makemygc
08-01 12:15 PM
mine reached at 10-23 am -2 nd july,by some L.ARMSTRONG guy..no receipt yet,no check cashed
cjagtap..where did you send your application.. NSC or TSC?
cjagtap..where did you send your application.. NSC or TSC?
wallpaper Ice XP 3D Wallpaper.
GC08
07-08 02:48 PM
Did anyone watch Fox News just now? How come the senator did not mention the inefficient process of adjudicating the applications?
Wendyzhu77
01-03 03:36 PM
I am not so sure where you get the impression that being a pilot is not a glamarous job any more. If you equate airline pilot to taxi drivers, you would probabily see planes dropping from sky like raining, and I bet few would dare to take commercial airline, unless one with suicidal tendency.
However, that relates another interesting part about outsourcing: lots of people are saying outsourcing are good and you can get anyone to do the IT job, but it really turned out that lots of oursourced jobs are done so poorly that eventually it costs more for the company.
We think about outsourcing because it affects engineers the most. especially IT/software. Remember software is still a tool. What you do with the software is more important. The process of creating software is just like making any other tool (every problem is hard to solve only for the first time).
Western countries started the industrial revolution (manufacturing/factories). Now China is leading in manufacturing. IT revolution, again was started in the west. In 20 years, it is possible that very few lines of original software is written in the US. Its not that US does not have smart people who cannot be trained as engineers but more like the smart people in US prefer other occupations as compared to engineering/software.
I imagine the computer/internet revolution to be similar to the air travel revolution. Both made the world a smaller place. A few decades ago, being a pilot was a glamorous, high paying job. While pilots may still be reasonably paid, they are now perceived just like taxi drivers (with all due respect to both professions). What is to say how IT engineers are perceived as in a few decades from now. 13 years ago, a maths professor who taught us a class said "Before the computer was invented, we had a profession called typists; now they are called computer scientists".
US education system : A few months ago, there was an article that debunked the myth that 'US education is falling behind other countries'. The US education system may be a little pressured (especially in places with more population - but certainly not falling behind other countries. Just count the number of colleges in the US.
I am not just being brouhaha about the US. But just putting things in a different perspective.
H1B, GC, legal immigration are just sub audible noise in the overall scheme of things. Yes. it affects us a great deal because we cannot live unfettered lives.
On the other hand, India & China ( & Brazil/latin america & Russia) are starting to rise back (yes, each country had its own golden past - remember Columbus was trying to find a route to India when he discovered America. Marco Polo is still remembered for discovering the silk route to China....) These countries got left out of the renaissance, industrial revolution developments that gave western europe and north america an edge over the 3rd world countries.
Growth in the above mentioned countries will result in increased demand for goods and services that will benefit the overall global economy.
IMO
However, that relates another interesting part about outsourcing: lots of people are saying outsourcing are good and you can get anyone to do the IT job, but it really turned out that lots of oursourced jobs are done so poorly that eventually it costs more for the company.
We think about outsourcing because it affects engineers the most. especially IT/software. Remember software is still a tool. What you do with the software is more important. The process of creating software is just like making any other tool (every problem is hard to solve only for the first time).
Western countries started the industrial revolution (manufacturing/factories). Now China is leading in manufacturing. IT revolution, again was started in the west. In 20 years, it is possible that very few lines of original software is written in the US. Its not that US does not have smart people who cannot be trained as engineers but more like the smart people in US prefer other occupations as compared to engineering/software.
I imagine the computer/internet revolution to be similar to the air travel revolution. Both made the world a smaller place. A few decades ago, being a pilot was a glamorous, high paying job. While pilots may still be reasonably paid, they are now perceived just like taxi drivers (with all due respect to both professions). What is to say how IT engineers are perceived as in a few decades from now. 13 years ago, a maths professor who taught us a class said "Before the computer was invented, we had a profession called typists; now they are called computer scientists".
US education system : A few months ago, there was an article that debunked the myth that 'US education is falling behind other countries'. The US education system may be a little pressured (especially in places with more population - but certainly not falling behind other countries. Just count the number of colleges in the US.
I am not just being brouhaha about the US. But just putting things in a different perspective.
H1B, GC, legal immigration are just sub audible noise in the overall scheme of things. Yes. it affects us a great deal because we cannot live unfettered lives.
