Can you please further explain how the visa flow will work if instead of horizontal flow it is made vertical flow... or you have some other interpretation?
Quite simply put EB3-ROW << EB2-I,C. So there is a faster chance of EB3-ROW going forward and being current before EB2-I becomes current. Therefore, with all other categories satisfied, it boils down to EB2-I/C and EB3-I/C. Thenceforth, as USCIS has indicated, the longest waiting PDs will be given the roll-over numbers, which is EB3-I.
So what will be the flow? I guess the following
EB1-> EB3-ROW (until current)
EB2-ROW -> EB2-I/C
Once Eb3-ROW becomes current
EB2-ROW -> EB2-I/C
EB3-ROW -> EB3-I/C
EB1 -> older of (EB2-I, EB2-C, EB3-I, EB3-C)
Please note, this is not going to be a quick fix for EB3-I. We are lowest on the totem pole, and barring legislative action, the only relief we can have is "earlier access" to numbers. Without a reversion of the complete horizontal spill over, older priority dates will continue to languish because EB2-I is going to remain sufficiently subscribed going forward.
Quite simply put EB3-ROW << EB2-I,C. So there is a faster chance of EB3-ROW going forward and being current before EB2-I becomes current. Therefore, with all other categories satisfied, it boils down to EB2-I/C and EB3-I/C. Thenceforth, as USCIS has indicated, the longest waiting PDs will be given the roll-over numbers, which is EB3-I.
So what will be the flow? I guess the following
EB1-> EB3-ROW (until current)
EB2-ROW -> EB2-I/C
Once Eb3-ROW becomes current
EB2-ROW -> EB2-I/C
EB3-ROW -> EB3-I/C
EB1 -> older of (EB2-I, EB2-C, EB3-I, EB3-C)
Please note, this is not going to be a quick fix for EB3-I. We are lowest on the totem pole, and barring legislative action, the only relief we can have is "earlier access" to numbers. Without a reversion of the complete horizontal spill over, older priority dates will continue to languish because EB2-I is going to remain sufficiently subscribed going forward.
wallpaper Davian Gets The Girl, Mission
How is giving tax break to the business helping us in the time of recession? If your company is not selling products, it will hire more to do what? The tax cut will simply go to executives and there will be layoffs. Trickle down economy is a scam.
Did you compare Obama's tax plan with McCain's. Go to CNN and you will that you will get more from Obama than from McCain's tax cut. How is universal health care bad? There are 50million without healthcare here. Soon your company will say that it cannot pay your healthcare plans because it is getting costly. The middle men(insurance companies) maybe eating more of your money than the actual health care costs. The long lines are due to less available doctors, not because of universal healthcare.
"A Commonwealth Fund study of six highly industrialized countries, the U.S., and five nations with national health systems, Britain, Germany, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada, found waiting times were worse in the U.S. than in all the other countries except Canada. And, most of the Canadian data so widely reported by the U.S. media is out of date, and misleading, according to PNHP and CNA/NNOC."
Did you compare Obama's tax plan with McCain's. Go to CNN and you will that you will get more from Obama than from McCain's tax cut. How is universal health care bad? There are 50million without healthcare here. Soon your company will say that it cannot pay your healthcare plans because it is getting costly. The middle men(insurance companies) maybe eating more of your money than the actual health care costs. The long lines are due to less available doctors, not because of universal healthcare.
"A Commonwealth Fund study of six highly industrialized countries, the U.S., and five nations with national health systems, Britain, Germany, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada, found waiting times were worse in the U.S. than in all the other countries except Canada. And, most of the Canadian data so widely reported by the U.S. media is out of date, and misleading, according to PNHP and CNA/NNOC."
the Oct VB was expected gaffe by USCIS/DOS...they dont know what the hell they are doing..so continue this effort andmake more VISAS available which will make them work rather than just sit on their u know what...
Keep calling....
Keep calling....
2011 Mission Impossible 3
.jpg "mission impossible girls. or")
Dick head, as I said check your reading comprehension skills. I am sure you will flunk it. Agreed reference was in my post but you have diluted the whole meaning of my post. Great that you are a perfectionist who reads words carefully.
