know about is uncalled for...
I_need_GC
03-14 02:06 PM
Thanks for you post about Canada Visit. You mentioned that one shouldn't say vacation for purpose of visit. What should we say then? My wife and I are going for Landing to Canada and people have posted that if you tell you landed as immigrant in Canada then Border Officers give you a hard time as well and some have even got RFE's from USCIS regarding their intent with US immigration process. So either way we are in trouble!
Friends please advise. What should you say to Border Patrol Officers on Re Entry to US with AP?:(
Also would you mind sharing what was your purpose of Visit?
AP was created for people who had an emergency to travel outside the US while there I-485 was being processed. but over the years these processes have elapse and now take longer. So now the USCIS is more lenient in issuing APs but the law still is that its for emergency travel. Now if you come across an IO who is having a bad day and asks you your reason for travel and you say vacation well he has the authority to deny you entrance. The IO can refuse you entry if he feels somethings not right.
While you have a I-485 pending trying to get Canadian landing papers in theory is a good idea but heres the problem you run in to. After get us green card or passport you take on any other nationality they don't like that. They consider it that you no longer want to be a US citizen now if you have previously held any other nationality like Indian by birth they are ok with that.
So yes if you tell the IO you went there for Canadian landing papers and are traveling on AP its sounds like you no longer want to be a US citizen.
In the past I have said visit family they are ok with that.
My Canadian visit was for work purposes. my company has a sister office in Canada. so when they asked I said to temporarily work in Canada. they were happy with that.
Friends please advise. What should you say to Border Patrol Officers on Re Entry to US with AP?:(
Also would you mind sharing what was your purpose of Visit?
AP was created for people who had an emergency to travel outside the US while there I-485 was being processed. but over the years these processes have elapse and now take longer. So now the USCIS is more lenient in issuing APs but the law still is that its for emergency travel. Now if you come across an IO who is having a bad day and asks you your reason for travel and you say vacation well he has the authority to deny you entrance. The IO can refuse you entry if he feels somethings not right.
While you have a I-485 pending trying to get Canadian landing papers in theory is a good idea but heres the problem you run in to. After get us green card or passport you take on any other nationality they don't like that. They consider it that you no longer want to be a US citizen now if you have previously held any other nationality like Indian by birth they are ok with that.
So yes if you tell the IO you went there for Canadian landing papers and are traveling on AP its sounds like you no longer want to be a US citizen.
In the past I have said visit family they are ok with that.
My Canadian visit was for work purposes. my company has a sister office in Canada. so when they asked I said to temporarily work in Canada. they were happy with that.
more...
satishku_2000
07-05 05:10 PM
CALL your state senators. State senators are interested in listening from people who reside in their respective states, Cause they technically represent them. So they want to hear what affects their constituents.
Call your state senators first, then call your house reps, (remember logfren is a house rep) and then the others.
I did that already ...:)
Call your state senators first, then call your house reps, (remember logfren is a house rep) and then the others.
I did that already ...:)
2010 Moral#39; by Phillis Wheatley
Marphad
03-03 05:07 PM
That is not true, my lawyer who is very influential and he has some good contacts he told me that this year spill-over would be different form last year. I was stupid so didn�t believe him about July 2007, and paying it for now for not having EAD.
I know this is hard to believe especially if something comes from lawyer.
Thank's
MDix
I owe you a drink if this is true :)
I know this is hard to believe especially if something comes from lawyer.
Thank's
MDix
I owe you a drink if this is true :)
more...
JunRN
08-13 09:13 PM
I think everything will normalize in October. From RN, EAD may take three to four months.
hair Phillis Wheatley Poems
rajuram
12-18 02:25 PM
has any publicity we have recd so far in the press (not on anti-immig websites, which are visited only by anti-immigs) been in any way negative? no.
why? because there is nothing negative to say.
on the contrary, many people are discovering that their misperceptions aboutu legal immigs are wrong, and that before CIR the legal system needs to be fixed first.
I agree that our tone should not be negative, maybe not call it a boycott, but show them that we are protesting in a big and united way.
We have to differentiate ourselves from the illegals. Let the illegals do Rallies, Huger strikes etc.
why? because there is nothing negative to say.
on the contrary, many people are discovering that their misperceptions aboutu legal immigs are wrong, and that before CIR the legal system needs to be fixed first.
I agree that our tone should not be negative, maybe not call it a boycott, but show them that we are protesting in a big and united way.
We have to differentiate ourselves from the illegals. Let the illegals do Rallies, Huger strikes etc.
more...
PD_Dec2002
06-02 10:12 PM
Canadian_Dream, I think your interpretation is wrong..
