images 05/17/2010 - Gemma Arterton 
nixstor
07-04 09:33 PM
[QUOTE=nixstor]Excellent analysis but it does have flaws
I am sure you might have read this from murthy's website (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_dosebn.html) or not, but DOS/CA/VO officials shared this piece with them. As per the above article, final quarter quota should not open until Jul 2nd. I understand that agencies can implement and interpret certain stuff, but you cannot interpret and implement one thing on Jun 13th and another on Jul 2nd. If its written into law, that the quarterly allocation is a must, USCIS is in violation and DOS/CA/VO as well for not policing them of visa number usage.
"Essentially, the numbers are spread out during the first three quarters and whatever is left is available during the last quarter"
On reading the Murthy article it appears that the biggest mistake USCIS committed was using up the visa numbers before the 4th qtr began on 7/2/07.
USCIS did it other way around...desparately rushed to use up the numbers before the 4th qtr began....only explanation is to avoid doing additional paperwork for the July filers...
Its not the paper work guys. They will love the money on EAD & AP. Its the huge backlog that will remain for ever on their hump unless a recapture occurs. Due to lack of communication or what ever, DOS made every category current. The only way they can escape from accepting our applications is by using up all numbers. Thats what they essentially did. AFAIK, DOS gets updates from USCIS and CP's across the world about the number of visas they have used in the past month. DOS then prepares the VB. Assuming USCIS told DOS that they have used 80/90K for the fiscal year so far, DOS is left with 60/50K for the last quarter of the fiscal year. How can DOS imagine/understand availability of 50/60k visas to be less demand for EB categories? This is what exactly the initial July VB said and we were all stupefied. They know this in and out and a simple request for pending number of 485's from years, approved & pending 140's since retrogression hit & that do not have a adjoining 485 should come out conservatively to 150-200K. Does DOS ask this as a part of their monthly information gathering process? Yes, they does is the simple answer. Then what led to the making VB current is the esoteric Q here. USCIS will have allocated the numbers at their own pace if the VB was not made current. As the VB was made current, USCIS was forced to use all the numbers and say that there are no numbers. Unless, we hear more stuff from the offices of DOS/USCIS in response to Rep Lofgren, every thing will be speculation.
I am sure you might have read this from murthy's website (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_dosebn.html) or not, but DOS/CA/VO officials shared this piece with them. As per the above article, final quarter quota should not open until Jul 2nd. I understand that agencies can implement and interpret certain stuff, but you cannot interpret and implement one thing on Jun 13th and another on Jul 2nd. If its written into law, that the quarterly allocation is a must, USCIS is in violation and DOS/CA/VO as well for not policing them of visa number usage.
"Essentially, the numbers are spread out during the first three quarters and whatever is left is available during the last quarter"
On reading the Murthy article it appears that the biggest mistake USCIS committed was using up the visa numbers before the 4th qtr began on 7/2/07.
USCIS did it other way around...desparately rushed to use up the numbers before the 4th qtr began....only explanation is to avoid doing additional paperwork for the July filers...
Its not the paper work guys. They will love the money on EAD & AP. Its the huge backlog that will remain for ever on their hump unless a recapture occurs. Due to lack of communication or what ever, DOS made every category current. The only way they can escape from accepting our applications is by using up all numbers. Thats what they essentially did. AFAIK, DOS gets updates from USCIS and CP's across the world about the number of visas they have used in the past month. DOS then prepares the VB. Assuming USCIS told DOS that they have used 80/90K for the fiscal year so far, DOS is left with 60/50K for the last quarter of the fiscal year. How can DOS imagine/understand availability of 50/60k visas to be less demand for EB categories? This is what exactly the initial July VB said and we were all stupefied. They know this in and out and a simple request for pending number of 485's from years, approved & pending 140's since retrogression hit & that do not have a adjoining 485 should come out conservatively to 150-200K. Does DOS ask this as a part of their monthly information gathering process? Yes, they does is the simple answer. Then what led to the making VB current is the esoteric Q here. USCIS will have allocated the numbers at their own pace if the VB was not made current. As the VB was made current, USCIS was forced to use all the numbers and say that there are no numbers. Unless, we hear more stuff from the offices of DOS/USCIS in response to Rep Lofgren, every thing will be speculation.
wallpaper Gemma Arterton Prince Of
psaxena
11-17 06:25 PM
And you are a perfect desi... who wants to get everything without giving anything and to add on to that provoke others and distract them.
