Add St.Louis --- www.myilaaka.com
wallpaper renters lease agreement.
I just updated the profile. Could you please confirm?
Sorry about making a commitment for only @ 20.00.
Thanks again for all the effort done by IV Core.
Thanks.
We confirm your contribution commitment for $20 per month. Each $20 is important for us.
Sorry about making a commitment for only @ 20.00.
Thanks again for all the effort done by IV Core.
Thanks.
We confirm your contribution commitment for $20 per month. Each $20 is important for us.
by the way shusterman predicted ROW will retrogress in his blog found at shusterman.com there was also an IV post about this (abbout somethin like shusterman got a call from clinton or something)..........
so what happened to the quareterly spill over ???????????
so what happened to the quareterly spill over ???????????
2011 MS Word Rental Application
No more crossing into USA just based on saying you are a Citizen (oral declaration).
Starting from January 31, 2008 (two weeks from now), all citizens must carry passport or other kinds of acceptable ID's to enter into US border. This is also applicable US and Canadian citizen.
Following are acceptable documents/ID's for US/Canada citizens ages 19 and older.
1. USA, Canada passports
2. US passport card (available in the spring)
3. Trusted traveler card such as NEXUS, SENTRI or FAST
4. Secure driver's license
5. US military ID
6. US Merchant Mariner document
7. One of several IDs issued to Native Americans
So, proof of citizenship will be required for entry.
As usual, all other citizen must carry all required documents.
Source: USA Today January 18, 2008 news paper 3A page.
Starting from January 31, 2008 (two weeks from now), all citizens must carry passport or other kinds of acceptable ID's to enter into US border. This is also applicable US and Canadian citizen.
Following are acceptable documents/ID's for US/Canada citizens ages 19 and older.
1. USA, Canada passports
2. US passport card (available in the spring)
3. Trusted traveler card such as NEXUS, SENTRI or FAST
4. Secure driver's license
5. US military ID
6. US Merchant Mariner document
7. One of several IDs issued to Native Americans
So, proof of citizenship will be required for entry.
As usual, all other citizen must carry all required documents.
Source: USA Today January 18, 2008 news paper 3A page.
I think we should start a media campaign. Here is an easy way to get your message out to as many media outlet as possible: go to http://www.immigrantslist.org/page/speakout/dailies
By the way, I recommend Immigrants' List (http://www.immigrantslist.org). Although this organization is for all immigrants, both legal and illegal, legal and illegal are facing the same problem: the anti-immigration sentiment. And because of the problems in the immigration system, legal immigrants can sometimes become illegal without knowing it. Plus it is so difficult to jump through so many hoops that are designed to make you illegal, there is no point to let these laws enslave you.
We can only abide by the laws to certain extend and only if the laws are reasonable. If the laws are based on disrespect for us, we should not abide by those laws. We should fight to change those laws.
By the way, I recommend Immigrants' List (http://www.immigrantslist.org). Although this organization is for all immigrants, both legal and illegal, legal and illegal are facing the same problem: the anti-immigration sentiment. And because of the problems in the immigration system, legal immigrants can sometimes become illegal without knowing it. Plus it is so difficult to jump through so many hoops that are designed to make you illegal, there is no point to let these laws enslave you.
We can only abide by the laws to certain extend and only if the laws are reasonable. If the laws are based on disrespect for us, we should not abide by those laws. We should fight to change those laws.
Sent the mail today.
I look at this bill in a different perspective:
1. This will give the Indian IT companies an opportunity to move up the value chain. Rather than body shop its employees to clients...they can have all the IT work done at its development locations. Also they can fill americans for half of its US workforce.
2. It will put an end to 100% H1b bodyshoppers who just make money without having any office and putting their employees onto client locations. These scrupulous bodyshops even dont pay on bench.
Thanks
1. This will give the Indian IT companies an opportunity to move up the value chain. Rather than body shop its employees to clients...they can have all the IT work done at its development locations. Also they can fill americans for half of its US workforce.
2. It will put an end to 100% H1b bodyshoppers who just make money without having any office and putting their employees onto client locations. These scrupulous bodyshops even dont pay on bench.
Thanks
2010 Rental Application Free
Assuming you are right then,
average visa issued for EB1 ROW+Non ROW over the last 5 years have been 26K,
Now assuming this year the demand would be close to average then. It leaves 14K for EB2
Implying 12/2003 dates movement is very likely as 14k>5k (your number)
Yes it is very likely the Eb2 India can move past Dec03. Keep in mind that the spillover (taking your estimate of 14k) will not entirely go to EB2 India. Part of it will also go to Eb2 China. And we dont know how that allocation is done.