------------------------------------------------------------------------
40 (2) PENDING AND APPROVED PETITIONS AND APPLICATIONS.�Petitions
41 for an employment-based visa filed for classification under
42 section 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Immigration and Nationality
43 Act (as such provisions existed prior to the enactment of this
44 section) that were filed prior to the date of the introduction of
265
1 the [Insert title of Act] and were pending or approved at the
2 time of the effective date of this section, shall be treated as if
3 such provision remained effective and an approved petition may
4 serve as the basis for issuance of an immigrant visa. Aliens with
5 applications for a labor certification pursuant to section
6 212(a)(5)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act shall
7 preserve the immigrant visa priority date accorded by the date
8 of filing of such labor certification application.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think what AILA, our core group and other attorneys are trying to say is that as long as you filed before May 15, 2007 you will be fine regardless of whether your petition is pending or approved. There is no dispute about this point. Any applications that were filed after May 15, 2007 will become null and void the day this bill is signed by the president to make it a law. The 'effective date' ( Oct 1, 2008 ) does not apply for applications filed after May 15, 2007. I will be glad if you can prove me wrong :)
java_jaggu :
yes, we both are saying the same thing.
Thanks,
Jayant
------------------------------------------------------------------------
40 (2) PENDING AND APPROVED PETITIONS AND APPLICATIONS.�Petitions
41 for an employment-based visa filed for classification under
42 section 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Immigration and Nationality
43 Act (as such provisions existed prior to the enactment of this
44 section) that were filed prior to the date of the introduction of
265
1 the [Insert title of Act] and were pending or approved at the
2 time of the effective date of this section, shall be treated as if
3 such provision remained effective and an approved petition may
4 serve as the basis for issuance of an immigrant visa. Aliens with
5 applications for a labor certification pursuant to section
6 212(a)(5)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act shall
7 preserve the immigrant visa priority date accorded by the date
8 of filing of such labor certification application.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think what AILA, our core group and other attorneys are trying to say is that as long as you filed before May 15, 2007 you will be fine regardless of whether your petition is pending or approved. There is no dispute about this point. Any applications that were filed after May 15, 2007 will become null and void the day this bill is signed by the president to make it a law. The 'effective date' ( Oct 1, 2008 ) does not apply for applications filed after May 15, 2007. I will be glad if you can prove me wrong :)
java_jaggu :
yes, we both are saying the same thing.
Thanks,
Jayant
hot Phillis Wheatley Poetry
LostInGCProcess
09-10 12:53 PM
Please help me understand this:
The Dept. of State's web site has the visa bulletin for SEpt 2008 as:
EB INDIA
--------------------
1st C
2nd 01AUG06
3rd U
And the US Consulate's web site at Mumbai has:
EB INDIA
------------
E1 Current
E2 1 April 2003
So, how come Consulates got the latest information? Why not post this on the DOS page too by the DOS?
I am so sick and tired of this whole process of GC. I am starting to question myself if this entire process of wait, is worth at all? If you are illegal, you are free in this country, if you are legal they scrutiny your papers with a microscope....I am sick, totally sick. There is a limit to patience, too.:mad::mad::mad:
The Dept. of State's web site has the visa bulletin for SEpt 2008 as:
EB INDIA
--------------------
1st C
2nd 01AUG06
3rd U
And the US Consulate's web site at Mumbai has:
EB INDIA
------------
E1 Current
E2 1 April 2003
So, how come Consulates got the latest information? Why not post this on the DOS page too by the DOS?
I am so sick and tired of this whole process of GC. I am starting to question myself if this entire process of wait, is worth at all? If you are illegal, you are free in this country, if you are legal they scrutiny your papers with a microscope....I am sick, totally sick. There is a limit to patience, too.:mad::mad::mad:
more...
house Phillis_Wheatley.jpg
stillhopefull
09-10 12:50 PM
Just contributed $100 and will see everybody in DC!
tattoo Phillis Wheatley, Boston
rbms
04-25 12:41 PM
How about something like,
If a person has stayed in US for 10+ (or 7+years) years and has filed taxes(verified thourgh 1040s), he should be given GC. No questions asked(other than the ones the affect security of USA)
If a person has stayed in US for 10+ (or 7+years) years and has filed taxes(verified thourgh 1040s), he should be given GC. No questions asked(other than the ones the affect security of USA)
more...
pictures Phillis Wheatley - Liberty#39;s
needhelp!
09-10 05:15 PM
raminmd, Miya Maqbool, Guest007, sxm101, nosightofgc, p_aluri, uslegals, krispal
Here's to a strong community of active members!
Here's to a strong community of active members!
dresses Phillis Wheatley
chanduv23
11-18 10:41 AM
We must also step forward and work towards resolving other things
(1) Create blog on how to report Employer wage violations to Wage and Hour division
(2) USCIS poor customer service - inconsistencies, rude answers ....... We must create a blog to let people know how to contact Ombudsman to report issues
(3) Any other pressing issues....
Folks please add anything you feel must be addressed
(1) Create blog on how to report Employer wage violations to Wage and Hour division
(2) USCIS poor customer service - inconsistencies, rude answers ....... We must create a blog to let people know how to contact Ombudsman to report issues
(3) Any other pressing issues....