Nothing is free, and nothing will happen over night. It takes time and political to get these things done.
Think for a second ..
how many members are there on IV = More than 30000
How many donate = less than 200 give or take
How many yell and suggest and expect that core will leave everything and start working on the suggestion = Everyone
Now if you are in this situation , where you are not even responsible to do anything for anyone(like desi politician)... would you even do what IV is doing? No, forget that you won't even think of creating IV.
So you know my next sentence.. keep it low and be out .. or sober up and get in line and be the one to do the right thing so that you can look into your eyes in the mirror next time.
IV is acting like a desi politician.. paisa do and shut up..we know what we are doing....they refuse to even entertain such alternate remedies.
like i had said in my earlier post.. If you pay a BYTCH.. she will sing what you want to hear..hence the fake promises of CIR being a reality..and all.. (remember that 588x bill fiasco) and NOW we know..from the horses mouth.. CIR is dead for the near foreseeable future.
So i think we should pursue alternate reliefs with immediate effect.
just my 2cents.
Nothing is free, and nothing will happen over night. It takes time and political to get these things done.
Think for a second ..
how many members are there on IV = More than 30000
How many donate = less than 200 give or take
How many yell and suggest and expect that core will leave everything and start working on the suggestion = Everyone
Now if you are in this situation , where you are not even responsible to do anything for anyone(like desi politician)... would you even do what IV is doing? No, forget that you won't even think of creating IV.
So you know my next sentence.. keep it low and be out .. or sober up and get in line and be the one to do the right thing so that you can look into your eyes in the mirror next time.
IV is acting like a desi politician.. paisa do and shut up..we know what we are doing....they refuse to even entertain such alternate remedies.
like i had said in my earlier post.. If you pay a BYTCH.. she will sing what you want to hear..hence the fake promises of CIR being a reality..and all.. (remember that 588x bill fiasco) and NOW we know..from the horses mouth.. CIR is dead for the near foreseeable future.
So i think we should pursue alternate reliefs with immediate effect.
just my 2cents.
ajthakur
07-14 08:07 PM
Thanks rajuseattle. I am first going to try find out whether my previous employer did revoke the 140. In case he didnt i am safe. In case he did, when he did it is the key.
One more thing AC-21 is not a formal USCIS form which one can fill in and send it over to USCIS, its just a letter wherein you or your legal representative informs USCIS about the change in employment, be it a job promotion with same employer or u switching the Job using the AC-21 provisions.
As explained earlier in this forum, 180 day rule interpretation is solely USCIS's descretion, if USCIS adjudicator who is working on your case accepts your new EVL and approves your case you are good to go, but for some reason the adjudicator keeps sending more RFE then you will need someone who can answer them in a legal language and thats where attorney services comes in handy.
I am hoping for the best for you that once they see your new EVL, they are satisfied and sends you GC.
One more thing AC-21 is not a formal USCIS form which one can fill in and send it over to USCIS, its just a letter wherein you or your legal representative informs USCIS about the change in employment, be it a job promotion with same employer or u switching the Job using the AC-21 provisions.
As explained earlier in this forum, 180 day rule interpretation is solely USCIS's descretion, if USCIS adjudicator who is working on your case accepts your new EVL and approves your case you are good to go, but for some reason the adjudicator keeps sending more RFE then you will need someone who can answer them in a legal language and thats where attorney services comes in handy.