Again, All this is based on the hope provided by recent posts that Eb1ROW spillover may actually got to EB2India (posts made by Ron Gotcher / Googler on their supposed converations with Charles Oppenheimer). Till recently, I used to be under the impression that only Eb1ROW spills to EB2ROW spills to EB3ROW.
average visa issued for EB1 ROW+Non ROW over the last 5 years have been 26K,
Now assuming this year the demand would be close to average then. It leaves 14K for EB2
Implying 12/2003 dates movement is very likely as 14k>5k (your number)
Yes it is very likely the Eb2 India can move past Dec03. Keep in mind that the spillover (taking your estimate of 14k) will not entirely go to EB2 India. Part of it will also go to Eb2 China. And we dont know how that allocation is done.
Again, All this is based on the hope provided by recent posts that Eb1ROW spillover may actually got to EB2India (posts made by Ron Gotcher / Googler on their supposed converations with Charles Oppenheimer). Till recently, I used to be under the impression that only Eb1ROW spills to EB2ROW spills to EB3ROW.
I am fed up of the blissful ignorance that is so characteristic of so many EB-based retrogressed folks.
Why should I care about this forum? Why should I contribute? Tell me what is wrong with me just sitting on my butt, and looking at Visa bulletins every month if
1) I am an Indian with EB-3 PD of Jun 2002 or later
2) I am an Indian with EB-2 PD after Jan 2005.
3) I am ROW with EB-3 PD of 2003
4) I am ROW with EB-2. (Ok. Here you can't convince me.)
Any other categories I am missing.
Post numbers, facts, figures, analysis. We will condense it to something marketable, so I can send it to people like us, and get them to participate.
BTW, I am ROW EB-3 with an expected, I am hoping, PD of 1Q 2007.
Why should I care about this forum? Why should I contribute? Tell me what is wrong with me just sitting on my butt, and looking at Visa bulletins every month if
1) I am an Indian with EB-3 PD of Jun 2002 or later
2) I am an Indian with EB-2 PD after Jan 2005.
3) I am ROW with EB-3 PD of 2003
4) I am ROW with EB-2. (Ok. Here you can't convince me.)
Any other categories I am missing.
Post numbers, facts, figures, analysis. We will condense it to something marketable, so I can send it to people like us, and get them to participate.
BTW, I am ROW EB-3 with an expected, I am hoping, PD of 1Q 2007.
hair Residential Rental/Lease
They wasted 580 EB3 India visas last year (2009).
Total available EB3 India GC Visas per year: 2802
Used: 2222
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV_2.pdf
Total available EB3 India GC Visas per year: 2802
Used: 2222
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV_2.pdf
I came to US through CompanyA on L1A Visa 4 months back. My L1A Visa is valid till Mar-09. I had applied for the H1B Visa when I was in India. I got the H1B Visa and now has a valid petition effective Oct-07.
I would like to know the following.
Can I join the Company B from Company A without going back to India after Oct-07?Shouldn't be a problem, but I need some clarifying
Do you have an i-94 for the H1B visa? Do you have 2 visas in your passport - L1 and H1? Or so you have an a receipt issued by the USCIS for the H1B
Please clarify
I would like to know the following.
Can I join the Company B from Company A without going back to India after Oct-07?Shouldn't be a problem, but I need some clarifying
Do you have an i-94 for the H1B visa? Do you have 2 visas in your passport - L1 and H1? Or so you have an a receipt issued by the USCIS for the H1B
Please clarify
hot Lease Option Agreement / Lease
We already have a campaign to call legislators. Please call the legisltaors and inform them about these issues. Thanks!
house renters lease agreement.
Here are the details for last year and years before:
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
Thanks Kondur. That was a very good presentation of the numbers. I very much appreciate it.
Now,
1. Why did EB1 last year needed spillover visas, although it was current all the time? If a category is current, isn't that it has less demand than allocated numbers?
2. As per May bulletin, EB4 might need a cut off. So we cannot expect any spillover from EB4. So that is clear. Now the spillover chances are from EB5, EB2 ROW and EB1(?). I am including EB1 because, given the current economy over the past year, should there be a better possibility of more spillover from EB2 ROW and EB1 compared to last year?
