map_boiler
09-25 05:22 PM
...but could be due to unavailability of visa numbers for EB2-I in September. So even though the ported PD of Nov 2004 is current in September, the October visa bulletin has clarified that the EB2-I numbers were actually unavailable in September. See below:
E. EMPLOYMENT VISA AVAILABILITY
Item E of the May 2008 Visa Bulletin (number 118, volume VIII) indicated that many Employment cut-off dates had been advancing very rapidly, based on indications that the Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) would need to review a significantly larger pool of applicants than there were numbers available in order to maximize number use under the FY-2008 annual limits. That item also indicated that if the CIS projections proved to be incorrect, it would be necessary to adjust the cut-off dates during the final quarter of FY-2008. The CIS estimates have proven to be very high resulting in: 1) the “unavailability” of all Employment Third preference categories beginning in July, 2) the “unavailability” of numbers for China and India Employment Second preference adjustment of status cases during September, and 3) the establishment of many October Employment cut-off dates which are earlier than those which applied during FY-2008.
Little if any forward movement of the cut-off dates in most Employment categories is likely until the extent of the CIS backlog of old priority dates can be determined. It is estimated that the FY-2009 Employment-based annual limit will be very close to the 140,000 minimum.
E. EMPLOYMENT VISA AVAILABILITY
Item E of the May 2008 Visa Bulletin (number 118, volume VIII) indicated that many Employment cut-off dates had been advancing very rapidly, based on indications that the Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) would need to review a significantly larger pool of applicants than there were numbers available in order to maximize number use under the FY-2008 annual limits. That item also indicated that if the CIS projections proved to be incorrect, it would be necessary to adjust the cut-off dates during the final quarter of FY-2008. The CIS estimates have proven to be very high resulting in: 1) the “unavailability” of all Employment Third preference categories beginning in July, 2) the “unavailability” of numbers for China and India Employment Second preference adjustment of status cases during September, and 3) the establishment of many October Employment cut-off dates which are earlier than those which applied during FY-2008.
Little if any forward movement of the cut-off dates in most Employment categories is likely until the extent of the CIS backlog of old priority dates can be determined. It is estimated that the FY-2009 Employment-based annual limit will be very close to the 140,000 minimum.
wallpaper Aw! Anne Hathaway looks like
gopi246
03-20 11:12 AM
I entered US through Logan on Dec 12th, 2007 and got i94 till Nov 2010.
When I applied for SSN at Norwood SSN office, they told me that the immigration dept have to cross verify my visa details and confirm them back which is still not done. Without SSN, Payroll is not generated. I have to return back to India in next 1 week. Can someone let me know the contact info of immigration people. Is this common thing to happen or i need to fight it out Any input will be appreciated. Thanks
When I applied for SSN at Norwood SSN office, they told me that the immigration dept have to cross verify my visa details and confirm them back which is still not done. Without SSN, Payroll is not generated. I have to return back to India in next 1 week. Can someone let me know the contact info of immigration people. Is this common thing to happen or i need to fight it out Any input will be appreciated. Thanks
newlife2
09-19 10:16 PM
Guys, I was just laid off and have efiled i539 3 days after the termination date for a status change to F2. Now working on the application letter. Do you think I should mention the layoff in the letter?
If I do mention it:
Con: The layoff might quickly catch the eyes of the immigration officer and if he want to check my status, he could find out the 3 days OOS.
Pro: My previous job was well paid. By mentioning it, I give the reason that why I want to stay at home as F2 instead of keeping the well paid job.
I guess I will mention it in the letter to explain the whole situation and hope everything will be all right. Let me know if anybody disagrees asap, I will mail out the stuff with in next two days.
If I do mention it:
Con: The layoff might quickly catch the eyes of the immigration officer and if he want to check my status, he could find out the 3 days OOS.
Pro: My previous job was well paid. By mentioning it, I give the reason that why I want to stay at home as F2 instead of keeping the well paid job.
I guess I will mention it in the letter to explain the whole situation and hope everything will be all right. Let me know if anybody disagrees asap, I will mail out the stuff with in next two days.
2011 Anne Hathaway Wallpaper
RajWantsGC
05-12 10:59 PM
Thanks Roger for the reply. Mine was 3 years degree. So they mentioned that it is not equvilent to U.S. Bachelor degree. They did not have any issue with my experience which is more than 5 years.
more...
lusuresh
07-17 09:27 AM
I am also in somewhat same situation. My Employer didnot pay me for one month and didnot provide paystubs for 4 months. ANy way I sucessfully joined a large corporation as they were willing to listen to my situation. When I ask for pay they say they will suit me as I have joined the client.
gc28262
01-29 11:21 PM
E-Verify was a bargaining chip for Senate Democrats against Senate Republicans.