I am hoping for the best for you that once they see your new EVL, they are satisfied and sends you GC.
2011 Super Babe: Gemma Arterton
rajeev_74
07-05 11:09 AM
Hope this helps...
Answer me this. God forbid but if you have a cancer and your brother has a malaria and you have just one doctor to treat. Would you ask doctor to treat you first since you have a bigger issue than your brother? No, right.
Dude, we all are brothers in this mess and everyone deserves to be treated fairly. I agree that core should work to eliminate BEC problem as well as any other opportunity to get any other immediate relief but core has limited resources, very limited funding plus and core needs to work on areas which fixes maximum number of lives here.
There are around 40000 people stuck in BEC and if 20% of those can join core and contribute, I'm sure that is enough number to allocate resources accordingly. But somehow people has got the wrong idea that IV is not for people stuck in BEC. I've seen similar posts in immigrationportal.com as well.
Now if IV will work for people who were eligible to file in July or even for people who just filed on Jul 2nd, i'm sure people will come and say that IV is for July 2nd people only. But that is not the case. Any issues/bill/ammendment which can bring some immediate relief should be worked along with our core issues which is retrogression. Once you are out of BEC (I hope you do asap as several of my friends stuck there), I'm sure your main issue will be retrogression and not BEC even if there are other people stuck there.
So lets not divide these communities any more, work together towards common cause that can bring some relief to our brother, sisters and ourselves. We all be benefitted if we all support each other.
Hope you understand.
Thanks
Answer me this. God forbid but if you have a cancer and your brother has a malaria and you have just one doctor to treat. Would you ask doctor to treat you first since you have a bigger issue than your brother? No, right.
Dude, we all are brothers in this mess and everyone deserves to be treated fairly. I agree that core should work to eliminate BEC problem as well as any other opportunity to get any other immediate relief but core has limited resources, very limited funding plus and core needs to work on areas which fixes maximum number of lives here.
There are around 40000 people stuck in BEC and if 20% of those can join core and contribute, I'm sure that is enough number to allocate resources accordingly. But somehow people has got the wrong idea that IV is not for people stuck in BEC. I've seen similar posts in immigrationportal.com as well.
Now if IV will work for people who were eligible to file in July or even for people who just filed on Jul 2nd, i'm sure people will come and say that IV is for July 2nd people only. But that is not the case. Any issues/bill/ammendment which can bring some immediate relief should be worked along with our core issues which is retrogression. Once you are out of BEC (I hope you do asap as several of my friends stuck there), I'm sure your main issue will be retrogression and not BEC even if there are other people stuck there.
So lets not divide these communities any more, work together towards common cause that can bring some relief to our brother, sisters and ourselves. We all be benefitted if we all support each other.
Hope you understand.
Thanks
more...
neelu
12-13 01:01 PM
All , this subject has been raised very often and every time new members join in they start a thread and start questioning it.
- IV has indepth explored and studied this option and have found that this change is not possible administratively.
- we have not just met a lawyer. we have met few lawyers. we also have communicated with USCIS in the past.
- In the past some administrative changes have been done by USCIS, but this change cannot be done by them. All, we already had this idea long long ago and we also thought that why dont we do it if it so simple and then we dont have to go through all the legislative hurdles. But NO it cannot be done by USCIS.
- Faxing USCIS will not work. USCIS does not take policy decisions. We need to approach policy makers to get it done and that is what we are doing. By coming up with ideas, endlessly discussing despite explaination by IV and not working with IV action items we will all go in divergent directions and lose focus on the main action items we want each every member should focus. If you really feel for some idea and want to help, instead of asking IV to give explanation to every question on the forum, contact any of the active IV core members on the forum and bounce ideas. We need people with ideas and also same people willing to work on them too.
- If it was possible to get it done administratively, then in the current Skil bill push we would have/ and lawmakers would also have just asked USCIS to implement it.