On the other hand, India & China ( & Brazil/latin america & Russia) are starting to rise back (yes, each country had its own golden past - remember Columbus was trying to find a route to India when he discovered America. Marco Polo is still remembered for discovering the silk route to China....) These countries got left out of the renaissance, industrial revolution developments that gave western europe and north america an edge over the 3rd world countries.
Growth in the above mentioned countries will result in increased demand for goods and services that will benefit the overall global economy.
IMO
2011 3D Wallpaper
nixstor
12-13 09:13 PM
IMHO "legally" exploiting the system is illegal. I don't blame the system because any system will have some flaws in them. I would rather blame people who take advantage of situations esp in scenarios like this. We all know how much time some people has waited here. We heard a story on Monday right? Have we already forgot that? IV's goals and objectives are clear on its home page. Here comes the OP, registers himself and comes up with his first post of Labor substitution and how to better himself. I don't see any thing wrong in pete getting fired up. This exact attitude is the result of 6500 members and not 25,000 or what ever.
>>it appears that you support labor substitution as long as both the employer and employee can hush up the money involved and leave no proof.<<
If I was judging you I would have concluded that you support what the OP is doing and wouldn't asked you what your stand is. It depends on how you understand what I said. Those NASDAQ listed companies you were referring to might have substituted labors but I am sure they wouldn't charge X dollars for giving a better PD or deduct from payroll under some other miscellaneous stuff. I am aware of what you are talking and what OP is talking and they are not the same. I don't need to explicitly tell how desi shops work with
pre-approved labor, esp in the current situation.
>>it appears that you support labor substitution as long as both the employer and employee can hush up the money involved and leave no proof.<<
If I was judging you I would have concluded that you support what the OP is doing and wouldn't asked you what your stand is. It depends on how you understand what I said. Those NASDAQ listed companies you were referring to might have substituted labors but I am sure they wouldn't charge X dollars for giving a better PD or deduct from payroll under some other miscellaneous stuff. I am aware of what you are talking and what OP is talking and they are not the same. I don't need to explicitly tell how desi shops work with
pre-approved labor, esp in the current situation.
more...
MDix
02-11 01:58 PM
That's absolutely right.
I personally think Mr. MPADAPA's assumption is wrong. Last year (2008), the spillover came from Family quota of 2008. Spillover from Family or Employment quota of a particular year cannot be given to the following year. So the fact that there is nothing left from the family quota of 2008 doesn't change any situation here.
So, this year the spillover that Employment category can get from Family quota will be the unused numbers of 2009 Family quota.
This is just my thought!
Thanks,
MDix
I personally think Mr. MPADAPA's assumption is wrong. Last year (2008), the spillover came from Family quota of 2008. Spillover from Family or Employment quota of a particular year cannot be given to the following year. So the fact that there is nothing left from the family quota of 2008 doesn't change any situation here.
So, this year the spillover that Employment category can get from Family quota will be the unused numbers of 2009 Family quota.
This is just my thought!
Thanks,
MDix
bbct
06-19 10:44 AM
Check your PM. This is what i sent.
Could you please share the letter? I am also looking for a sample format.
Thanks
Could you please share the letter? I am also looking for a sample format.
Thanks
more...
nozerd
01-10 03:15 PM
I have had 1 friend go through this. In his case he decided to go through the "India Doctors Association" and they refered him to this OBGYN who helped him as community service. She didnt charge anything for her own fees but he had to pay the clinic for tests. For hospital he just put his hands up and didnt pay a penny - it ofcourse spoiled his credit but he didnt care as the amount was so unrealistically high for him (wife had c section so it costs like 40-50k).
I did a quick google and there is something called the "North Texas Indian Physicians Charitable Foundation " contact them and Im sure they will help you out by working with one of their members.
http://tipsfreeclinic.org/default.aspx
I did a quick google and there is something called the "North Texas Indian Physicians Charitable Foundation " contact them and Im sure they will help you out by working with one of their members.
http://tipsfreeclinic.org/default.aspx
2010 XP 3d wallpapers for xp.
bbct
05-30 12:22 PM
Voted - YES
more...
hpandey
11-10 01:56 PM
This is true and the only one working actively working for our cause. If this organization is not succeeding to its full potential, its only because high skilled immigrants did not support it to the extent they could. Everyone wants to know what IV acheived - with $175???
you can get an idea of contributions from the ticker on the top of this page -
"Goal amount for this month: 10000 USD, Received:"
The illegal lobby is picking up an average of a few hundred thousand dollars each month - result CIR, Dream, lawsuits and support in Media and chambers of govt.