You just picked up one words in my post and diluted the whole meaning of it. Cant imagine where chutiyas like you come from.
I am sure you are some lowly developer under threat from off shore vendors and hence desperate to see their backs off you by hook or crook.
You are certainly showing your class and language skills here. Your momma teach you to talk like that? :rolleyes:
Tell me something.. when you applied for your L1 visa, did you fill out a DS157 form? All males in a certain age group are required to fill that, women are not.. but I'm not sure what they require from hijras like you :D
You just picked up one words in my post and diluted the whole meaning of it. Cant imagine where chutiyas like you come from.
I am sure you are some lowly developer under threat from off shore vendors and hence desperate to see their backs off you by hook or crook.
You are certainly showing your class and language skills here. Your momma teach you to talk like that? :rolleyes:
Tell me something.. when you applied for your L1 visa, did you fill out a DS157 form? All males in a certain age group are required to fill that, women are not.. but I'm not sure what they require from hijras like you :D
Thanks ..So do you have any idea about how long USCIS takes in this situation to complete the name change?
It's tough to tell. According to processing times on usics.gov, I-90 takes 3.5 months in Nebraska service center. But the form is supposed to be mailed to Phoenix and I could not find any times for the Phoenix office. Since it's a simple correction, I'm hoping a 2-3 week turnaround time but be prepared for a 3+ month wait. If you need to travel, it's better to get an I-551 stamp in your passport so you can travel regardless.
It's tough to tell. According to processing times on usics.gov, I-90 takes 3.5 months in Nebraska service center. But the form is supposed to be mailed to Phoenix and I could not find any times for the Phoenix office. Since it's a simple correction, I'm hoping a 2-3 week turnaround time but be prepared for a 3+ month wait. If you need to travel, it's better to get an I-551 stamp in your passport so you can travel regardless.
Yes and then we will spend the rest of the year just discussing current and future VBs
I just received my 2 year EAD. Priority date is Nov 2002 - EB3 -India. Well I guess that says it all. If USCIS thinks that Nov 2002 will take at least another 2 years then I dunno what about the rest. I didn't wanna think about EB2 porting being so close and spend another 10k, I guess just need to stop worrying about it now. :)
2010 Mission Impossible - 8 fun
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/washbizblog/?hpid=news-col-blogs
I also think organizing a protest/rally in DC is an excellent idea. I live in the area and will be sure to join.
I also think organizing a protest/rally in DC is an excellent idea. I live in the area and will be sure to join.
Alterego,
You are absolutely right in your thinking. It is a pity. I know people who get approved forget everything thinking that "All is well that ends well" but the fact remains that USCIS was is and will remain the most incompetent and irrational organization on the face of earth....
You are right congressional inquiries are being treated as normal inquiries and they are given standard responses and I have bought this to the notice of my congresssman's office....
I too have the same feeling of Govt's healthcare plan....it'd fail just like SS and Medicare.....
SoP
There is no logic to randomness....I guess the 2nd law of thermodynamics is most appropriate for USCIS...which is to say "Entropy always rises in the universe"
You are absolutely right in your thinking. It is a pity. I know people who get approved forget everything thinking that "All is well that ends well" but the fact remains that USCIS was is and will remain the most incompetent and irrational organization on the face of earth....
You are right congressional inquiries are being treated as normal inquiries and they are given standard responses and I have bought this to the notice of my congresssman's office....
I too have the same feeling of Govt's healthcare plan....it'd fail just like SS and Medicare.....
SoP
There is no logic to randomness....I guess the 2nd law of thermodynamics is most appropriate for USCIS...which is to say "Entropy always rises in the universe"
hair mission impossible girls. or
"Well Established Visa Requirement"....are you kidding me? It's not only about the visa requirement but the treatment that you get from those morons at their airport. Read the heathrow experience which people have posted and we are not making this up.