What happened was - When Senator Menendez from NJ (Dem.) floated the Visa Recapture Bill; he said that he and other Dems will only support Permanent extension of E-Verify a bill designed to extend it for four additional years; if the Senate Republicans support Visa Recapture Bill.
But the Visa Recapture Bill didn't happen.
So, E-Verify also didn't happen.
However, as a Last Minute "ideal gift" from the Great President Bush to all Legal Immigrants; he issued an Executive order to extend E-Verify till March 06, 2009.
Therefore, E-Verify is active today in the system.
Now, House and Senate Republicans want to permanently extend E-Verify after March 06, 2009; especially the antis and yes NumbersUSA.So, they added this amendment to extend E-Verify for additional 4 years in the Stimulus Bill that passed this Wednesday.
However, the Stimulus Bill has to pass the Senate to become law. Thus, permanent extension of E-Verify has nothing to do with giving Stimulus money to only legal immigrants. It, is just that two immigrant hating politicians added the clause to the bill; in the hopes of seeing it pass. But IT SHOULD FAIL!!!
Again the question remains, how does it affect us ?
Are you saying Visa recapture was tied to E-verify in the past administration and so passing E-Verify without recapture will kill the chances of recapture ?
Situation has changed now. It is a new administration now and power has titled in favor of democrats both in house and senate. Democrats don't have to appease GOP to get any bill passed now.
What happened was - When Senator Menendez from NJ (Dem.) floated the Visa Recapture Bill; he said that he and other Dems will only support Permanent extension of E-Verify a bill designed to extend it for four additional years; if the Senate Republicans support Visa Recapture Bill.
But the Visa Recapture Bill didn't happen.
So, E-Verify also didn't happen.
However, as a Last Minute "ideal gift" from the Great President Bush to all Legal Immigrants; he issued an Executive order to extend E-Verify till March 06, 2009.
Therefore, E-Verify is active today in the system.
Now, House and Senate Republicans want to permanently extend E-Verify after March 06, 2009; especially the antis and yes NumbersUSA.So, they added this amendment to extend E-Verify for additional 4 years in the Stimulus Bill that passed this Wednesday.
However, the Stimulus Bill has to pass the Senate to become law. Thus, permanent extension of E-Verify has nothing to do with giving Stimulus money to only legal immigrants. It, is just that two immigrant hating politicians added the clause to the bill; in the hopes of seeing it pass. But IT SHOULD FAIL!!!
Again the question remains, how does it affect us ?
Are you saying Visa recapture was tied to E-verify in the past administration and so passing E-Verify without recapture will kill the chances of recapture ?
Situation has changed now. It is a new administration now and power has titled in favor of democrats both in house and senate. Democrats don't have to appease GOP to get any bill passed now.
more...
aadimanav
11-02 11:06 AM
exactly! this is almost a disaster for EB folks, most people dont realize that: they think the queue is getting smaller. The queue will remain the same, .
If you take out 61000 out of a queue the queue becomes smaller. It is as simple as that.
The thing is that you want to see from the point of view where you are standing in the queue. If there are no nurses ahead of you in the line (as Paskal mentioned that earlier 50,000 were recaptured), that doesn't mean there are no nurses behind you in the queue. Overall size of the the queue becomes smaller.
However, it would have been good if the recapture was for everyone (not just nurses). Something is better than nothing. No recapture is better than recapture for someone.
If you take out 61000 out of a queue the queue becomes smaller. It is as simple as that.
The thing is that you want to see from the point of view where you are standing in the queue. If there are no nurses ahead of you in the line (as Paskal mentioned that earlier 50,000 were recaptured), that doesn't mean there are no nurses behind you in the queue. Overall size of the the queue becomes smaller.
However, it would have been good if the recapture was for everyone (not just nurses). Something is better than nothing. No recapture is better than recapture for someone.
