vdlrao
07-18 11:35 PM
vdlrao,
I disagree with you. Per my calculation USCIS should have at-least 158k application with PD 2002 and 2003 (all chargeability, all cat). And yes I have arrived at this number after deducting already approved EB2 and EB3 numbers.
If you do INDIA:CHINA:MEXICO :: 40:30:30 ratio.
The break up of outstanding I485 looks like this
India :- 64k
China :- 47K
Mexico:- 47K
As per my calculation Eb3 India do not have good outlook.
you are right if theres no immigration reform in the next two years. But i strongly presume there would be immigration reform in the next two years.
I disagree with you. Per my calculation USCIS should have at-least 158k application with PD 2002 and 2003 (all chargeability, all cat). And yes I have arrived at this number after deducting already approved EB2 and EB3 numbers.
If you do INDIA:CHINA:MEXICO :: 40:30:30 ratio.
The break up of outstanding I485 looks like this
India :- 64k
China :- 47K
Mexico:- 47K
As per my calculation Eb3 India do not have good outlook.
you are right if theres no immigration reform in the next two years. But i strongly presume there would be immigration reform in the next two years.
wallpaper friends quotes wallpapers.
skd
09-18 12:18 PM
Those smart people are not in charge. The people in charge were saying everything is fine and go do shopping
No body saw this coming, then how can you trust those people again that things will be fine in 2 years or so.
As I said No body saw this coming , So we don't know if we have seen the bottom yet or not.
No body saw this coming, then how can you trust those people again that things will be fine in 2 years or so.
As I said No body saw this coming , So we don't know if we have seen the bottom yet or not.
EB2_Jun03_dude
02-21 05:11 PM
I-485: EB2 India with PD June 2003
I was wondering why I am I getting a LUD in Feb 08? (since EB2 India is 'U').
Now I know why :) it seems USCIS is getting ready for the deluge in April 08' :D
I was wondering why I am I getting a LUD in Feb 08? (since EB2 India is 'U').
Now I know why :) it seems USCIS is getting ready for the deluge in April 08' :D
2011 friends quotes wallpapers.
chanduv23
09-19 11:40 AM
These stories are scary
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080918/ap_on_bi_ge/ny_economy_4
By MICHAEL GORMLEY, Associated Press Writer Thu Sep 18, 1:03 PM ET
ALBANY, N.Y. - A new projection shows Wall Street's meltdown will likely cost New York state up to 40,000 private sector jobs and $3 billion in tax revenues over the next two years, two state officials said Thursday.
ADVERTISEMENT
The revised numbers in the snapshot of worst case estimates was done Wednesday at the highest levels of New York's state government.
The projection is worse than Gov. David Paterson predicted just Tuesday when he said the state could lose some $1 billion in revenue because of upheaval in the financial sector.
Wall Street is a major economic force in New York state, generating one-fifth of the state's revenues each year.
The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren't authorized to comment on the fiscal analysis.
Both hits would be substantial. The total New York state budget including federal funds is about $120 billion, and the state has about 7.25 million private-sector jobs.
State officials used the model of the fiscal damage to New York after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Then, Gov. George Pataki said it was the worst financial hit to New York since the Great Depression 70 years earlier.
The new analysis includes the stock market drop, lost revenue from transactions and projected lost income tax revenue from Wall Street jobs.
Three of the five major U.S. investment banks � Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch � have either gone out of business or been driven into the arms of another bank. The two remaining banks, Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Morgan Stanley, are under siege.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080918/ap_on_bi_ge/ny_economy_4
By MICHAEL GORMLEY, Associated Press Writer Thu Sep 18, 1:03 PM ET
ALBANY, N.Y. - A new projection shows Wall Street's meltdown will likely cost New York state up to 40,000 private sector jobs and $3 billion in tax revenues over the next two years, two state officials said Thursday.
ADVERTISEMENT
The revised numbers in the snapshot of worst case estimates was done Wednesday at the highest levels of New York's state government.
