diptam
07-04 12:07 AM
Agreed !!
These days i'm driving back from work instead of taking the Train/subway because my client location changed and i built this habit of listening to
Talk radio by guys like Howie Carr , Michael Savage etc.. ( WRKO 680 at Boston) and they really influence Public decision....
They were beating the s*** out of Bush, Ted kennedy because of CIR ( atleast verbally ) and calls after calls were coming from local american Public...
But our story may not be very interesting for Locals - so talk radio probably won't take it up as a Topic ???
Yeah seriously. Do you know that a lot of talk shows and their hosts have played a significant role in pulling CIR down? If they can do it, we can do it too. Go ahead and digg the stories
These days i'm driving back from work instead of taking the Train/subway because my client location changed and i built this habit of listening to
Talk radio by guys like Howie Carr , Michael Savage etc.. ( WRKO 680 at Boston) and they really influence Public decision....
They were beating the s*** out of Bush, Ted kennedy because of CIR ( atleast verbally ) and calls after calls were coming from local american Public...
But our story may not be very interesting for Locals - so talk radio probably won't take it up as a Topic ???
Yeah seriously. Do you know that a lot of talk shows and their hosts have played a significant role in pulling CIR down? If they can do it, we can do it too. Go ahead and digg the stories
wallpaper webby awards logo.
amsgc
12-13 10:40 PM
I advocate talking to policymakers, writing to them, and calling in on any talkshow on the radio/tv - where ever there is an opportunity.
I am not sure if we can challenge the legality of the system. However, I do question the motivation behind this policy. It is morally and ethically wrong and does not make any economic sense. It is probably hurting the economy, if you get my drift. My thought is that it can be adressed by enlightening the very people who put this policy in place - the congressmen/women.
Welcome to the board... we are just analyzing which way to fight is better. Mark is saying lobbying is the only way, some other say exploring to challenge in court worth a try...some say not worth it-forget it. Have your opinion pitch in please.:)
I am not sure if we can challenge the legality of the system. However, I do question the motivation behind this policy. It is morally and ethically wrong and does not make any economic sense. It is probably hurting the economy, if you get my drift. My thought is that it can be adressed by enlightening the very people who put this policy in place - the congressmen/women.
Welcome to the board... we are just analyzing which way to fight is better. Mark is saying lobbying is the only way, some other say exploring to challenge in court worth a try...some say not worth it-forget it. Have your opinion pitch in please.:)
whoever
02-15 11:37 AM
hey anyone know why since democrats have taken control of house, senate, they havent uttered a word on immigration? last year there was so much noise on tv regarding immigration but none at all this year. i wonder what is going on.
2011 tattoo Music Awards 2010.
sidbee
02-13 07:46 PM
I am with you guys.Read my old posts, i have been thinking on this from day one.
more...
meridiani.planum
07-30 06:31 AM
http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5766
posted 07-24 09:59 AM
Ron Gotcher has some thoughts on India E2 movement over the next two months.
More and more, I see people posting messages containing the unspoken assumption that since the Indian E2 cutoff date has moved forward, it is likely to move forward further in the coming months. This is a false hope.
Even with a cutoff date in early 2003, the CIS has sufficient inventory of Indian E2 adjustments on file to use up the remaining inventory of E2 visas for this fiscal year. The reason that the Visa Office advanced the priority date is to move it up to the point where overseas consular posts can take up the slack left by the CIS's inability to close out enough cases and avoid wasting visas this year.
The CIS inventory of pending cases is massive. If there were no quota at all - if everyone were suddenly "current" - and no new cases were filed after today, it would still take the CIS four to five years to close out all of the pending cases that they already have in their inventory.
Overseas consular posts maintain inventories of cases as well. When the priority date for a particular case starts to edge forward and it appears that the applicant may become "current' in the not too distant future, the applicant is told to submit all required supporting documents to the post or the NVC. When this is done, the applicant is reported to the Visa Office as being "documentarily qualified." This means that the case is in a position where an immigrant visa can be issued to the applicant as soon as a visa number becomes available.
The inventory of documentarily qualified cases with current priority dates at a consular post never exceeds that post's ability to process all such cases within sixty days. Consular posts have very high bandwidth processing capabilities. No matter how many cases become current, they are able to process all of them within sixty days.
The reason that the Indian E2 cutoff date has moved forward is that the Visa Office fears that the CIS will not be able to adjudicate enough adjustment of status applications to exhaust the annual quota. They have advanced the cutoff date in order to make more cases overseas eligible for final processing.
This means that overseas consular posts have exhausted their inventories of Indian E2 cases with priority dates earlier than 2006 and the Visa Office had to move the cutoff date forward in order to make more cases eligible to be closed out.