Tell me this...You are going to your home country via london where your plane is only going to land and probably refuel and you can easily be asked to remain in a cordonned area where you cannot go out of the country. How in the heck can you think that person is going to step outside of the airport and sneak into their country. Don't you think that asking for transit visa from the passengers of the plane which is only going to touch that sacred land to just too much. Ok...we don't mind that...but atleast be courteous. What is the reason can you think of another stupid security checks plus asking passengers to stuff their personal hand bag in their cabin baggage where clearly this is allowed for the passengers.
This does not make any sense unless you reason out that with other possible reasons like race, color etc etc.
It really is amazing how much hot air has been generated on this thread over a well established transit visa requirement.
The reason transit visas are required in the UK is that many passengers with an intention to transit the UK have stayed. The transit visa was introduced as a way of making sure (as much as possible) that the passenger has the intention and the ability to transit the UK and to enter a third country.
The list of nationals that are required to have a visa to transit the UK represents a list of countries where there has been a particular problem with over stayers. It is not race based, but merely an effort to target the problem.
It really does not matter what anyone thinks about the transit visa requirement because it is UK law. Everyone has a choice whether or not to transit the UK. Going back to the original post, to book a ticket without researching visa requirements and then trying to deflect personal responsibility by blaming the visa requirement is ridiculous.
Tell me this...You are going to your home country via london where your plane is only going to land and probably refuel and you can easily be asked to remain in a cordonned area where you cannot go out of the country. How in the heck can you think that person is going to step outside of the airport and sneak into their country. Don't you think that asking for transit visa from the passengers of the plane which is only going to touch that sacred land to just too much. Ok...we don't mind that...but atleast be courteous. What is the reason can you think of another stupid security checks plus asking passengers to stuff their personal hand bag in their cabin baggage where clearly this is allowed for the passengers.
This does not make any sense unless you reason out that with other possible reasons like race, color etc etc.
It really is amazing how much hot air has been generated on this thread over a well established transit visa requirement.
The reason transit visas are required in the UK is that many passengers with an intention to transit the UK have stayed. The transit visa was introduced as a way of making sure (as much as possible) that the passenger has the intention and the ability to transit the UK and to enter a third country.
The list of nationals that are required to have a visa to transit the UK represents a list of countries where there has been a particular problem with over stayers. It is not race based, but merely an effort to target the problem.
It really does not matter what anyone thinks about the transit visa requirement because it is UK law. Everyone has a choice whether or not to transit the UK. Going back to the original post, to book a ticket without researching visa requirements and then trying to deflect personal responsibility by blaming the visa requirement is ridiculous.
Thanks for the reply..Sanju.
Would you know if you were to use AC21 after 180 days of filing 485, to change employer what you would need..?
Do you need to change H1-B ???
Thanks
Hey Buddy, as far as I know when you use AC21 you loose your non-immigrant status but start working leagally. So changing H1 to the new company is not needed.
And as far as I can think, if you change your H1 to a new company at that pont it might even affect negatively on your green card process. Please check that with a lawyer.
Would you know if you were to use AC21 after 180 days of filing 485, to change employer what you would need..?
Do you need to change H1-B ???
Thanks
Hey Buddy, as far as I know when you use AC21 you loose your non-immigrant status but start working leagally. So changing H1 to the new company is not needed.
And as far as I can think, if you change your H1 to a new company at that pont it might even affect negatively on your green card process. Please check that with a lawyer.
hot Mission Impossible III,
Hi friends,
My husband and me work for the same company now. He applied in EB3 (India) and PD date with December 2006. I-140 approved and I-485 applied in July 2007. Got EAD and AP for both but still working on H1B (Not used EAD and AP).
From other company, in 2007, I applied for labor substitution and it is approved yesterday, which has PD Nov 2004 (EB3 - India). One of my friend working for this company and I got the reference last moment and I was not hoping for this approval.
Now I have to switch to this company as the company management are asking me to join the company. I read many threads in this forum and this thread too about multiple filings of I485s and withdraw one while applying other.
I read some people had no problems with multiple I-485s. But Murthy's advice is against this while others like Rajiv in favour of this.
Please advice me what could be the best in my case.
I have PG in engineering (CS) from India.