The projection is worse than Gov. David Paterson predicted just Tuesday when he said the state could lose some $1 billion in revenue because of upheaval in the financial sector.
Wall Street is a major economic force in New York state, generating one-fifth of the state's revenues each year.
The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren't authorized to comment on the fiscal analysis.
Both hits would be substantial. The total New York state budget including federal funds is about $120 billion, and the state has about 7.25 million private-sector jobs.
State officials used the model of the fiscal damage to New York after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Then, Gov. George Pataki said it was the worst financial hit to New York since the Great Depression 70 years earlier.
The new analysis includes the stock market drop, lost revenue from transactions and projected lost income tax revenue from Wall Street jobs.
Three of the five major U.S. investment banks � Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch � have either gone out of business or been driven into the arms of another bank. The two remaining banks, Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Morgan Stanley, are under siege.
more...
nousername
11-13 02:13 PM
when was the last time you won a legal battel in 2 weeks/months/years time?
IV is acting like a desi politician.. paisa do and shut up..we know what we are doing....they refuse to even entertain such alternate remedies.
like i had said in my earlier post.. If you pay a BYTCH.. she will sing what you want to hear..hence the fake promises of CIR being a reality..and all.. (remember that 588x bill fiasco) and NOW we know..from the horses mouth.. CIR is dead for the near foreseeable future.
So i think we should pursue alternate reliefs with immediate effect.
just my 2cents.
With you on this bro.. You propose something and they ridicule you, you ask a question or question their intent they pull your thread off the main page and dump it someplace else..
Because of the above reasons I stopped donating (which I know they don't care, nor do I). I only visit this forum to help other members with their questions to which I might have an answer or share my experience, as like others even I have quite a lot of bad immigration experiences.
IV is acting like a desi politician.. paisa do and shut up..we know what we are doing....they refuse to even entertain such alternate remedies.
like i had said in my earlier post.. If you pay a BYTCH.. she will sing what you want to hear..hence the fake promises of CIR being a reality..and all.. (remember that 588x bill fiasco) and NOW we know..from the horses mouth.. CIR is dead for the near foreseeable future.
So i think we should pursue alternate reliefs with immediate effect.
just my 2cents.
With you on this bro.. You propose something and they ridicule you, you ask a question or question their intent they pull your thread off the main page and dump it someplace else..
Because of the above reasons I stopped donating (which I know they don't care, nor do I). I only visit this forum to help other members with their questions to which I might have an answer or share my experience, as like others even I have quite a lot of bad immigration experiences.
hpandey
10-15 02:25 PM
I have a doubt about what can be accomplished by the flower campaign. I am totally for it if it would help but just think - it is not in USCIS hands to assign more visas to EB3 or EB2. The number of visas is limited and the number of people waiting for the visas is huge. That is the whole cause of retrogression . If there were as many visas as the people everything would be current.
This is a simple matter of demand and supply . The thing that can help is visa recapture but that again USCIS can't do and only the Congress . What we need to do is point our efforts in the right direction .
This is a simple matter of demand and supply . The thing that can help is visa recapture but that again USCIS can't do and only the Congress . What we need to do is point our efforts in the right direction .
more...
GCard_Dream
12-28 12:26 PM
Both of the flights were on the same itinerary and were booked through Thai. United was asking for money for international part of the travel because he said that Thai would charge United for the extra weight if United checked in the luggage all the way to Bangkok, which isn't really true because Thai did allow 70 LB then. I am not sure what the regulation is now.
I think you are right that the guy was probably ignorant and didn't really care becasue I wasn't flying United after LA anyways.
i have never had that problem
may have been because you booked those flights separately, if they are on the same itinerary and both were booked through Thai, United should not do that, guess they don't care because you are not continuing on United. btw how could they demand money for the international part of the flight- they are not Thai and their rules don't apply...i also think the person you dealt with was ignorant...
the problem i have seen- you fly into the US and have a connecting flight onwards- if you take it withing 24 hrs ie same day- bags just continue- if not you are stuck with domestic rules. now it no longer matters on american carriers at least, intl allowance has also been decreased to 50 lbs.