Hope this explains this topic. Thanks
Our dear Pappu,
I understand how difficult it must be to respond to so many questions directed towards core members, and can understand how frustrating it can be to answer repetitive questions.
So thanks for clarifying this again for many of us who thought an easy route was available (but half knew that it was there, it would have been taken).
But can I please add that if this question has been asked repetitively, I think it warrants to be added to the "The Employment-Based Green Card: Process and Problems" section on the home page, so people can find the answer easily that searching our huge forum database. I understand that each of you are very busy and feel bad that I am adding additional work.
Thank you.
Neelu
- IV has indepth explored and studied this option and have found that this change is not possible administratively.
- we have not just met a lawyer. we have met few lawyers. we also have communicated with USCIS in the past.
- In the past some administrative changes have been done by USCIS, but this change cannot be done by them. All, we already had this idea long long ago and we also thought that why dont we do it if it so simple and then we dont have to go through all the legislative hurdles. But NO it cannot be done by USCIS.
- Faxing USCIS will not work. USCIS does not take policy decisions. We need to approach policy makers to get it done and that is what we are doing. By coming up with ideas, endlessly discussing despite explaination by IV and not working with IV action items we will all go in divergent directions and lose focus on the main action items we want each every member should focus. If you really feel for some idea and want to help, instead of asking IV to give explanation to every question on the forum, contact any of the active IV core members on the forum and bounce ideas. We need people with ideas and also same people willing to work on them too.
- If it was possible to get it done administratively, then in the current Skil bill push we would have/ and lawmakers would also have just asked USCIS to implement it.
Hope this explains this topic. Thanks
Our dear Pappu,
I understand how difficult it must be to respond to so many questions directed towards core members, and can understand how frustrating it can be to answer repetitive questions.
So thanks for clarifying this again for many of us who thought an easy route was available (but half knew that it was there, it would have been taken).
But can I please add that if this question has been asked repetitively, I think it warrants to be added to the "The Employment-Based Green Card: Process and Problems" section on the home page, so people can find the answer easily that searching our huge forum database. I understand that each of you are very busy and feel bad that I am adding additional work.
Thank you.
Neelu
pappu
01-16 10:17 AM
All pls update your profile information wth your full details so that IV may contact you whenever needed. We had several hundred bounced emails today when we sent out our first round of newsletter for this drive.
more...
GreenLantern
02-15 06:52 PM
Anybody want to post what they have so far? Please?
2010 Gemma Arterton as Tamina
desi3933
02-11 07:03 PM
Dude,
Calm down, PresidenO gave you good comment and you got carried away thinking that President Obama praise you. Just vent your frustration somewhere else.
PresidentO,
I saw your past comment and it seems like you have an Attitude problem.
If something your are not agree or disagree that's fine but there is now way to go this far.
Great!!
Now you have come down to personal attacks while conveniently chosen not to reply to this. Did you read that pdf document and if so, show me where you see 13,000 unused numbers?
Go for facts, not for fictional stories.
Read this
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY08-AR-TableV.pdf
and tell us, where do you see 13,000 unused numbers?
Calm down, PresidenO gave you good comment and you got carried away thinking that President Obama praise you. Just vent your frustration somewhere else.
PresidentO,
I saw your past comment and it seems like you have an Attitude problem.
If something your are not agree or disagree that's fine but there is now way to go this far.
Great!!
Now you have come down to personal attacks while conveniently chosen not to reply to this. Did you read that pdf document and if so, show me where you see 13,000 unused numbers?
Go for facts, not for fictional stories.
Read this
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY08-AR-TableV.pdf
and tell us, where do you see 13,000 unused numbers?
more...
nlssubbu
09-24 01:55 PM
check with your attorney if a birth certificate issued by the consulate is ok
They provide it based on the passport - and then you may attach an affidavit
I do not think that USCIS accept the birth certificate provided by Consulate. You may either get an affidavit or can get a copy of the certificate truly attested from your birth place based on your birth records. If you do not have a birth certificate, you may also need a NC (No Certificate) from your local authority as a proof along with the affidavit.