This does not mean that the CIS has closed out all of the pre-2006 cases pending in their inventory. Far from it. When the new fiscal year starts, Indian E2 is likely to retrogress back to late 2002 or early 2003. This is roughly the point reached by the CIS in processing their inventory of pending cases.
Please understand that this is a temporary phenomenon and due entirely to the difference in the processing capabilities of the CIS and the overseas consular posts.
I hope this clarifies matters.
Ron Gotcher
this makes no sense (with all due respect to Mr Gotcher). He basically claims that PD has been moved to allow CP cases to be processed faster to avoid visa number wastage.. However he also says that there is a huge backlog of AOS cases. Looking at how many CP cases are being called for interview in mumbai and delhi (low hundreds) I dont see how CP alone can help avoid a big wastage of visas. If USCIS is still 20k short, then its the massive pile of AOS cases they should be using, just like they did last year.
Also, if they waste visa numbers this year, it would be really gross incompetence. EB2-India has gone all the way from 2000 to 2006 this year. They slack off at the start of the year, then scramble in the end. I dont know why they follow this approach knowing full well that right at the end it puts them in a soup.
posted 07-24 09:59 AM
Ron Gotcher has some thoughts on India E2 movement over the next two months.
More and more, I see people posting messages containing the unspoken assumption that since the Indian E2 cutoff date has moved forward, it is likely to move forward further in the coming months. This is a false hope.
Even with a cutoff date in early 2003, the CIS has sufficient inventory of Indian E2 adjustments on file to use up the remaining inventory of E2 visas for this fiscal year. The reason that the Visa Office advanced the priority date is to move it up to the point where overseas consular posts can take up the slack left by the CIS's inability to close out enough cases and avoid wasting visas this year.
The CIS inventory of pending cases is massive. If there were no quota at all - if everyone were suddenly "current" - and no new cases were filed after today, it would still take the CIS four to five years to close out all of the pending cases that they already have in their inventory.
Overseas consular posts maintain inventories of cases as well. When the priority date for a particular case starts to edge forward and it appears that the applicant may become "current' in the not too distant future, the applicant is told to submit all required supporting documents to the post or the NVC. When this is done, the applicant is reported to the Visa Office as being "documentarily qualified." This means that the case is in a position where an immigrant visa can be issued to the applicant as soon as a visa number becomes available.
The inventory of documentarily qualified cases with current priority dates at a consular post never exceeds that post's ability to process all such cases within sixty days. Consular posts have very high bandwidth processing capabilities. No matter how many cases become current, they are able to process all of them within sixty days.
The reason that the Indian E2 cutoff date has moved forward is that the Visa Office fears that the CIS will not be able to adjudicate enough adjustment of status applications to exhaust the annual quota. They have advanced the cutoff date in order to make more cases overseas eligible for final processing.
This means that overseas consular posts have exhausted their inventories of Indian E2 cases with priority dates earlier than 2006 and the Visa Office had to move the cutoff date forward in order to make more cases eligible to be closed out.
This does not mean that the CIS has closed out all of the pre-2006 cases pending in their inventory. Far from it. When the new fiscal year starts, Indian E2 is likely to retrogress back to late 2002 or early 2003. This is roughly the point reached by the CIS in processing their inventory of pending cases.
Please understand that this is a temporary phenomenon and due entirely to the difference in the processing capabilities of the CIS and the overseas consular posts.
I hope this clarifies matters.
Ron Gotcher
this makes no sense (with all due respect to Mr Gotcher). He basically claims that PD has been moved to allow CP cases to be processed faster to avoid visa number wastage.. However he also says that there is a huge backlog of AOS cases. Looking at how many CP cases are being called for interview in mumbai and delhi (low hundreds) I dont see how CP alone can help avoid a big wastage of visas. If USCIS is still 20k short, then its the massive pile of AOS cases they should be using, just like they did last year.
Also, if they waste visa numbers this year, it would be really gross incompetence. EB2-India has gone all the way from 2000 to 2006 this year. They slack off at the start of the year, then scramble in the end. I dont know why they follow this approach knowing full well that right at the end it puts them in a soup.
waitingmygc
01-13 10:56 PM
Is this Memorandom final?
If yes, then the options for them whose employer is consulting company and the employer is not direct vendor to the client are as follows:
1. If status is H1B, then join direct client of the employer or switch employer having projects with direct clients.
2. If maintaing H1B status and also have EAD, then switch to EAD ASAP because this Memorandom is for H1B (renewal/extension or Change).