I think you are right that the guy was probably ignorant and didn't really care becasue I wasn't flying United after LA anyways.
i have never had that problem
may have been because you booked those flights separately, if they are on the same itinerary and both were booked through Thai, United should not do that, guess they don't care because you are not continuing on United. btw how could they demand money for the international part of the flight- they are not Thai and their rules don't apply...i also think the person you dealt with was ignorant...
the problem i have seen- you fly into the US and have a connecting flight onwards- if you take it withing 24 hrs ie same day- bags just continue- if not you are stuck with domestic rules. now it no longer matters on american carriers at least, intl allowance has also been decreased to 50 lbs.
2010 Posted in Best Friend Quotes
Ramba
07-14 06:39 PM
Thanks Ramba. I appreciate your positive comments. I guess the only doubt now is to find out a way whether employer had revoked my 140 before 180 days? If they didnt I am 100% safe now.
Yes. If they revoked the 140 before 180 days of 485 pending, USCIS might have directly denied your 485. They normally dont issue RFE. Since, you recived RFE, I guess it is after 180 days. So hang on. Reply correctly to RFE with all details. You will be fine.
Are you sure they are revoking your 140?
Yes. If they revoked the 140 before 180 days of 485 pending, USCIS might have directly denied your 485. They normally dont issue RFE. Since, you recived RFE, I guess it is after 180 days. So hang on. Reply correctly to RFE with all details. You will be fine.
Are you sure they are revoking your 140?
more...
logiclife
01-30 04:37 PM
I agree with you totally. But the sad part is, Try going the normal straight way & nobody entertains you when the companies hear the word "H4". All the work experience gathered over the years suddenly seems like crap in front of the visa status.
Its frustrating.
Yes. Many of the American companies, the fortune 500 companies would go without a qualified worker for months and months but would not hire H1B because they dont want to deal with keeping track of stuff and all the legal requirements and paperwork and dealing with USCIS and immigration lawyers.
But you have to start somewhere and gain experience and hope that you will have a project somewhere, where you prove to the client (potential employer) that you are a valuable resource, and then they would sponsor you for H1 and then you can quit your desi employer. That is the standard M.O. for most people who are looking for a start. However, in most cases, since desi employers are also the GC sponsors of the primary bread-winner of the family, that opportunity of working for a better employer is passed up by many employees.
Its frustrating.
Yes. Many of the American companies, the fortune 500 companies would go without a qualified worker for months and months but would not hire H1B because they dont want to deal with keeping track of stuff and all the legal requirements and paperwork and dealing with USCIS and immigration lawyers.
But you have to start somewhere and gain experience and hope that you will have a project somewhere, where you prove to the client (potential employer) that you are a valuable resource, and then they would sponsor you for H1 and then you can quit your desi employer. That is the standard M.O. for most people who are looking for a start. However, in most cases, since desi employers are also the GC sponsors of the primary bread-winner of the family, that opportunity of working for a better employer is passed up by many employees.
hair friendship quotes wallpapers.
chi_shark
03-11 11:08 AM
I agree that preadjudication could be happening now and the flood gates are to be opened for Eb2 I soon. Otherwise why would USCIS work on apps and send for RFE etc?
I have seen high activitiy in the last few months.
man, we are an optimistic bunch! nothing wrong with it... but this is what keeps me coming back! :-)
I have seen high activitiy in the last few months.
man, we are an optimistic bunch! nothing wrong with it... but this is what keeps me coming back! :-)
more...
logiclife
12-20 08:31 PM
On a second thought, If I interpret it correctly...
the alien, subsequent to such lawful admission has not, for an aggregate period exceeding 180 days�
(A) failed to maintain, continuously, a lawful status;
(B) engaged in unauthorized employment; or
(C) otherwise violated the terms and conditions of the alien�s admission.