They provide it based on the passport - and then you may attach an affidavit
I do not think that USCIS accept the birth certificate provided by Consulate. You may either get an affidavit or can get a copy of the certificate truly attested from your birth place based on your birth records. If you do not have a birth certificate, you may also need a NC (No Certificate) from your local authority as a proof along with the affidavit.
hair Clash of the Titans star Gemma
realizeit
10-17 03:25 PM
This is a very important effort, I guess.
I believe, this will help all of us to understand where we all stand. I will try to send this request as soon as possible.
I believe, this will help all of us to understand where we all stand. I will try to send this request as soon as possible.
more...
xela
03-12 07:56 AM
As far as dates for India goes, its out. Bulletin on USCIS website will have details for all other countries as well which doesn't matter much to us...
How sweet of you, but guess what it does matter to some people, like me.
What I do not understand is how EB3 row only moves so little because there isnt a lot of people left before 2005. Anyone have an answer for that?
But I hope things will eventually improve for all of us!
How sweet of you, but guess what it does matter to some people, like me.
What I do not understand is how EB3 row only moves so little because there isnt a lot of people left before 2005. Anyone have an answer for that?
But I hope things will eventually improve for all of us!
hot Prince of Persia: The Sands of
shamu
01-17 02:10 AM
............
I got my priorities set now & believe me getting a GC has become my last priority ...................
And tomorrow the day starts again with a snooze ahwwwww…
I read your story (every line and every word) and portray my self in that but few small changes.
Very recently even I have learn't that GC is important, but not that important than your life, kids, parents,...
but I would certainly pray for you to get a job ASAP. I know the pain.
I got my priorities set now & believe me getting a GC has become my last priority ...................
And tomorrow the day starts again with a snooze ahwwwww…
I read your story (every line and every word) and portray my self in that but few small changes.
Very recently even I have learn't that GC is important, but not that important than your life, kids, parents,...
but I would certainly pray for you to get a job ASAP. I know the pain.
more...
house Jake Gyllenhaal (Prince
serg
07-16 09:25 PM
As someone told, webfaxes/emails do not have big influence/impact, why we can't just send regular mails? Guys, we spent $20-$40 each on flower campaign, why we can't spend 39c to send a letter?
tattoo 05/17/2010 - Gemma Arterton
wizkid732
07-29 03:42 PM
Never been in a dire situation??
August 10th 2010 it will be 15 years in this country (Masters 95), so been there done and seen that, so stop cribbing and stop being a cry baby
poor sod! ???? No Comment :-)
@wizkid...Nice job!! Go on and pile it on the poor sod!
You had already made your point in your initial post to this thread so why rub it in? Is it because you never have faced such a dire situation... if you cannot offer anything constructive atleast shut your trap, don't be such a jerk and let the guy vent!
@uma...I can understand your frustration at this point. Is staying and working in the US very important to you? If so, you can try to workout a solution with your employer where you can work for them in a different country for 1 year and then maybe come back with a new 6 year H1 time. If the economy gets better (and hoping it would), you can perhaps negotiate with them to restart your GC process or at that stage move to another employer. I ask you to think ahead with calm and logic. You will find a solution which you will be happy with in future.
I wish you all the best and Take care!
August 10th 2010 it will be 15 years in this country (Masters 95), so been there done and seen that, so stop cribbing and stop being a cry baby
poor sod! ???? No Comment :-)
@wizkid...Nice job!! Go on and pile it on the poor sod!
You had already made your point in your initial post to this thread so why rub it in? Is it because you never have faced such a dire situation... if you cannot offer anything constructive atleast shut your trap, don't be such a jerk and let the guy vent!
@uma...I can understand your frustration at this point. Is staying and working in the US very important to you? If so, you can try to workout a solution with your employer where you can work for them in a different country for 1 year and then maybe come back with a new 6 year H1 time. If the economy gets better (and hoping it would), you can perhaps negotiate with them to restart your GC process or at that stage move to another employer. I ask you to think ahead with calm and logic. You will find a solution which you will be happy with in future.