If yes, then the options for them whose employer is consulting company and the employer is not direct vendor to the client are as follows:
1. If status is H1B, then join direct client of the employer or switch employer having projects with direct clients.
2. If maintaing H1B status and also have EAD, then switch to EAD ASAP because this Memorandom is for H1B (renewal/extension or Change).
more...
rajsenthil
05-02 05:20 PM
You are talking about Sinhala... LOL... Have you ever been to chennai? Look at the Black paint on Hindi letters on Government boards!:D
It is far far better than where in some states, North Indian people are kicked and thrown out. This NEVER happed in TN. May be some arrogant people like you make it happen.
It is far far better than where in some states, North Indian people are kicked and thrown out. This NEVER happed in TN. May be some arrogant people like you make it happen.
2010 the webby awards logo. webby
fairman
08-15 10:47 PM
I believe visitors get finger printed and photographed . Isn't that in the system ?
If they felt suspicious on this 'khan' they should have pulled the records from computer .
Dealing with USCIS ( and the service center Information Officers ) , they are either arrogrant or idiots. They also hate computers.
If they felt suspicious on this 'khan' they should have pulled the records from computer .
Dealing with USCIS ( and the service center Information Officers ) , they are either arrogrant or idiots. They also hate computers.
more...
snathan
01-22 05:40 PM
Wow, you have a great suggestion for him, I am sure he took your suggestion and did the right thing, do you have a similar suggestion regarding immigration to Obama ?, if so you better let him know what you think, you seem very open minded about giving suggestions.
Please read all his post first and you will understand the reason for this comment.
Please read all his post first and you will understand the reason for this comment.
hair 15th webby awards logo
unitednations
02-14 04:00 PM
The entire discussion by EB3-ROW guys want to preserve those recaptured unused numbers in 2000 only for EB3-ROW for ever. As I mentioned earlier, the purpose of that recapture is to eliminate backlog in 1999. India and China were only the two countries backlogged at that point. USCIS could do that job only in 2005. You guys want a controlled allocation of recaptured numbers for years and years with the simple intension of EB3-ROW always should be current. I understand that urge. However, you guys forget the reality. EB3 demand is huge due to 245i. The real demand for EB2 always very less. (The real demand for EB2 is when EB3 were current). Now everyone is going to EB2. I feel that is the reason why EB2-India and China getting penalized as DOS took the law in their own hand. Now EB2 guys are victimized. Do not blame India and China took more numbers. The real fact is EB3-ROW is enjoying with the expense of EB2.
Furthermore all this mess is due cumulative results allowing 245i without increasing visa numbers (this is major one), failure of DOL in processing LC in time, USCIS inefficiency, dealy in processing 485 due to 911, abuse in labor substitution, abuse of massive filing of GC by body shoppers with out a bonafide permanent positions or ability to pay, opening a firms in fast labor processing states just to file GC etc. The list for this mess is end less. No one wants to fix that. If they fix everything, there will be less demand for EB3 visas. Furthermore some thing can not be fixed. One can not request/litigate DOL or USCIS to process the LC or 485 fast. Therefore, everyone in EB3 has to wait. Other option is to educate the law makers the problems due to this mess to fix those. Everyone wants CIR/SKIL bill and no one wants to fix the current system and abuse. So, one has to wait, wait, wait..
I have come across many people in the last few years from all sorts of countries. Russian, Korean, African, British, Brazilian, Colombian, etc,; although everyone wants their greencards yesterday; it appears to me that the indian nationals are the most hungry for it. It is a generalization but I am just speaking from my experience on this.
How do you know what the "intention" was of the lawmakers that recaptured visas are supposed to go to the retrogressed countries. If that was the case they would have gotten rid of the 7% limitation along with the recapture.
Most people who come on h-1b are Chines and indian. There was also close to 200,000 visitor visas approved in 2005 from India. Makes sense because there is a lot of population there. However; it would be short sited to think that there are minimal 245i applicants from India. There actually is a very large number of them. The biggest status violators are people who come on visitor visas from non visa waiver countries. The status violators either get greencard through marriage or through 245i.
Although as a business person I look at skill rather then nationality; I do know enough about immigration that there is a good purpose behind country limits. Foreign nationals will prefer their own people for h-1b; they will look for their friends, cousins, brothers, sisters, wives, relatives, etc. and bring their own country people here. Therefore, it is not an "open market" on skill people from all parts of the world. The country quota is the equalizer because of this.
The cultural aspect of south asians is also hurting retrogression. Most people who come here on H-1b are out of school and generally single. People from non south asian countries or muslim countries will find their spouse here. However, someone on h-1b from south asian country or muslim country will get arranged marriage after being here for 4 to 6 years and then spouse gets counted against the quota at the expense of a skilled worker who may have had a later date. I a m not saying this is wrong because it is a cultural issue but is confined to certain countries.