2010 Anne Hathaway to play Catwoman
user1205
09-05 12:05 PM
From http://www.immigration-law.com/Canada.html
List of Witnesses To Testify at House Judiciary Immigration Subcommittee Hearing Tomorrow
The list:
Congressman Jeff Flake, R-AZ, co-sponsor of STRIVE Act of 2007
Congressman Joe Beca, D-CA
Congressman Ray Lahood, R-CA
Congessman Brian Bilbray, R-CA
Tony Wasilewsi, Small Business Owner, Schiller Park, IL
Eduardo Gonzalez, U.S. Navy Petty Officer Second Class, Jacsonville, FL
Rev. Luis Cortes, Jr., President Esperanza USA
Joshua Hoyt, Executive Director Illinois Coalition for Immigrant & Refugee Rights
Cassandra Q. Butts, Sr. Vice President for Domestic Policy Center for American Progress
David Lizarraga, Chirman of U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce
Julie Kirchner, Director of Government Relations Federation of American Immigration Reform
Corey Stewart, Chairman At-Large, William County Board of Supervisors, FL
The list indicates that the skilled worker immigrant worker community is not well represented in this hearing. We will post the text of the testimony as soon as it becomes available.
List of Witnesses To Testify at House Judiciary Immigration Subcommittee Hearing Tomorrow
The list:
Congressman Jeff Flake, R-AZ, co-sponsor of STRIVE Act of 2007
Congressman Joe Beca, D-CA
Congressman Ray Lahood, R-CA
Congessman Brian Bilbray, R-CA
Tony Wasilewsi, Small Business Owner, Schiller Park, IL
Eduardo Gonzalez, U.S. Navy Petty Officer Second Class, Jacsonville, FL
Rev. Luis Cortes, Jr., President Esperanza USA
Joshua Hoyt, Executive Director Illinois Coalition for Immigrant & Refugee Rights
Cassandra Q. Butts, Sr. Vice President for Domestic Policy Center for American Progress
David Lizarraga, Chirman of U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce
Julie Kirchner, Director of Government Relations Federation of American Immigration Reform
Corey Stewart, Chairman At-Large, William County Board of Supervisors, FL
The list indicates that the skilled worker immigrant worker community is not well represented in this hearing. We will post the text of the testimony as soon as it becomes available.
more...
stucklabor
07-26 02:59 PM
See original A.P. story below.
Copyright 2005 Associated Press
All Rights Reserved
The Associated Press
April 15, 2005, Friday, BC cycle
SECTION: Washington Dateline
LENGTH: 550 words
HEADLINE: Senate agrees to votes on immigration measures
BYLINE: By SUZANNE GAMBOA, Associated Press Writer
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
BODY:
Senate Republicans and Democrats worked out a deal Friday on how to handle immigration issues attached to a measure paying for U.S. operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The immigration measures spilled into the Senate's debate over an $80.6 billion military spending bill after the House included measures in its version to deny driver's licenses to illegal immigrants and make it harder for foreigners to stay in the United States on claims of asylum.
Under the deal, the Senate will vote Tuesday on three immigration measures. Each would require 60 votes to survive, including one sponsored by Democrat Sen. Barbara Mikulski that would give temporary visas to migrant crab pickers and oyster shuckers in time for Maryland's seafood season.
Another by Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, would provide workers for the agricultural industry. It has support from growers and farm worker advocates, but it faces opposition for providing legal status to some workers.
Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., said he opposes using the military spending bill to address immigration, but he is proposing an alternative to Craig's measure. Co-sponsored by Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz, it doesn't include the legal residency provision.
"While reforms are needed to provide a legal way to meet our agricultural labor needs, we must also remove incentives for illegal immigration and put stricter provisions in place for seasonal workers coming across our borders," Chambliss said.
Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., the White House and other Republicans had pleaded with senators to keep immigration off the spending bill and address them later in comprehensive immigration legislation.
Democrats refused, saying it was because Frist wouldn't commit to opposing the immigration provisions in the House version when negotiators try to blend the two.
"The only reason we have these Democrat and Republican amendments dealing with immigration is because it was placed in the bill by the Republicans," said Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada. He said the immigration bills being offered are a "tiny speck" of the immigration problems the country faces.
Mikulski defended her measure to provide Maryland seafood processors and other businesses with more seasonal workers hired through the H2B visa program, saying "the cat was already out of the bag on immigration." Businesses are limited to 66,000 H2B workers a year, and that ceiling was reached Jan. 3.
"Republican leadership has been stalling on this bill by not allowing votes on amendments like mine. I have brought people to the table to vote on this because Maryland's small businesses need help now," Mikulski said.
The House's Iraq spending bill includes the immigration measures its Judiciary Committee chairman, Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., wanted in the intelligence reorganization bill President Bush signed in December. He withdrew the provisions back then after House and Senate leaders promised he could attach them to the first major legislation likely to make it to Bush's desk.
They are almost universally opposed by Senate Democrats but also by state motor vehicle commissioners, some GOP senators and religious groups who say people fleeing persecution would be harmed.