The other part is getting public support, which I feel we already have. breaking news (apologies to faux haters):
Texas Goes for Arizona-Style Immigration Law - Arizona Immigration Law - Fox Nation (http://nation.foxnews.com/arizona-immigration-law/2010/11/10/texas-goes-arizona-style-immigration-law)
Tony -
As you say that the illegal immigrant lobby gets hundreds of thousands of dollars per month. Do you think any illegal immigrant is contributing this money. They work for minimum wages and have hardly any money to spare.
I think most of the money comes from businesses that employ these people to cut costs. We don't have any such resource. So I don't think IV not getting enough donations can be blamed on IV users.
I have donated as much as I can without getting my budget in jeopardy with all the mortgage , taxes, "health insurance " .medicare, car payments etc etc that we have to deal with.
Another point I think is that even if IV had a couple of million dollars I don't think it will be able to pursuade the Congress to pass any legislation to bring relief to legal immigrants considering the mood of the people in the Congress . No one would like to hurt their political career with voting for us in the Congress. The politicians do only lip service whether for illegal or legal immigrant bills. They have zero interest in seeing them passed in the Congress.
you can get an idea of contributions from the ticker on the top of this page -
"Goal amount for this month: 10000 USD, Received:"
The illegal lobby is picking up an average of a few hundred thousand dollars each month - result CIR, Dream, lawsuits and support in Media and chambers of govt.
The other part is getting public support, which I feel we already have. breaking news (apologies to faux haters):
Texas Goes for Arizona-Style Immigration Law - Arizona Immigration Law - Fox Nation (http://nation.foxnews.com/arizona-immigration-law/2010/11/10/texas-goes-arizona-style-immigration-law)
Tony -
As you say that the illegal immigrant lobby gets hundreds of thousands of dollars per month. Do you think any illegal immigrant is contributing this money. They work for minimum wages and have hardly any money to spare.
I think most of the money comes from businesses that employ these people to cut costs. We don't have any such resource. So I don't think IV not getting enough donations can be blamed on IV users.
I have donated as much as I can without getting my budget in jeopardy with all the mortgage , taxes, "health insurance " .medicare, car payments etc etc that we have to deal with.
Another point I think is that even if IV had a couple of million dollars I don't think it will be able to pursuade the Congress to pass any legislation to bring relief to legal immigrants considering the mood of the people in the Congress . No one would like to hurt their political career with voting for us in the Congress. The politicians do only lip service whether for illegal or legal immigrant bills. They have zero interest in seeing them passed in the Congress.
hair This is a 3D wallpaper,
matreen
08-15 04:34 PM
In the letter from the new employer include the following (start date, title, job description, salary and position type):
This letter is to verify that Mr. Cool Dude (SSN: ) has been employed by our company as a full-time employee. He has been working with us since Oct 32, 1666 as a Full Time Gamer.
Mr. Dude's primary job duties include:
Put Bulletized description here
Mr. Dude is compensated with an annual salary of $xxx,xxx. The postion is for permanent at will employment and we have continued interest in employing Mr. Dude.
I trust that this letter would assist Mr. and Mrs. Dude in adjusting their status to a permanent resident as soon as possible. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Joe Employer
As far as docs are concerned add the following with the EVL:
Your covering letter
AC21 Yates Memo
3 latest paystubs
I-485 receipt
that would be it ;)
You're the best Dude! Thanks for giving some fuel, I gain some confident by seeing your cae otherwise I was kind of nervese by seeing other threads.
Cool - Good Job dude. Thanks gain....
M
This letter is to verify that Mr. Cool Dude (SSN: ) has been employed by our company as a full-time employee. He has been working with us since Oct 32, 1666 as a Full Time Gamer.
Mr. Dude's primary job duties include:
Put Bulletized description here
Mr. Dude is compensated with an annual salary of $xxx,xxx. The postion is for permanent at will employment and we have continued interest in employing Mr. Dude.
I trust that this letter would assist Mr. and Mrs. Dude in adjusting their status to a permanent resident as soon as possible. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Joe Employer
As far as docs are concerned add the following with the EVL:
Your covering letter
AC21 Yates Memo
3 latest paystubs
I-485 receipt
that would be it ;)
You're the best Dude! Thanks for giving some fuel, I gain some confident by seeing your cae otherwise I was kind of nervese by seeing other threads.
Cool - Good Job dude. Thanks gain....