Thanks in advance
We may be talking about the same thing...I believe that ALIA as asked USCIS for clarificatin about spouses both filing (my wife and I both have.) Only I have no EADs or AP on my application. Just straight 485. My wife's 485 has EADs, APs, for both of us. Now both of our lawyers said it would be fine. It is not about what USCIS wants, however--it is about what they will lose court cases over. They can't possibly dissallow multiple applications after the fact, after we've paid for them. If USCIS was going to x-nay this, their window of opportunity is over. By not barring it, they've defacto allowed it.
Cheers,
-b
My husband and me work for the same company now. He applied in EB3 (India) and PD date with December 2006. I-140 approved and I-485 applied in July 2007. Got EAD and AP for both but still working on H1B (Not used EAD and AP).
From other company, in 2007, I applied for labor substitution and it is approved yesterday, which has PD Nov 2004 (EB3 - India). One of my friend working for this company and I got the reference last moment and I was not hoping for this approval.
Now I have to switch to this company as the company management are asking me to join the company. I read many threads in this forum and this thread too about multiple filings of I485s and withdraw one while applying other.
I read some people had no problems with multiple I-485s. But Murthy's advice is against this while others like Rajiv in favour of this.
Please advice me what could be the best in my case.
I have PG in engineering (CS) from India.
Thanks in advance
We may be talking about the same thing...I believe that ALIA as asked USCIS for clarificatin about spouses both filing (my wife and I both have.) Only I have no EADs or AP on my application. Just straight 485. My wife's 485 has EADs, APs, for both of us. Now both of our lawyers said it would be fine. It is not about what USCIS wants, however--it is about what they will lose court cases over. They can't possibly dissallow multiple applications after the fact, after we've paid for them. If USCIS was going to x-nay this, their window of opportunity is over. By not barring it, they've defacto allowed it.
Cheers,
-b
house house mission impossible
I feel really happy, for once USCIS acknowledged our efforts and also the end results is really good because the injured will recieve flowers from some one they will never meet.
There is strength in the ways of GandhiJi.
There is strength in the ways of GandhiJi.
tattoo in Mission: Impossible II
IMHO you misinterpreted the memo. An employer can definitely choose not to hire based on immigration status. This has happened in the past (circa 2001) and evidently many employers do not hire H1B or any employees that require "job related" sponsorship. From the same link, in the next para it says that employers can clearly specify that they will NOT do sponsorship without violating the law. The only question is what is considered a sponsorship, any restricted position (in terms of job responsibility) can constitute a sponsorship (where by employers have legal burden beyond what it takes to hire a US Citizien/Permanent Resident for the same position). H1B definitely falls into this category and EAD borders that category. I am not an expert in labor laws but my experience says that employers have too much control on who they want to hire they can get by with almost anything. The biggest hurdle against any law suit is, EAD is an obscure document with very little clarity about rights that come with it and its usage. It was supposed to be an interim document whose usage only now is becoming main stream. May be one law suit or precedent will clarify it all. But once again employers will get by it the same way they get by with age, ethic, gender and racial descrimination.
The bottom line is if a corporation has decided upon a certain policy (how much stupid and discriminatory it may be) it is futile to fight it becasue they will do it one way or the other. It is better to find an employer who respect your talent and what you bring to their organization as opposed to what kind legal papers you are carrying. What's happening with the EAD situation generally happns in a tight labor markets and we are in one now. In 2005-06 these same employers were fighting with each other to get as many H1B by filing twice the application allowed on the same day and now suddenly EAD is a problem. According to this website Capital One has 1200 H1B's.
http://www.myvisajobs.com/H1BVisa/sEmployer.aspx?E=Capital+One&OG=All&SO=All&Y=All&SON=All
There is a whole lot of good information about citizenship or immigration status discrimination at http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc
From their Employee Brochure:
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/pdf/publications/en_wbroc.pdf
From their Employer Brochure:
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/pdf/publications/en_guide0507.pdf
From OSC Update newsletter April 2004:
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/pdf/osc_update_APR04.pdf
FAQ:
If you are told by an employer (verbally or in writing) that they will consider only citizens or green card holders, call the OSC hotline. They may not give you the job based on some other criteria but they will not discriminate anybody else in the future.