3. Also why are the total EB numbers different in different fiscal years (e.g., 141020 in FY2009, 162949 in FY 2008 and 154497 in FY2007)? In FYs 2007 and 2008 did the extra visas come from Family based while it did not for FY 2009? If so, why is it so?
4. Based on Pending 485 data of March 2010, I barely see few hundred EB4s. And hardly considerable number of EB1s. What's going on? If we go by this data, we should be getting good chunk of spillover numbers...
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Green%20Card/Green%20Card%20Through%20a%20Job/Employment%20Based%20I-485%20Pending%20Inventory-Total%203-8-2010.pdf
Thanks,
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
Thanks Kondur. That was a very good presentation of the numbers. I very much appreciate it.
Now,
1. Why did EB1 last year needed spillover visas, although it was current all the time? If a category is current, isn't that it has less demand than allocated numbers?
2. As per May bulletin, EB4 might need a cut off. So we cannot expect any spillover from EB4. So that is clear. Now the spillover chances are from EB5, EB2 ROW and EB1(?). I am including EB1 because, given the current economy over the past year, should there be a better possibility of more spillover from EB2 ROW and EB1 compared to last year?
3. Also why are the total EB numbers different in different fiscal years (e.g., 141020 in FY2009, 162949 in FY 2008 and 154497 in FY2007)? In FYs 2007 and 2008 did the extra visas come from Family based while it did not for FY 2009? If so, why is it so?
4. Based on Pending 485 data of March 2010, I barely see few hundred EB4s. And hardly considerable number of EB1s. What's going on? If we go by this data, we should be getting good chunk of spillover numbers...
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Green%20Card/Green%20Card%20Through%20a%20Job/Employment%20Based%20I-485%20Pending%20Inventory-Total%203-8-2010.pdf
Thanks,
tattoo Vic Residential Tenancy
Why am I not suprised with this news?
I think it is self evident that even though there is some spill over I think large number of visa's are getting wasted. Else last year we should have seen better movement than just wrapping up 2004. In 2008 there were so many people with 2005 & 2006 PD who were approved. I think it was either inefficiency on part of USCIS or a go slow directive from the administation that has caused visa wastage.
One immigration business shop says that visas are being wasted and that's our proof. We are now ready to list the reasons why visa numbers are being wasted. Not only the visas have been wasted but according to you the reason for wastage are -
1.) Inefficiency
2.) Directive from the administration
But before that, can anybody prove conclusively that visa numbers were wasted. What is the proof? Just because my application is pending doesn't mean that USCIS is wasting green card numbers. Give us all proof that visa numbers are being wasted. Where is the proof. Around 20 days back I wrote an email to the immigration business shop asking for proof of waste of visa numbers. No response.
I think it is self evident that even though there is some spill over I think large number of visa's are getting wasted. Else last year we should have seen better movement than just wrapping up 2004. In 2008 there were so many people with 2005 & 2006 PD who were approved. I think it was either inefficiency on part of USCIS or a go slow directive from the administation that has caused visa wastage.
One immigration business shop says that visas are being wasted and that's our proof. We are now ready to list the reasons why visa numbers are being wasted. Not only the visas have been wasted but according to you the reason for wastage are -
1.) Inefficiency
2.) Directive from the administration
But before that, can anybody prove conclusively that visa numbers were wasted. What is the proof? Just because my application is pending doesn't mean that USCIS is wasting green card numbers. Give us all proof that visa numbers are being wasted. Where is the proof. Around 20 days back I wrote an email to the immigration business shop asking for proof of waste of visa numbers. No response.
pictures renters lease agreement.
delax,
There is a mistake in your numbers, thousands of cases applied for in 2005 were approved in 2006.
If you look at the 2006 PERM Data Sheet, there are 7290 Approved, India cases with receipt dates in the year 2005.
I'm assuming PD = PERM Receipt Date (correct me if i'm wrong)
Similarly for 2006 in the 2007 tables.
Therefore there are ~ 8700 - EB1, EB2, EB3 cases in 2005 and not 1350.
The data is organized by Govt Fiscal Year (Oct thru Sept) and by priority date not approval date. Thus anyone applying in Oct-Dec of 2005 will show up in the 2006 file.
You will notice that the PERM receipt date is always between Oct of previous year and Sept of next year. I also think that the pre-PERM data is a little suspect. I am the only GC applicant from my company and my PD is July 2004, but my case does not show up in the 2004 file. I guess during the transfer from DOL to BEC's my case got lost in translation though I got an approval in Feb 2007.