Copyright 2005 Associated Press
All Rights Reserved
The Associated Press
April 15, 2005, Friday, BC cycle
SECTION: Washington Dateline
LENGTH: 550 words
HEADLINE: Senate agrees to votes on immigration measures
BYLINE: By SUZANNE GAMBOA, Associated Press Writer
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
BODY:
Senate Republicans and Democrats worked out a deal Friday on how to handle immigration issues attached to a measure paying for U.S. operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The immigration measures spilled into the Senate's debate over an $80.6 billion military spending bill after the House included measures in its version to deny driver's licenses to illegal immigrants and make it harder for foreigners to stay in the United States on claims of asylum.
Under the deal, the Senate will vote Tuesday on three immigration measures. Each would require 60 votes to survive, including one sponsored by Democrat Sen. Barbara Mikulski that would give temporary visas to migrant crab pickers and oyster shuckers in time for Maryland's seafood season.
Another by Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, would provide workers for the agricultural industry. It has support from growers and farm worker advocates, but it faces opposition for providing legal status to some workers.
Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., said he opposes using the military spending bill to address immigration, but he is proposing an alternative to Craig's measure. Co-sponsored by Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz, it doesn't include the legal residency provision.
"While reforms are needed to provide a legal way to meet our agricultural labor needs, we must also remove incentives for illegal immigration and put stricter provisions in place for seasonal workers coming across our borders," Chambliss said.
Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., the White House and other Republicans had pleaded with senators to keep immigration off the spending bill and address them later in comprehensive immigration legislation.
Democrats refused, saying it was because Frist wouldn't commit to opposing the immigration provisions in the House version when negotiators try to blend the two.
"The only reason we have these Democrat and Republican amendments dealing with immigration is because it was placed in the bill by the Republicans," said Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada. He said the immigration bills being offered are a "tiny speck" of the immigration problems the country faces.
Mikulski defended her measure to provide Maryland seafood processors and other businesses with more seasonal workers hired through the H2B visa program, saying "the cat was already out of the bag on immigration." Businesses are limited to 66,000 H2B workers a year, and that ceiling was reached Jan. 3.
"Republican leadership has been stalling on this bill by not allowing votes on amendments like mine. I have brought people to the table to vote on this because Maryland's small businesses need help now," Mikulski said.
The House's Iraq spending bill includes the immigration measures its Judiciary Committee chairman, Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., wanted in the intelligence reorganization bill President Bush signed in December. He withdrew the provisions back then after House and Senate leaders promised he could attach them to the first major legislation likely to make it to Bush's desk.
They are almost universally opposed by Senate Democrats but also by state motor vehicle commissioners, some GOP senators and religious groups who say people fleeing persecution would be harmed.
hair Anne Hathaway arrives for the
trueguy
08-11 02:55 PM
Doesn't work. When I select nationality as India, results are ZERO. I wish that was true :)
more...
insbaby
05-22 08:00 AM
Did you ask him to give you this information in writing? :)
Two years back, in the month of july, they accepted all applications in one month.
May be they have been working in the past 2 years to print cards for all of them and ready to dispatch this July.
:D :D :D :D :D :D
I think, they probably distribute thru the local stores like Walmart, Target and Costco.
Two years back, in the month of july, they accepted all applications in one month.
May be they have been working in the past 2 years to print cards for all of them and ready to dispatch this July.
:D :D :D :D :D :D
I think, they probably distribute thru the local stores like Walmart, Target and Costco.
hot Anne Hathaway on nude scenes
lostinbeta
10-04 01:43 AM
Oh, that is awesome=)
Congratulations on a job well done:)
Congratulations on a job well done:)
more...
house Anne Hathaway (Photo by
BharatPremi
12-05 12:22 PM
Me too! Citizen of India.
:)
:)
tattoo Anne Hathaway isn#39;t kidding
yabadaba
08-21 03:29 PM
sunny how much money have you saved up? whats your networth?
more...
pictures Anne Hathaway
dixie
09-11 07:06 PM
We cannot fault USCIS for the BEC backlogs .. thats the work of the even more incompetant DOL.Even they have improved with the PERM system. Our battle with retrogression is really a political issue more than a procedural one .The one place there is major room for improvement for USCIS is to use a more reliable system of advancing PDs than the current arbitrary system. There is no denying that USCIS has been improving lately with respect to service times(given the scarce resources), so lets give them credit where it is due.
dresses Anne Hathaway Have Great
gcformeornot
04-04 07:39 AM
need to in good condition from your PD. So whatever adjustments they are doing needs to be done since PD. I hope your lawyer knows this.