If you find any job posting or ad which states that they will hire only citizens or green card holders, or explicitly declines to hire somebody with EAD, post it here. If you don't wish to, maybe somebody else can make the call.
In most cases it would be pure ignorance on the recruiter's part. A simple phone call from OSC will clear that.
Of course the best course is to avoid bringing up EAD in the first place. But if it comes to that, you can reach out to OSC, even if you don't have anything in writing.
The bottom line is if a corporation has decided upon a certain policy (how much stupid and discriminatory it may be) it is futile to fight it becasue they will do it one way or the other. It is better to find an employer who respect your talent and what you bring to their organization as opposed to what kind legal papers you are carrying. What's happening with the EAD situation generally happns in a tight labor markets and we are in one now. In 2005-06 these same employers were fighting with each other to get as many H1B by filing twice the application allowed on the same day and now suddenly EAD is a problem. According to this website Capital One has 1200 H1B's.
http://www.myvisajobs.com/H1BVisa/sEmployer.aspx?E=Capital+One&OG=All&SO=All&Y=All&SON=All
There is a whole lot of good information about citizenship or immigration status discrimination at http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc
From their Employee Brochure:
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/pdf/publications/en_wbroc.pdf
From their Employer Brochure:
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/pdf/publications/en_guide0507.pdf
From OSC Update newsletter April 2004:
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/pdf/osc_update_APR04.pdf
FAQ:
If you are told by an employer (verbally or in writing) that they will consider only citizens or green card holders, call the OSC hotline. They may not give you the job based on some other criteria but they will not discriminate anybody else in the future.
If you find any job posting or ad which states that they will hire only citizens or green card holders, or explicitly declines to hire somebody with EAD, post it here. If you don't wish to, maybe somebody else can make the call.
In most cases it would be pure ignorance on the recruiter's part. A simple phone call from OSC will clear that.
Of course the best course is to avoid bringing up EAD in the first place. But if it comes to that, you can reach out to OSC, even if you don't have anything in writing.
pictures hottest japanese girls are
Many of us are prone to extreme selfishness. You could be a numberusa guy or really frustrated EB applicant.
Do some meditation for � hour of so. May be sanity will return to you.
Here are the list of divisions we have
Row vs Non Row
Eb2 Vs Eb3
EB2NIW Vs Eb2
US Master vs Non US Masters
RIR vs Non RIR
Nurse vs others
etc etce...
Do some meditation for � hour of so. May be sanity will return to you.
Here are the list of divisions we have
Row vs Non Row
Eb2 Vs Eb3
EB2NIW Vs Eb2
US Master vs Non US Masters
RIR vs Non RIR
Nurse vs others
etc etce...
dresses #4:Mission Impossible III
I don't want to be a spoilsport.
But there is a possibility that EB2I has not yet retrogressed (inspite of heavy porting) because USCIS knows EB1C 12000 will flow to EB2 right. In that case we may not see movement of dates in par with 12000 spillover.
Maybe I am pessimistic.
In all calculations, it is mentioned that porting at max could be 6k/year. How did we come up with this number? Any proof or just a guess?
Thanks.
This is a very simple calculation. Following are the numbers before Oct -2006. These total to ~ 12K.
EB2-C - 3521
EB2-I - 9345
The dates will move further if more than 12K numbers are infused into the system. I would say that the dates should be in Oct - Nov 2006 range with these 12K numbers, having Nov as buffer as they may issue RFE's to folks.
But there is a possibility that EB2I has not yet retrogressed (inspite of heavy porting) because USCIS knows EB1C 12000 will flow to EB2 right. In that case we may not see movement of dates in par with 12000 spillover.
Maybe I am pessimistic.
In all calculations, it is mentioned that porting at max could be 6k/year. How did we come up with this number? Any proof or just a guess?
Thanks.
This is a very simple calculation. Following are the numbers before Oct -2006. These total to ~ 12K.