Folks please add anything you feel must be addressed
more...
makeup Memoir and Poems of Phillis
GCard_Dream
09-10 01:00 PM
The discrepancy is due to the fact that you are looking at visa bulletin from 2 different month. The bulletin on State department's website is for September and the one on Mumbai consulate's website is supposed to be for October.
Please help me understand this:
The Dept. of State's web site has the visa bulletin for SEpt 2008 as:
EB INDIA
--------------------
1st C
2nd 01AUG06
3rd U
And the US Consulate's web site at Mumbai has:
EB INDIA
------------
E1 Current
E2 1 April 2003
So, how come Consulates got the latest information? Why not post this on the DOS page too by the DOS?
I am so sick and tired of this whole process of GC. I am starting to question myself if this entire process of wait, is worth at all? If you are illegal, you are free in this country, if you are legal they scrutiny your papers with a microscope....I am sick, totally sick. There is a limit to patience, too.:mad::mad::mad:
Please help me understand this:
The Dept. of State's web site has the visa bulletin for SEpt 2008 as:
EB INDIA
--------------------
1st C
2nd 01AUG06
3rd U
And the US Consulate's web site at Mumbai has:
EB INDIA
------------
E1 Current
E2 1 April 2003
So, how come Consulates got the latest information? Why not post this on the DOS page too by the DOS?
I am so sick and tired of this whole process of GC. I am starting to question myself if this entire process of wait, is worth at all? If you are illegal, you are free in this country, if you are legal they scrutiny your papers with a microscope....I am sick, totally sick. There is a limit to patience, too.:mad::mad::mad:
girlfriend Phillis Wheatley, Poems on
prashanthg
09-10 05:06 PM
I guess the reason for moving back eb2 I dates is strategic. Since they have the whole year to use the 140 K visas, they might be trying to start the year conservatively, trying to honor FIFO.
The aggressive movement of dates in last quarter was ONLY to prevent the visa number wastage.
I think the reason for the retrogression in EB2-I is obvious.
There are only 800 visas available for EB2-I for any given quarter (remember the 7% country quota). The spill overs from EB2-ROW and EB1 start only after few months.
EB2-I will move after the DOS looks at the unused visa numbers from EB2-ROW and EB1, hope fully next quarter.
There are no spill overs into EB3-I, so it won't move any time soon.
Note: I am not commenting on USCIS approving cases with later dates before older priority dates.
The aggressive movement of dates in last quarter was ONLY to prevent the visa number wastage.
I think the reason for the retrogression in EB2-I is obvious.
There are only 800 visas available for EB2-I for any given quarter (remember the 7% country quota). The spill overs from EB2-ROW and EB1 start only after few months.
EB2-I will move after the DOS looks at the unused visa numbers from EB2-ROW and EB1, hope fully next quarter.
There are no spill overs into EB3-I, so it won't move any time soon.
Note: I am not commenting on USCIS approving cases with later dates before older priority dates.
hairstyles Phillis Wheatley
kuhelica2000
09-15 05:13 PM
I wasn't planning on porting my PD until I read this nonsense "Injunction" threat. I will now port my PD; GCTest - go and file your injunction. If you don't have enough balls to do that I can lend you one.
That memo/document you pointed out is an interpretation. We have already said that USCIS's interpretation is incorrect. We intend to correct this interpretation with this lawsuit.
Infact, it would be wrong to call this a lawsuit.
We are aiming for an injunction (or a stay order) in step 1 of the lawsuit that would prevent USCIS from working on any interfiling/PD porting requests.
If the injunction is with retroactive effect, all the EBs (not just EB3) who have ported their PDs will have their cases frozen. USCIS would not be able to work on them.
The remainder of the lawsuit can take its sweet time... the injunction should serve the primary cause.
That memo/document you pointed out is an interpretation. We have already said that USCIS's interpretation is incorrect. We intend to correct this interpretation with this lawsuit.
Infact, it would be wrong to call this a lawsuit.
We are aiming for an injunction (or a stay order) in step 1 of the lawsuit that would prevent USCIS from working on any interfiling/PD porting requests.
If the injunction is with retroactive effect, all the EBs (not just EB3) who have ported their PDs will have their cases frozen. USCIS would not be able to work on them.
The remainder of the lawsuit can take its sweet time... the injunction should serve the primary cause.
param_r
09-11 12:05 PM
Guys,
Keep up the good work.
This is just another way of saying, sorry I cannot come down to DC due to prior engagements.
Sent $100 in contribution.
Google Order #528053412971728
Thanks,
Param.
Keep up the good work.
This is just another way of saying, sorry I cannot come down to DC due to prior engagements.
Sent $100 in contribution.
Google Order #528053412971728
Thanks,
Param.
puriyu
03-31 10:15 AM
:)I am sorry but i think there is no point to discuss this concern whether USCIS has ability or not..... Just support IV, group 2gather and fight....
No comments:
Post a Comment