I exceeded 180 days and was out of status, but the law says that you shouldn't exceed 180 days :eek:
yes, but that happened prior to your last admission in USA and prior to your filing of 485.
Make sure that it doesnt happen now. What happened before your last entry into USA and before 485 filing is like what happened in Vegas.
Relax my friend, if you still cant find solace, then surely talk to a lawyer. I always do that when in doubt because frankly, there is a reason why professinals exist.
Also, search "245(k) immigration" in google and read lawyer's interpretations of section 245(k), you will understand what I am saying.
the alien, subsequent to such lawful admission has not, for an aggregate period exceeding 180 days�
(A) failed to maintain, continuously, a lawful status;
(B) engaged in unauthorized employment; or
(C) otherwise violated the terms and conditions of the alien�s admission.
I exceeded 180 days and was out of status, but the law says that you shouldn't exceed 180 days :eek:
yes, but that happened prior to your last admission in USA and prior to your filing of 485.
Make sure that it doesnt happen now. What happened before your last entry into USA and before 485 filing is like what happened in Vegas.
Relax my friend, if you still cant find solace, then surely talk to a lawyer. I always do that when in doubt because frankly, there is a reason why professinals exist.
Also, search "245(k) immigration" in google and read lawyer's interpretations of section 245(k), you will understand what I am saying.
hot friendship images and quotes.
Refugee_New
07-30 11:19 AM
LOL.
The issue of GOD and religion has been discussed ad nauseum by many great thinkers and philosophers (Spinoza, Voltaire, Hume, Russel etc.). Most of us do not read their opinions and try to broaden our knowledge. We never get beyond what our parents taught us about GOD and religion. What is worse still is that the allegorical descriptions in religious texts are now treated as facts and we often end up arguing over these as well.
Having said that, there is nothing wrong in believing in GOD. There is also nothing wrong if someone is not convinced about the existence of GOD. There are valid philosophical arguments for both cases. Lack of mutual respect and failing to see others point of view is what is causing this rift.
You are true. Every religion preaches their followers to give atmost respect to people of other faith. Being a weak humanbeing we always tend to forget these simple rules.
The issue of GOD and religion has been discussed ad nauseum by many great thinkers and philosophers (Spinoza, Voltaire, Hume, Russel etc.). Most of us do not read their opinions and try to broaden our knowledge. We never get beyond what our parents taught us about GOD and religion. What is worse still is that the allegorical descriptions in religious texts are now treated as facts and we often end up arguing over these as well.
Having said that, there is nothing wrong in believing in GOD. There is also nothing wrong if someone is not convinced about the existence of GOD. There are valid philosophical arguments for both cases. Lack of mutual respect and failing to see others point of view is what is causing this rift.
You are true. Every religion preaches their followers to give atmost respect to people of other faith. Being a weak humanbeing we always tend to forget these simple rules.
more...
house friendship quotes wallpapers.
optimystic
03-18 03:43 PM
Unfortunately, this doesn't seem to be quite true as it contradicts the April bulletin. The bulletin says there are unused visas in the second category going to EB-2 India, and doesn't mention EB-1 at all.
There also seem to be people who are going to sue because they believe DOS ignoring per-country quotas is hurting their chances at EB-3 visas (i.e. they claim that if EB-2 India should get any extra visas then all of EB-3 ROW applications should be approved first). This situation is turning out to be quite interesting. I wonder if we're going to have another fiasco like the July 2007 one.
Just a question out of curiosity....why would someone choose 'taliban' as a login handle, knowing fully well the kind of unneccessary negative attention one can get. I do fully respect the individual's choice to choose her/her own id but just curious...And to jog the curiosity even more , this member seems to be tagged as 'banned' now.. :D...did the admins not like the chosen handle as well !!