M
more...
longq
12-20 03:41 PM
Hello IV and its core members,
I am one of the members of the forum and suffering due to the severe retrogression of EB visas. I highly appreciate IV�s effort to bring some legislative relief to address the severe backlogs in EB visas. I too participated in all IVs campaign in urging the law makers to bring some relief for this crisis. However, I have some concern here; about the method followed U.S DOS in allocating EB visas particularly in EB2 category for India and China. I am worried whether U.S DOS is violating the INA 202 (a), by suspending AC21 provision that eliminates country quota in EB categories. If they are violating by mistake, it is our responsibility to notify/clarify with them or we need to understand the law clearly. This is very important. Because, even if 110th congress passes SKIL bill, if DOS violates the AC21 law then it will not help applicants from oversubscribed countries (India and China). Here is my analysis based on following facts.
The cutoff date for EB2 India has moved just 7 days since last 9 months. However EB2 �Row has been current. EB2- ROW has never retrogressed before. EB3 ROW has seen considerable movement in last 9 months.
There may be four possible separate or combination of following reasons for the freeze of cutoff dates for India in EB2 at Jan 2003.
1. The backlog elimination effort of DOL pumped massive approved labor certificates from BEC. There may be tons of EB2 applicants from India and China with PD in the year 2001 and 2002 might have applied 485s based on recent approvals from BEC. However I doubt that. Because, in the year 2001, 2002 and 2003, EB3 India and China were �current�. No body cared about filing EB2 labor certification till the later part of 2004. Most lawyers preferred to file EB3 as it was easy, and there were no difference between EB3 and EB2 at that time. First ever indication for EB3 retrogression was issued by DOS only in later part of 2004. I doubt so many people have filed EB2-labor till 2003, keeping in mind that EB3 will retrogress in 2004 or future. Traditionally EB2 has been less demanding compare to EB1 and EB3.
2. Perhaps, there may be a huge demand by ROW (Due to PERM) to consume all the 86% of visa numbers in EB2 category in every month that prompts DOS to allocate only 7% to India and China. I doubt this too, because India and China itself consume about 60% of EB2 visas.
3. There may be lot of EB3 Indians and Chinese with PD 2001 and 2002 porting their PD from EB3 to EB2 by filing new LC and EB2-I-140. This may escalate the demand. However, how many will do this? How many employers will to do this �favor� for their employees? A real US employer/big corporations will not do double time work for an employee. Only consulting/staffing companies will do this. I think this may be a small group (or may not be?).
4. There may be another possible reason. There may be something wrong with U.S.DOS in allocating visa numbers in EB2 category, as per section 202 (a) of current INA. They may be issuing only 2800 (7% of 40,000) visas to India and China in EB2 and redirecting unused EB2 numbers to EB3 category. They may be imposing hard country cap in EB2 (Suspending AC21 law as per their VB Nov 2005). There is a large room for this speculation, due to the pattern of cutoff date movement in EB2 category. This is just a speculation. This argument/speculation is valid if DOS has issued less than 40,000 EB2 visas in FY 2006 as mandated by the law, and issued those numbers (40,000 minus actually issued) to EB3-ROW. In my view, it violates section 203 (b) (2) of the INA. One has to wait till they release statistics for FY 2006, to see how many EB2 visas are issued in that FY.
Here is some detailed analysis that says why it violates the law.
Section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets an annual minimum family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000. The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 203 a and b of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets numbers for each preference categories with in FB and EB.
Section 202 prescribes that the per-country limit for preference immigrants is set at 7% of the total annual family-sponsored and employment-based preference limits, i.e., 25,620. The dependent area limit is set at 2%, or 7,320. This section also explains how to handle unused numbers with respect to country quota.
Even before AC21 rule enacted in 2000, there was no �hard� country cap as per INA then. Here is the section of INA before year 2000, describes how to allocate unused visas, if overall/total demand for FB an EB visas are less than supply*.
INA 202 (a) (3)
�Exception if additional visas available. - If because of the application of paragraph (2) with respect to one or more foreign states or dependent areas, the total number of visas available under both subsections (a-Family category) and (b-Employment category) of section 203 for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who otherwise may be issued such a visa, paragraph (2) shall not apply to visas made available to such states or areas during the remainder of such calendar quarter�.
Therefore, the 7% country cap had always been �soft� till year 2000.
After year 2000, AC21 has completely removed country cap in each employment category, if excess visas are available in each preference categories.