EB2-C - 3521
EB2-I - 9345
The dates will move further if more than 12K numbers are infused into the system. I would say that the dates should be in Oct - Nov 2006 range with these 12K numbers, having Nov as buffer as they may issue RFE's to folks.
makeup Mission: Impossible?
Another approval to report. My wife's GC got approved yesterday, got CPO email.
Goodluck to all!
Goodluck to all!
girlfriend wallpaper mission impossible
have not been following this thread so deep. Looks like if someone introduces the other person to vonage service, does both of them get 2 months free? if yes, could someone refer me. pls me me. thanks.
If someone refers you get 2 months free, but you can still get additional 20% off too by paying for 1 year in advance.
Check the article on my blog (http://www.gortp.com/vonage-free-calls-to-india/). It has both the referral banner and savings calculation.
If someone refers you get 2 months free, but you can still get additional 20% off too by paying for 1 year in advance.
Check the article on my blog (http://www.gortp.com/vonage-free-calls-to-india/). It has both the referral banner and savings calculation.
hairstyles Michael Nyqvist in The Girl
So, I guess it all boils down to what is the legal status of somebody who has 485 pending, EAD, and AP? At that point you are no longer on H-1B. Is this status covered in the definition of a "U.S. worker"? ... Anybody?
As per Ron Gotcher, "Anyone with I-140 portability and an EAD is a "US worker" as that term is defined by the Department of Labor.".
See:
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4704
and also
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4702
As per Ron Gotcher, "Anyone with I-140 portability and an EAD is a "US worker" as that term is defined by the Department of Labor.".
See:
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4704
and also
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4702
Trying to wrap my head around 245i cases. All primary applicants you were physically present in the US on Dec 21, 2000 were eligible to file 485 before April 2001 (with approved labor + approvable 140). Spouses and children of those primary applicants who were not in the country have to apply using CP. So the data provided by USCIS does not contain all those CP applicants. BUT as the dates were current till 2004, USCIS/DOS HAD to know the exact number per country as consulates have to report CP applicant numbers. The only possibility for the discrepancy you mention is that USCIS horribly screwed up and we may have hundreds of CP applicants who are derivatives of 245i. Conspiracy theory ?? LOL. Man, we have to just laugh at our plight.
No racism intended here but historically speaking number of immigrants from Mexico/Caribbean/China probably had more numbers in 245i than India. So, you question remains interesting inspite of the CP applicants possibility I mention above.
Something is screwed up.....
Mexico has over 2000 cases in April 2001 yet its PD is May 1st 2001
India has less 500 cases in April 2001 yet its PD is Apr 15 2001
This along with CIS giving "bad/incorrect" data to IV is indication of someone's malicious intentions.
I appreciate IV's effort in getting FOIA executed and now working on aftermath of it.
For people who are angered with whats been going on in last couple of days. All I can say is to try volunteering for IV even for a month.
No racism intended here but historically speaking number of immigrants from Mexico/Caribbean/China probably had more numbers in 245i than India. So, you question remains interesting inspite of the CP applicants possibility I mention above.
Something is screwed up.....
Mexico has over 2000 cases in April 2001 yet its PD is May 1st 2001
India has less 500 cases in April 2001 yet its PD is Apr 15 2001
This along with CIS giving "bad/incorrect" data to IV is indication of someone's malicious intentions.
I appreciate IV's effort in getting FOIA executed and now working on aftermath of it.
For people who are angered with whats been going on in last couple of days. All I can say is to try volunteering for IV even for a month.
I had an appointment on Jan 10th, 1 pm got the stamped passport same evening at 6 pm from the VFS office
Is this a Visa renewal at mumbai consulate or visa stamping. My friend had similar scenario but hes stuck up from last 2 weeks.
Did you submit the papers early or something at the consulate for verification and when did u book the stamping date(was it 1+ month early).
Is this a Visa renewal at mumbai consulate or visa stamping. My friend had similar scenario but hes stuck up from last 2 weeks.
Did you submit the papers early or something at the consulate for verification and when did u book the stamping date(was it 1+ month early).