There also seem to be people who are going to sue because they believe DOS ignoring per-country quotas is hurting their chances at EB-3 visas (i.e. they claim that if EB-2 India should get any extra visas then all of EB-3 ROW applications should be approved first). This situation is turning out to be quite interesting. I wonder if we're going to have another fiasco like the July 2007 one.
Just a question out of curiosity....why would someone choose 'taliban' as a login handle, knowing fully well the kind of unneccessary negative attention one can get. I do fully respect the individual's choice to choose her/her own id but just curious...And to jog the curiosity even more , this member seems to be tagged as 'banned' now.. :D...did the admins not like the chosen handle as well !!
tattoo friends quotes wallpapers.
yabadaba
08-15 04:35 PM
Please link it.
read the bulletin!
read the bulletin!
more...
pictures friends quotes wallpapers.
.jpg "friendship quotes wallpapers.")
perm2gc
01-11 03:25 PM
http://www.laborlawtalk.com/showthread.php?p=850460#post850460
http://www.indiacause.com/services/advt/advt_lst_one.asp?srno=10394
http://www.indiacause.com/services/advt/advt_lst_one.asp?srno=10394
dresses short best friend quotes
imh1b
11-12 04:03 PM
Did you see that whoever is crying for spillover is EB2 India. or EB3 ROW. He has his priority date pretty close to cutoff dates in bulletin. So they think by doing spillover their greencard will come few months earlier. This is a selfish thinking. IV should not help such people. They do not care about us. They only care about getting their own greencard. I will oppose this campaign and send letters against this campiagn to whoever you are sending. This campiagn does no help to EB3 India. I am sure many EB2 ROW will oppose you and send letters against your letters. You are trying to delay EB2 ROW greencards by taking from their quota. Even Chinese will oppose you because there are too many Indians blocking the system for everyone.
IV should spend money for EB3 India rather then EB2 India who are already in advantage.
IV should spend money for EB3 India rather then EB2 India who are already in advantage.
more...
makeup friendship quotes and
varshadas
09-12 10:57 AM
Ajay, Shekhar, Sanjay where are you guys? I have not heard from you guys for a while. Is anyone of you going to the rally? If not, have you guys been spreading the message within your contacts?
girlfriend friendship quotes wallpapers.
shreekhand
07-12 10:15 PM
What is the need for all this ? The visa bulletin is out but no one cares to read it I guess. Every bulletin has these or words to this effect.
"Only applicants who have a priority date earlier than the cut-off date may be allotted a number."
So the date that you see in the table is NOT eligible for visa numbers.
Thanks for good wishes and congratulations to all who become current.
Regarding cutoff date I'm hearing multiple theories -
A. if it says 1st March - then prior to that consider as active - 1st of March is not included
B. some says 1st March is included because it is like UNTIL 1st March
C. Someone told me if cutoff date fall on weekend then consider that date in. 1st March in 2006 was Wednesday - just FYI.
D. someone also told me if it falls during weekdays then consider whole week - until Friday. USCIS taking cases for whole week for processing.
Wow so many options looks like I need to poll this and then wait until next bulletin :)
Once again thanks for good wishes and Congratulations who were waiting for longer period.
-Rwe
"Only applicants who have a priority date earlier than the cut-off date may be allotted a number."
So the date that you see in the table is NOT eligible for visa numbers.
Thanks for good wishes and congratulations to all who become current.
Regarding cutoff date I'm hearing multiple theories -
A. if it says 1st March - then prior to that consider as active - 1st of March is not included
B. some says 1st March is included because it is like UNTIL 1st March
C. Someone told me if cutoff date fall on weekend then consider that date in. 1st March in 2006 was Wednesday - just FYI.
D. someone also told me if it falls during weekdays then consider whole week - until Friday. USCIS taking cases for whole week for processing.
Wow so many options looks like I need to poll this and then wait until next bulletin :)
Once again thanks for good wishes and Congratulations who were waiting for longer period.