After 2000 (After AC21) the following law was added to INA in the section 202.
INA 202 (a) (5) (A)
EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
As per my simple interpretation of above AC21 rule, DOS should allocate unused visas by ROW �EB2 (ROW- countries other than India and China in EB2 category) for the first two months of any calendar quarter to over-subscribed countries (India & China) at the third month of that calendar quarter. They should not allocate to lower Preference category (EB3), if demand is more in higher preference category (EB2) to consume all the visa numbers in that preference category. They should allocate visas to all the documentarily qualified applicants in that (EB2) preference category, irrespective of country of birth. If they followed this rule/law, there may be a considerable movement in cut-off dates for India and China in Dec 2005, Mar, June and Sep of 2006 in EB2 (last month of each calendar quarter in a fiscal year). We have not witnessed such movement in last 1.5 years. No one knows how DOS is allocating numbers. They may be allocating only 7% visas to India and China in EB2 category very strictly, every month, and allocating unused numbers to EB3 category, by suspending AC21 law as indicated in their Nov 2005 Visa Bulletin. If they do so, it is against the law, at least in my interpretation of AC21 rule that eliminates country quota in EB categories.
DOS can not interpret above AC21 rule that eliminates per country limit applies �totally� to all EB categories put together, not by individual preference categories. I.e. If they say they will issue more than 2,800 visas to EB2- India per year (more than 7% of 40,000), provided overall demand for EB visas are less than 140,000. If they interpret the law like this, then there is no need for section 202(a) (5) (A) due to AC21 law. The law before AC21 {i.e. section 202 (a) (3)} itself address the elimination of country quota in both FB and EB category*. Then, section 202(a) (5) (A) is a duplicate wording of section 202(a) (3). So, this section of AC21 law becomes a redundant/duplicate law. Then, there is no meaning of employment �preference� category if they interpret �totally or overall worldwide demand�. In other words, a non-Indian/Chinese restaurant cook (EB3) is more preferred than a NIW PhDs (EB2) from India or China. Is it the intend of the congress when enacting AC21 law in removing per country limitation in EB category? Is it the American Competitiveness in 21st century? I highly doubt that.
Now it is the time to ask US DOS, how they are allocating visa number in EB2 category. If DOS interpreting the law differently, then we need to ask the law makers (Congress) what is their original intension behind the section 202(a)(5)(A) when they drafted the AC21 law in 2000 and how it is differ from 202 (a) (3).
Perhaps Core IV team can initiate to discuss/consult this issue with an immigration lawyer and place an enquiry with DOS or Law makers, if needed.
(*Note: DOS do not mix FB and EB categories for visa number allocation/calculation to meet the per country limit. They keep both in separate track to meet separately the 7% limit)
I am one of the members of the forum and suffering due to the severe retrogression of EB visas. I highly appreciate IV�s effort to bring some legislative relief to address the severe backlogs in EB visas. I too participated in all IVs campaign in urging the law makers to bring some relief for this crisis. However, I have some concern here; about the method followed U.S DOS in allocating EB visas particularly in EB2 category for India and China. I am worried whether U.S DOS is violating the INA 202 (a), by suspending AC21 provision that eliminates country quota in EB categories. If they are violating by mistake, it is our responsibility to notify/clarify with them or we need to understand the law clearly. This is very important. Because, even if 110th congress passes SKIL bill, if DOS violates the AC21 law then it will not help applicants from oversubscribed countries (India and China). Here is my analysis based on following facts.
The cutoff date for EB2 India has moved just 7 days since last 9 months. However EB2 �Row has been current. EB2- ROW has never retrogressed before. EB3 ROW has seen considerable movement in last 9 months.
There may be four possible separate or combination of following reasons for the freeze of cutoff dates for India in EB2 at Jan 2003.
1. The backlog elimination effort of DOL pumped massive approved labor certificates from BEC. There may be tons of EB2 applicants from India and China with PD in the year 2001 and 2002 might have applied 485s based on recent approvals from BEC. However I doubt that. Because, in the year 2001, 2002 and 2003, EB3 India and China were �current�. No body cared about filing EB2 labor certification till the later part of 2004. Most lawyers preferred to file EB3 as it was easy, and there were no difference between EB3 and EB2 at that time. First ever indication for EB3 retrogression was issued by DOS only in later part of 2004. I doubt so many people have filed EB2-labor till 2003, keeping in mind that EB3 will retrogress in 2004 or future. Traditionally EB2 has been less demanding compare to EB1 and EB3.