There is a mistake in your numbers, thousands of cases applied for in 2005 were approved in 2006.
If you look at the 2006 PERM Data Sheet, there are 7290 Approved, India cases with receipt dates in the year 2005.
I'm assuming PD = PERM Receipt Date (correct me if i'm wrong)
Similarly for 2006 in the 2007 tables.
Therefore there are ~ 8700 - EB1, EB2, EB3 cases in 2005 and not 1350.
The data is organized by Govt Fiscal Year (Oct thru Sept) and by priority date not approval date. Thus anyone applying in Oct-Dec of 2005 will show up in the 2006 file.
You will notice that the PERM receipt date is always between Oct of previous year and Sept of next year. I also think that the pre-PERM data is a little suspect. I am the only GC applicant from my company and my PD is July 2004, but my case does not show up in the 2004 file. I guess during the transfer from DOL to BEC's my case got lost in translation though I got an approval in Feb 2007.
dresses Before you sign any lease,
:mad:
Hey imv116, how about the fact that it is totally unethical and illegal? How can you support this? I myself have done MS and have seen the effect of this ridiculous practice. I was very good and yet could not get any job because the market is flooded with false resumes. So employers think there are many experienced candidates and do not want freshers!!
Also, just like others have mentioned, it undermines the quality and experience of the genuine people. I agree that students sometimes do not have a choice in the current scenario. But at the same time, many of them are just not good enough to get a job on their own merit. That is why they have no problem resorting to such shameful tactics.
:mad:
Hey imv116, how about the fact that it is totally unethical and illegal? How can you support this? I myself have done MS and have seen the effect of this ridiculous practice. I was very good and yet could not get any job because the market is flooded with false resumes. So employers think there are many experienced candidates and do not want freshers!!
Also, just like others have mentioned, it undermines the quality and experience of the genuine people. I agree that students sometimes do not have a choice in the current scenario. But at the same time, many of them are just not good enough to get a job on their own merit. That is why they have no problem resorting to such shameful tactics.
:mad:
makeup Agreement Rental Form
After long wait of 4.7 years ( i know it may not sound too long as some of the others), I finally got the card production ordered email yesterday. I was mostly a silent reader on IV but have contributed to IV few times since I started visiting since last year. I wish good luck for everybody waiting out there.
Congratulations and good luck!
Congratulations and good luck!
girlfriend Images Lease on apartment
Just did it.
hairstyles residential lease agreement
Nixstor did explained his actions and I concur... Controversial handles should be banned... Handle "TALIBAN" was banned and same member opened new handle "TAWLIBANN" saying his name is Tawlibann Foggs...
Anyway we should close this issue.. I do find tawlibann's posts decent and non-offensive.. Only thing is we need to practice some respect to the communitity when chosing a handle... Its just not this.. there could be potentially other offensive handles.. So I'd say there should be a step/check in registration process to monitor/regulate handles... You won't like any handle offending your religious beliefs, dis-respecting your nation or humanity itself...
Just my 2 cents... We should stop this discussion and focus on immigration issues...
:D
Anyway we should close this issue.. I do find tawlibann's posts decent and non-offensive.. Only thing is we need to practice some respect to the communitity when chosing a handle... Its just not this.. there could be potentially other offensive handles.. So I'd say there should be a step/check in registration process to monitor/regulate handles... You won't like any handle offending your religious beliefs, dis-respecting your nation or humanity itself...
Just my 2 cents... We should stop this discussion and focus on immigration issues...
:D
Hi all,
I am not sure whether I should add this over here or not but I could not resist and I don't know any other way.
I went to a wine shop and was shocked to see cartoon of Ganesha used on the bottle of India Pale Beer. I am not a religious person but this thing made me nervous. Please let me know how this can be protested.
Thanks
ah! thats the perfect drink for the occasion when we all get our GC... :)There is no end to the things we could protest about...
I am not sure whether I should add this over here or not but I could not resist and I don't know any other way.
I went to a wine shop and was shocked to see cartoon of Ganesha used on the bottle of India Pale Beer. I am not a religious person but this thing made me nervous. Please let me know how this can be protested.
Thanks
ah! thats the perfect drink for the occasion when we all get our GC... :)There is no end to the things we could protest about...
If you are in need of air miles or would like to donate air miles, please PM me with your name and phone number.
I will not be able to coordinate if you do not provide me with your phone number.
I will not be able to coordinate if you do not provide me with your phone number.