I wish you all the best and Take care!
more...
pictures to be Gemma Arterton (as
abc
11-20 11:40 AM
5+ yrs, no promotion, pennies as salary hike(once reduced in 2001).
I have decided to break this GC CHAKRAVYUHU.
I have decided to break this GC CHAKRAVYUHU.
dresses GEMMA Arterton has revealed
Googler
02-20 02:54 PM
I'd posted elsewhere about my Feb 13, 2008 conversation with the DOS official who sets cutoff dates:
And then there this piece of info from Ron Gotcher posted on Feb 14, 2008
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4285
"Last night, at a meeting of the American Immigration Lawyer's Assocation Southern California chapter, Charles Oppenheim spoke. Mr. Oppenheim is the officer within the Visa Office tasked with calculating visa bulletin cutoff dates each month. He offered the following thoughts as to cutoff date movement in the upcoming months:
In April, India and China EB2 will be set at 12/01/2003
EB3 for India and China will slow down for the rest of the fiscal year."
I am riveted by this because I spoke to Oppenheim just the day before this meeting (he referred to it). This was the conversation in which he told me that at present EB-2 India would only get numbers leftover from EB-1 India -- the problem is he doesn't know either exactly how many EB-2 India adjudicated applications there are in any specific PD range -- so every month he makes wild guesses, with the intent of using up visas. So I guess at least as of 2/14/08 he thought moving the date to 12/1/03 would more than mop up whatever was leftover from EB-1 India. Given the end of the FBI boondoggle (the effects of which have not been quantified by Oppenheim or USCIS) I'd predict that even a date in early 2002 would be good enough to mop up. Let us see if he changes his mind by mid March.
But his statement at the AILA meeting has been bothering me so I talked to him again today. Here is what he said -- that he is considering not only the EB-1 India excess, but the entire EB-1 worldwide excess being given to oversubscribed EB-2! I asked him about his earlier statement and he said that he had had a chance to look at the numbers and determine that unlike recent years EB-1 worldwide is not using numbers up at a rate that would max out EB-1 usage. BUT. He is waiting for USCIS to give him an estimate of the number of EB-2 India applications that would become eligible if he moves the cutoff dates up to 12/1/03, he will set the date ONLY after he gets that data and determines that there won't be too many within that cutoff date.
I also asked him to confirm that he was relying on his interpretation of Section 202(a)(5) (http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe) of the INA in order to proceed with this spillover. This is his current interpretation of that section -- spillover from EB-1 to EB-2 IF there appears to be a worldwide excess in EB-1, when there is no worldwide excess in EB-1 then country specific spillover for example, from EB-1 India to EB-2 India only etc. In past years like FY06, EB-1 ROW was looking maxed out, so barely any spillover from EB-1 to oversubscribed EB-2.
And then there this piece of info from Ron Gotcher posted on Feb 14, 2008
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4285
"Last night, at a meeting of the American Immigration Lawyer's Assocation Southern California chapter, Charles Oppenheim spoke. Mr. Oppenheim is the officer within the Visa Office tasked with calculating visa bulletin cutoff dates each month. He offered the following thoughts as to cutoff date movement in the upcoming months:
In April, India and China EB2 will be set at 12/01/2003
EB3 for India and China will slow down for the rest of the fiscal year."
I am riveted by this because I spoke to Oppenheim just the day before this meeting (he referred to it). This was the conversation in which he told me that at present EB-2 India would only get numbers leftover from EB-1 India -- the problem is he doesn't know either exactly how many EB-2 India adjudicated applications there are in any specific PD range -- so every month he makes wild guesses, with the intent of using up visas. So I guess at least as of 2/14/08 he thought moving the date to 12/1/03 would more than mop up whatever was leftover from EB-1 India. Given the end of the FBI boondoggle (the effects of which have not been quantified by Oppenheim or USCIS) I'd predict that even a date in early 2002 would be good enough to mop up. Let us see if he changes his mind by mid March.