2. Perhaps, there may be a huge demand by ROW (Due to PERM) to consume all the 86% of visa numbers in EB2 category in every month that prompts DOS to allocate only 7% to India and China. I doubt this too, because India and China itself consume about 60% of EB2 visas.
3. There may be lot of EB3 Indians and Chinese with PD 2001 and 2002 porting their PD from EB3 to EB2 by filing new LC and EB2-I-140. This may escalate the demand. However, how many will do this? How many employers will to do this �favor� for their employees? A real US employer/big corporations will not do double time work for an employee. Only consulting/staffing companies will do this. I think this may be a small group (or may not be?).
4. There may be another possible reason. There may be something wrong with U.S.DOS in allocating visa numbers in EB2 category, as per section 202 (a) of current INA. They may be issuing only 2800 (7% of 40,000) visas to India and China in EB2 and redirecting unused EB2 numbers to EB3 category. They may be imposing hard country cap in EB2 (Suspending AC21 law as per their VB Nov 2005). There is a large room for this speculation, due to the pattern of cutoff date movement in EB2 category. This is just a speculation. This argument/speculation is valid if DOS has issued less than 40,000 EB2 visas in FY 2006 as mandated by the law, and issued those numbers (40,000 minus actually issued) to EB3-ROW. In my view, it violates section 203 (b) (2) of the INA. One has to wait till they release statistics for FY 2006, to see how many EB2 visas are issued in that FY.
Here is some detailed analysis that says why it violates the law.
Section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets an annual minimum family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000. The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 203 a and b of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets numbers for each preference categories with in FB and EB.
Section 202 prescribes that the per-country limit for preference immigrants is set at 7% of the total annual family-sponsored and employment-based preference limits, i.e., 25,620. The dependent area limit is set at 2%, or 7,320. This section also explains how to handle unused numbers with respect to country quota.
Even before AC21 rule enacted in 2000, there was no �hard� country cap as per INA then. Here is the section of INA before year 2000, describes how to allocate unused visas, if overall/total demand for FB an EB visas are less than supply*.
INA 202 (a) (3)
�Exception if additional visas available. - If because of the application of paragraph (2) with respect to one or more foreign states or dependent areas, the total number of visas available under both subsections (a-Family category) and (b-Employment category) of section 203 for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who otherwise may be issued such a visa, paragraph (2) shall not apply to visas made available to such states or areas during the remainder of such calendar quarter�.
Therefore, the 7% country cap had always been �soft� till year 2000.
After year 2000, AC21 has completely removed country cap in each employment category, if excess visas are available in each preference categories.
After 2000 (After AC21) the following law was added to INA in the section 202.
INA 202 (a) (5) (A)
EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
As per my simple interpretation of above AC21 rule, DOS should allocate unused visas by ROW �EB2 (ROW- countries other than India and China in EB2 category) for the first two months of any calendar quarter to over-subscribed countries (India & China) at the third month of that calendar quarter. They should not allocate to lower Preference category (EB3), if demand is more in higher preference category (EB2) to consume all the visa numbers in that preference category. They should allocate visas to all the documentarily qualified applicants in that (EB2) preference category, irrespective of country of birth. If they followed this rule/law, there may be a considerable movement in cut-off dates for India and China in Dec 2005, Mar, June and Sep of 2006 in EB2 (last month of each calendar quarter in a fiscal year). We have not witnessed such movement in last 1.5 years. No one knows how DOS is allocating numbers. They may be allocating only 7% visas to India and China in EB2 category very strictly, every month, and allocating unused numbers to EB3 category, by suspending AC21 law as indicated in their Nov 2005 Visa Bulletin. If they do so, it is against the law, at least in my interpretation of AC21 rule that eliminates country quota in EB categories.
DOS can not interpret above AC21 rule that eliminates per country limit applies �totally� to all EB categories put together, not by individual preference categories. I.e. If they say they will issue more than 2,800 visas to EB2- India per year (more than 7% of 40,000), provided overall demand for EB visas are less than 140,000. If they interpret the law like this, then there is no need for section 202(a) (5) (A) due to AC21 law. The law before AC21 {i.e. section 202 (a) (3)} itself address the elimination of country quota in both FB and EB category*. Then, section 202(a) (5) (A) is a duplicate wording of section 202(a) (3). So, this section of AC21 law becomes a redundant/duplicate law. Then, there is no meaning of employment �preference� category if they interpret �totally or overall worldwide demand�. In other words, a non-Indian/Chinese restaurant cook (EB3) is more preferred than a NIW PhDs (EB2) from India or China. Is it the intend of the congress when enacting AC21 law in removing per country limitation in EB category? Is it the American Competitiveness in 21st century? I highly doubt that.