more...
makeup Smartquot; star Anne Hathaway
pachai_attai
09-04 09:05 AM
485 approved on August 31st. Approved 3 weeks after I sent out the RFE.
girlfriend Anne Hathaway Hair Trend 2011
lsuk
07-21 07:17 PM
EAD is usually issued only for one year but USCIS has the option to issue EADs for a longer period of time based on this regulation:
"DHS on July 30, 2004 published an interim regulation that amends 8 CFR sec. 274a3. USCIS now has authority to issue EADs for periods greater than one year. This regulation recognizes the system is overburdened. However, USCIS has not implemented this reform probably due to the potential revenue loss."
Source: "Immigration and Nationality Law Handbook 2007 Edition", published by AILA
This can be done without changing the law. If USCIS is afraid to lose its revenue they can change for 2 or 3 years ahead. I believe this may be a good choice for people whose visa number will not be available for several years. Any comments?
"DHS on July 30, 2004 published an interim regulation that amends 8 CFR sec. 274a3. USCIS now has authority to issue EADs for periods greater than one year. This regulation recognizes the system is overburdened. However, USCIS has not implemented this reform probably due to the potential revenue loss."
Source: "Immigration and Nationality Law Handbook 2007 Edition", published by AILA
This can be done without changing the law. If USCIS is afraid to lose its revenue they can change for 2 or 3 years ahead. I believe this may be a good choice for people whose visa number will not be available for several years. Any comments?
hairstyles Anne Hathaway stars as the
ksrk
08-21 07:40 PM
I have a strange situation where I was thinking of AC21 all the while since January (Jul 02 Filer, TSC with Receipt# SRC 0722...).
Now, I finally made my mind and about to get an offer (after labor day, they say).
The lawyer says "don't think about AC21 now, because most probably your GC will be here within 3 months"
My PD is July 31st, 2006.
Dilemma: I don't want to screw up (or stretch the case un-necessarily) by changing employment just in case if there is an RFE. But then, I have to stay with my current employer for 6+ months AFTER GC as well, to be able to prove "permanent employment" intent.
please advise if the timing (within 3 months) makes sense.
Please also shed light on the permanent intent thing .
Many thanks
Not sure of terminology here, but some companies have policies to "go after" employees who leave immediately after getting their employment-based permanent residence. God knows there may be a law that allows the company to sue you for your "intent" of staying with the company for the sole purpose of getting your green card and not because you have a vested interest in doing your job for the company.
While these policies/laws allow for the employee to leave the company after a "reasonable" amount of time (usually six months), if, however, the employee leaves the company within that timeframe, the company has good cause to argue that the employee had an intent of leaving the company from the beginning right after s/he obtained employment-based permanent residence.
Not sure how much sense this made - the law is kinda fuzzy here, AFAIK. As is good with such matters, get professional advice from a good immigration attorney about what you need to do - always worth the money; the risk is not.
Now, I finally made my mind and about to get an offer (after labor day, they say).
The lawyer says "don't think about AC21 now, because most probably your GC will be here within 3 months"
My PD is July 31st, 2006.
Dilemma: I don't want to screw up (or stretch the case un-necessarily) by changing employment just in case if there is an RFE. But then, I have to stay with my current employer for 6+ months AFTER GC as well, to be able to prove "permanent employment" intent.
please advise if the timing (within 3 months) makes sense.
Please also shed light on the permanent intent thing .
Many thanks
Not sure of terminology here, but some companies have policies to "go after" employees who leave immediately after getting their employment-based permanent residence. God knows there may be a law that allows the company to sue you for your "intent" of staying with the company for the sole purpose of getting your green card and not because you have a vested interest in doing your job for the company.
While these policies/laws allow for the employee to leave the company after a "reasonable" amount of time (usually six months), if, however, the employee leaves the company within that timeframe, the company has good cause to argue that the employee had an intent of leaving the company from the beginning right after s/he obtained employment-based permanent residence.
Not sure how much sense this made - the law is kinda fuzzy here, AFAIK. As is good with such matters, get professional advice from a good immigration attorney about what you need to do - always worth the money; the risk is not.
mariodude100
08-25 09:33 PM
How about a mario one?XD
Or a luigi,kirby,sonic,butterfly and I think that is all
Random stuff for smilie
Or a luigi,kirby,sonic,butterfly and I think that is all
Random stuff for smilie
priderock
07-11 04:55 PM
Expecting help from Cheney ?:confused:
No comments:
Post a Comment