But his statement at the AILA meeting has been bothering me so I talked to him again today. Here is what he said -- that he is considering not only the EB-1 India excess, but the entire EB-1 worldwide excess being given to oversubscribed EB-2! I asked him about his earlier statement and he said that he had had a chance to look at the numbers and determine that unlike recent years EB-1 worldwide is not using numbers up at a rate that would max out EB-1 usage. BUT. He is waiting for USCIS to give him an estimate of the number of EB-2 India applications that would become eligible if he moves the cutoff dates up to 12/1/03, he will set the date ONLY after he gets that data and determines that there won't be too many within that cutoff date.
I also asked him to confirm that he was relying on his interpretation of Section 202(a)(5) (http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe) of the INA in order to proceed with this spillover. This is his current interpretation of that section -- spillover from EB-1 to EB-2 IF there appears to be a worldwide excess in EB-1, when there is no worldwide excess in EB-1 then country specific spillover for example, from EB-1 India to EB-2 India only etc. In past years like FY06, EB-1 ROW was looking maxed out, so barely any spillover from EB-1 to oversubscribed EB-2.
more...
makeup Gemma Arterton in CHANEL
BharatPremi
09-19 10:27 PM
Probably, Keeping job (at least 6 month to ride wave) is much more important then GC. Smartest people in the world (on wall street) doomed us !!!
Now they are saying "Smartness" is a relative term.:)
Now they are saying "Smartness" is a relative term.:)
girlfriend actress Gemma Arterton has
GooblyWoobly
03-20 02:09 PM
I have no idea why u guys get riled up about EB3->EB2 conversion? It's Not your Ration line FIFO. Are you trying to say someone who has 10 years of experience (5 years in the last company, so EB3) stands to get GC AFTER someone with no experience but a MS? There are many other loopholes through which EB3's can fall through. Just because you are frustrated with the wait, don't take it out on someone who is also on the same boat.
Also your assumption of "Reputed companies don't do EB3->EB2" is outright wrong. I work for one of the most reputed companies in the valley, and they do it on a selective basis (read, if you're good enough, they'll do it for you).
Remember this, someone can move to EB2 only if he qualifies to. It's not that you can just jump boat with no qualification. And if someone qualifies, I don't see why he/she should stay back!!
I'm a original EB2 filer (no EB3->EB2 conversion) and not a LC transfer. EB3->EB2 increases timeline for getting my GC. But I do not believe that's wrong.
Each one to his own!! My 2c.
Hi Coopheal:
With Due respects to your Seniority and Agony/ Frustration being retrogessed.
Standard Companies donot opt for having two I140s approved for a particular employees which is a "Logical Fallacy" of EB concept. Leave alone Rat Desi Companies.. They can do anything and turn the boards off..
If your arguement is right: first you have to stop L1s getting Gcs in less than 10 months.. (on an average). Porting EB3 to Eb2 is a big junk and disrepct to the EB2 Qualifier. Now, Qualifying Eb2, if you feel, is not a big deal, why the companies did not preferred it out for Eb3s in first place because lack of Job Requirements. (infact, this portings have to be highlighted to USCIS as Junk technique and illegal).
So the whole arguement doesnot workout. Soon, wait and see Portings would bestopped, with Desi companies messing itaround like Approved labors (infact, it isa refined version of approved labor scams).
Please donot jump on me.. its a waste of time.. But the logic holds good EB2 Vs. EB3. If allowed, People may even qualify for EB1, (People would work it out also sooner or later) Let's respect each other profiles.. and its a matter of time we are all there.
This is my Honest Advice.. Trust me. I am a 2003 eb3 victim.. No way to jump lines.. its inhuman.