Now it is the time to ask US DOS, how they are allocating visa number in EB2 category. If DOS interpreting the law differently, then we need to ask the law makers (Congress) what is their original intension behind the section 202(a)(5)(A) when they drafted the AC21 law in 2000 and how it is differ from 202 (a) (3).
Perhaps Core IV team can initiate to discuss/consult this issue with an immigration lawyer and place an enquiry with DOS or Law makers, if needed.
(*Note: DOS do not mix FB and EB categories for visa number allocation/calculation to meet the per country limit. They keep both in separate track to meet separately the 7% limit)
hot makeup images xp 3d wallpaper.
rayoflight
04-13 05:51 PM
Great Job guys. I am proud to be part of IV.
more...
house hd wallpapers xp. vivache
TomPlate
02-28 01:47 PM
NSC is curretly processing EB I-485 cases filed before July 30, 2007. TSC - cases filed before April 10, 2007. So according to the USCIS policy: "If at any point your case should become more than 30 days outside our normal processing time, and you haven't received a written decision or update from us within the last 60 days, you can help us by calling customer service and letting us know. We will research your case, see what needs to be done to get it processed, and get back to you with an explanation."
I.e. NSC cases filed before July 1st are considered outside of processing time. The USCIS explains it in the latest name check FAQ posted today.
Can you please let us know the URL for the latest name check FAQ posted today.
I.e. NSC cases filed before July 1st are considered outside of processing time. The USCIS explains it in the latest name check FAQ posted today.
Can you please let us know the URL for the latest name check FAQ posted today.
tattoo hair It#39;s Windows XP-Turbo™ 3D SP3 xp 3d wallpaper. free windows xp
gagbag
07-04 03:46 PM
Legal: $2000
Medical: $450
Shipping: $50
Birth Certificate: $50
Photos: $50
Photocopy+ Printing: $20
Gas: $30
-------------------------
$ 2650 in Total
-------------------------
Medical: $450
Shipping: $50
Birth Certificate: $50
Photos: $50
Photocopy+ Printing: $20
Gas: $30
-------------------------
$ 2650 in Total
-------------------------
more...
pictures 3d wallpapers xp. wallpaper xp
looivy
04-20 02:13 AM
I also sent my letter to WH today.
Good job MMJ.
Good job MMJ.
dresses xp 3d wallpaper.
ssdtm
12-12 01:35 PM
For EB3, 16 days are not significant. But what is significant that there were many 245(i) cases. Around 26,000 alone from April 26 to April 30. So crossing that barrier is a significant move.
While this generates some hope, one should note that PBEC and DBEC are giving ads most of which in high probability 245(i) cases. Does that mean while labors are being cleared, dates have moved without taking into account that when recruitment instructions are done for such cases, they will be in the queue. If that happens, EB3 instead of moving forward will move backwards.
Not a pessimitic view, but based on logic.
While this generates some hope, one should note that PBEC and DBEC are giving ads most of which in high probability 245(i) cases. Does that mean while labors are being cleared, dates have moved without taking into account that when recruitment instructions are done for such cases, they will be in the queue. If that happens, EB3 instead of moving forward will move backwards.
Not a pessimitic view, but based on logic.
more...
makeup xp 3d wallpaper.
bestia
08-31 03:55 PM
Good Find
Nah, I don't think so. Not a good article.
1. His salary CAN be raised.
2. His wife CAN work, as article mentions that he applied for GC in 2004
3. I never heard about 1 million - I guess we were talking about 140000 unused visas right? Where this 1 million came from?
4. If the company is bought - one doesn't generally reapply for GC.
Even little lies don't serve a good cause as this article can be easily discredited.
Nah, I don't think so. Not a good article.
1. His salary CAN be raised.
2. His wife CAN work, as article mentions that he applied for GC in 2004
3. I never heard about 1 million - I guess we were talking about 140000 unused visas right? Where this 1 million came from?