-Rwe
hairstyles bands. friendship quotes
zuhail
04-11 01:23 AM
A very useful piece of information has been brought to our attention by shiankuraaf.
Thank you very much!
http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/LPR08.shtm
Table 6 Persons Obtaining Legal Permanent Resident Status by Type and Major Class of Admission: Fiscal Years 1999 to 2008
http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/YrBk04Im.shtm
Table 4 Immigrants admitted by type and selected class of admission: fiscal years 1986-2004
Employment-based preferences (Total Number)
Year QUOTA ISSUED Unused/Excessively used
1986 140000 56617 83383
1987 140000 57519 82481
1988 140000 58727 81273
1989 140000 57741 82259
1990 140000 58192 81808
1991 140000 59525 80475
1992 140000 116198 23802
1993 140000 147012 -7012
1994 140000 123291 16709
1995 140000 85336 54664
1996 140000 117499 22501
1997 140000 90607 49393
1998 140000 77517 62483
1999 140000 56678 83322
2000 140000 106642 33358
2001 140000 178702 -38702
2002 140000 173814 -33814
2003 140000 81727 58273
2004 140000 155330 -15330
2005 140000 246877 -106877
2006 140000 159081 -19081
2007 140000 162176 -22176
2008 140000 166511 -26511
Sum total of the differences from 1986 to 2008: 626,681. Vow!!!
So when looked between the period of 1986 and 2008,
there were a total of 626,681 un-used visa numbers that can be re-captured.
This is based on the BIG assumption that the yearly quota for EB categories is 140,000 from 1986 to 2008.
Does anybody know how to verify this important assumption online --a link to a gov website perhaps?
It would be good to verify when the law specifying 140,000 visa numbers per year was passed and
what were the criteria for visa number usage prior to the existence of the law.
Thank you very much!
http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/LPR08.shtm
Table 6 Persons Obtaining Legal Permanent Resident Status by Type and Major Class of Admission: Fiscal Years 1999 to 2008
http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/YrBk04Im.shtm
Table 4 Immigrants admitted by type and selected class of admission: fiscal years 1986-2004
Employment-based preferences (Total Number)
Year QUOTA ISSUED Unused/Excessively used
1986 140000 56617 83383
1987 140000 57519 82481
1988 140000 58727 81273
1989 140000 57741 82259
1990 140000 58192 81808
1991 140000 59525 80475
1992 140000 116198 23802
1993 140000 147012 -7012
1994 140000 123291 16709
1995 140000 85336 54664
1996 140000 117499 22501
1997 140000 90607 49393
1998 140000 77517 62483
1999 140000 56678 83322
2000 140000 106642 33358
2001 140000 178702 -38702
2002 140000 173814 -33814
2003 140000 81727 58273
2004 140000 155330 -15330
2005 140000 246877 -106877
2006 140000 159081 -19081
2007 140000 162176 -22176
2008 140000 166511 -26511
Sum total of the differences from 1986 to 2008: 626,681. Vow!!!
So when looked between the period of 1986 and 2008,
there were a total of 626,681 un-used visa numbers that can be re-captured.
This is based on the BIG assumption that the yearly quota for EB categories is 140,000 from 1986 to 2008.
Does anybody know how to verify this important assumption online --a link to a gov website perhaps?
It would be good to verify when the law specifying 140,000 visa numbers per year was passed and
what were the criteria for visa number usage prior to the existence of the law.
nixstor
10-26 10:17 PM
please send the link and doc.
Please look at the first post in the thread.
Please look at the first post in the thread.
mpillai
05-08 10:04 AM
I feel your pain, But, what was the point of firing same requests to USCIS from thousands of users? Wont that cause more delay for some other FOIA requests? FOIA requests are required to be responded by law, so you are guaranteed a reply even if only 1 user files the request.
I got a reply from USCIS saying that they can process the request sorted by priority date and country of birth of the applicant.
I got a reply from USCIS saying that they can process the request sorted by priority date and country of birth of the applicant.