Thanks,
Also your assumption of "Reputed companies don't do EB3->EB2" is outright wrong. I work for one of the most reputed companies in the valley, and they do it on a selective basis (read, if you're good enough, they'll do it for you).
Remember this, someone can move to EB2 only if he qualifies to. It's not that you can just jump boat with no qualification. And if someone qualifies, I don't see why he/she should stay back!!
I'm a original EB2 filer (no EB3->EB2 conversion) and not a LC transfer. EB3->EB2 increases timeline for getting my GC. But I do not believe that's wrong.
Each one to his own!! My 2c.
Hi Coopheal:
With Due respects to your Seniority and Agony/ Frustration being retrogessed.
Standard Companies donot opt for having two I140s approved for a particular employees which is a "Logical Fallacy" of EB concept. Leave alone Rat Desi Companies.. They can do anything and turn the boards off..
If your arguement is right: first you have to stop L1s getting Gcs in less than 10 months.. (on an average). Porting EB3 to Eb2 is a big junk and disrepct to the EB2 Qualifier. Now, Qualifying Eb2, if you feel, is not a big deal, why the companies did not preferred it out for Eb3s in first place because lack of Job Requirements. (infact, this portings have to be highlighted to USCIS as Junk technique and illegal).
So the whole arguement doesnot workout. Soon, wait and see Portings would bestopped, with Desi companies messing itaround like Approved labors (infact, it isa refined version of approved labor scams).
Please donot jump on me.. its a waste of time.. But the logic holds good EB2 Vs. EB3. If allowed, People may even qualify for EB1, (People would work it out also sooner or later) Let's respect each other profiles.. and its a matter of time we are all there.
This is my Honest Advice.. Trust me. I am a 2003 eb3 victim.. No way to jump lines.. its inhuman.
Thanks,
hairstyles Bond girl Gemma Arterton
amitjoey
02-15 02:20 PM
I don\'t want to stand in line three times longer just because 60 percent of the applicants are natives of one country. Look what\'s going on with H-1B. There is no per-country quota and ROW is simply screwed.
How is ROW getting screwed?. Look at the situation as individuals applying irrespective of country of birth. Last Year, there were 120,000(approx) applicants and only 60,000(approx) H1-b1 visas. NOW: It just happens that a lot or 60%were natives of one country. But that does not mean anything... There could be more ROW applicants who could apply, no body is stopping them. There are just not enough ROW applicants that employers can find.
Also remember countries like India, China do not qualify for diversity visas. So an ROW applicant also has that advantage. Most people from small african countries and others qualify to apply there. China, India, Phillipines, Mexico are also backlogged in the family category. ROW has that advantage too.
How is ROW getting screwed?. Look at the situation as individuals applying irrespective of country of birth. Last Year, there were 120,000(approx) applicants and only 60,000(approx) H1-b1 visas. NOW: It just happens that a lot or 60%were natives of one country. But that does not mean anything... There could be more ROW applicants who could apply, no body is stopping them. There are just not enough ROW applicants that employers can find.
Also remember countries like India, China do not qualify for diversity visas. So an ROW applicant also has that advantage. Most people from small african countries and others qualify to apply there. China, India, Phillipines, Mexico are also backlogged in the family category. ROW has that advantage too.
actaccord
03-01 04:02 PM
.....
webm
03-19 11:39 AM
I called USCIS this morning and the lady took 3 mnute to explain me why the delay was happening. She mentioned that they will conduct a sweep on Fri Apr 4th to determine the I-485 cases in light of new visa bulletin and that cases will be assigned to IOs by Mon Apr 14th.
Not that I believe on help desk type of info with their primary job is get the caller off the phone but I have to admit that she was polite.
I will call again on Apr 4th and keep the forum updated.
Thanks for the update!! dude...
Not that I believe on help desk type of info with their primary job is get the caller off the phone but I have to admit that she was polite.
I will call again on Apr 4th and keep the forum updated.
Thanks for the update!! dude...