4. If the company is bought - one doesn't generally reapply for GC.
Even little lies don't serve a good cause as this article can be easily discredited.
girlfriend Windows Xp Background
number30
04-16 02:31 PM
Hi aroranuj,
US considers 16years of full time or equivalent of full time education as Bachelors degress(12yrs school + 4 yrs college/universit degree). Even Indian Bachelors of 3 yrs(12yrs school + 3 yrs coll/Univ) is not considered to be equivalent of US Bachelors.
From what my attorney told me,
1)16yrs of education(US Bachelors)/Indian 3 yr bachelors & 2/3years of Masters + 5 years experience qualifies for EB2 category.
2)15yrs of education(India Bachelors) + 5 or more years of education qualifies for EB3 cateogry.
3)Not sure of Diploma
You have said you have 3 yrs diploma + 1 yr bachelors, I assume your total years of education is 14 yrs(10 yrs school + 3 years diploma + 1 yr bachelors/coll/Univ). This not even equivalent of Indian bachelors, you can substitute your job experience towards educational years. But I do not know whether that can be done for Diploma.
What I have said is my opinion, personal view, please do not construe this as legal opinion. I suggest you consult a good education evaluation companies like Trustforte, Mulinational Education & Information Services to find whether your case will qualify for EB3.
They do not accept Indian 3 yr bachelors & 2/3years of Masters + 5 years for EB2. This has been discussed lot of times. They expect single 4 year degree.
15yrs of education(India Bachelors) + 5 or more years of education for EB3 is accepted if certain qualifiers are included in the Labor.
Just take care if you are dealing with attorney who saying above thing.
US considers 16years of full time or equivalent of full time education as Bachelors degress(12yrs school + 4 yrs college/universit degree). Even Indian Bachelors of 3 yrs(12yrs school + 3 yrs coll/Univ) is not considered to be equivalent of US Bachelors.
From what my attorney told me,
1)16yrs of education(US Bachelors)/Indian 3 yr bachelors & 2/3years of Masters + 5 years experience qualifies for EB2 category.
2)15yrs of education(India Bachelors) + 5 or more years of education qualifies for EB3 cateogry.
3)Not sure of Diploma
You have said you have 3 yrs diploma + 1 yr bachelors, I assume your total years of education is 14 yrs(10 yrs school + 3 years diploma + 1 yr bachelors/coll/Univ). This not even equivalent of Indian bachelors, you can substitute your job experience towards educational years. But I do not know whether that can be done for Diploma.
What I have said is my opinion, personal view, please do not construe this as legal opinion. I suggest you consult a good education evaluation companies like Trustforte, Mulinational Education & Information Services to find whether your case will qualify for EB3.
They do not accept Indian 3 yr bachelors & 2/3years of Masters + 5 years for EB2. This has been discussed lot of times. They expect single 4 year degree.
15yrs of education(India Bachelors) + 5 or more years of education for EB3 is accepted if certain qualifiers are included in the Labor.
Just take care if you are dealing with attorney who saying above thing.
hairstyles 3D Falling Leaves Animated
morchu
04-19 11:48 AM
No. You cannot get bachelors in india with 14 years.
The Diploma route for bachelors is this...
10+3(diploma)+3(bachelors).
For some other schools
10+3(diploma)+4(bachelors).
So in effect, the diploma route also puts you in 16 years / 17 years for Bachelors of Eng.
It might be extremely difficult to claim 14 years equivalent as US bachelors.
-Morchu
Ummm.. I did not know that one can do a diploma after 10th grade in India and after that, a year to get bachelors? You are right... its not very clear from the original post.. and can easily be misinterpreted as (10+2+3+1) which is 16 years of education.
OP, could you please confirm if this is the case with your background.
The Diploma route for bachelors is this...
10+3(diploma)+3(bachelors).
For some other schools
10+3(diploma)+4(bachelors).
So in effect, the diploma route also puts you in 16 years / 17 years for Bachelors of Eng.
It might be extremely difficult to claim 14 years equivalent as US bachelors.
-Morchu
Ummm.. I did not know that one can do a diploma after 10th grade in India and after that, a year to get bachelors? You are right... its not very clear from the original post.. and can easily be misinterpreted as (10+2+3+1) which is 16 years of education.
OP, could you please confirm if this is the case with your background.
Sakthisagar
10-27 12:21 PM
Whatever you say man. i am with you. your are a genius.
MC
Only One Genius can recognise the Other :-):):D
MC
Only One Genius can recognise the Other :-):):D
MightyIndian
11-29 11:41 AM
Details in my signature.