Regarding eb2 and eb3. This is also something that is quite comical. This is an area where immigration law hasn't kept up business practices. Pre H-1b you got greencard upon initial entry into USA. Department of labor rules were that you couldn't use the experience gained by your sponsor. It was never envisioned that people would come here on h-1b and hop/skip between employers. It has caused an end run around what the DOL rules were supposed to be. You shouldn't be able to gain experience in USA and then use that unfair advantage to knock out an american for that job. EB2 and EB3 differentiation would go away if you couldn't use the experience gained in USA. Just about everyone would be in eb3. Anyone who is here on h-1b generally already has or will have 5 years of experience and can go right to eb2.
People who are working at companies which aren't dominated by immigrants would have a difficult time satisfying themselves that the job requires a bachelors degree plus five years or masters degree. However; if you work at a staffing company you go straight to eb2 because that is what is needed to keep you there (remember, it is supposed to be the minimum requirements for the job). If software engineer or programmer analyst minimum requirement is masters or bachelors plus five then company is saying that is the "minimum" job requirements. However, if it is the "minimum" requirements then how are companies getting people here on h-1b who only have a bachelors degree?
Although people like to say "immigration system is broken" it can mean two things. From greencard wannabes; it is too much red tape, not friendly enough, etc. From other side it is broken because it is not being used as its intended purpose. You can mark my words that if/when rules are relaxed on h-1b or quota; you will see a whole bunch of enforcement with it. It actually is already happening at the consulates; department of labor and revocations of 140's by companies who are sponsoring too many people.
Furthermore all this mess is due cumulative results allowing 245i without increasing visa numbers (this is major one), failure of DOL in processing LC in time, USCIS inefficiency, dealy in processing 485 due to 911, abuse in labor substitution, abuse of massive filing of GC by body shoppers with out a bonafide permanent positions or ability to pay, opening a firms in fast labor processing states just to file GC etc. The list for this mess is end less. No one wants to fix that. If they fix everything, there will be less demand for EB3 visas. Furthermore some thing can not be fixed. One can not request/litigate DOL or USCIS to process the LC or 485 fast. Therefore, everyone in EB3 has to wait. Other option is to educate the law makers the problems due to this mess to fix those. Everyone wants CIR/SKIL bill and no one wants to fix the current system and abuse. So, one has to wait, wait, wait..
I have come across many people in the last few years from all sorts of countries. Russian, Korean, African, British, Brazilian, Colombian, etc,; although everyone wants their greencards yesterday; it appears to me that the indian nationals are the most hungry for it. It is a generalization but I am just speaking from my experience on this.
How do you know what the "intention" was of the lawmakers that recaptured visas are supposed to go to the retrogressed countries. If that was the case they would have gotten rid of the 7% limitation along with the recapture.
Most people who come on h-1b are Chines and indian. There was also close to 200,000 visitor visas approved in 2005 from India. Makes sense because there is a lot of population there. However; it would be short sited to think that there are minimal 245i applicants from India. There actually is a very large number of them. The biggest status violators are people who come on visitor visas from non visa waiver countries. The status violators either get greencard through marriage or through 245i.
Although as a business person I look at skill rather then nationality; I do know enough about immigration that there is a good purpose behind country limits. Foreign nationals will prefer their own people for h-1b; they will look for their friends, cousins, brothers, sisters, wives, relatives, etc. and bring their own country people here. Therefore, it is not an "open market" on skill people from all parts of the world. The country quota is the equalizer because of this.
The cultural aspect of south asians is also hurting retrogression. Most people who come here on H-1b are out of school and generally single. People from non south asian countries or muslim countries will find their spouse here. However, someone on h-1b from south asian country or muslim country will get arranged marriage after being here for 4 to 6 years and then spouse gets counted against the quota at the expense of a skilled worker who may have had a later date. I a m not saying this is wrong because it is a cultural issue but is confined to certain countries.
Regarding eb2 and eb3. This is also something that is quite comical. This is an area where immigration law hasn't kept up business practices. Pre H-1b you got greencard upon initial entry into USA. Department of labor rules were that you couldn't use the experience gained by your sponsor. It was never envisioned that people would come here on h-1b and hop/skip between employers. It has caused an end run around what the DOL rules were supposed to be. You shouldn't be able to gain experience in USA and then use that unfair advantage to knock out an american for that job. EB2 and EB3 differentiation would go away if you couldn't use the experience gained in USA. Just about everyone would be in eb3. Anyone who is here on h-1b generally already has or will have 5 years of experience and can go right to eb2.
People who are working at companies which aren't dominated by immigrants would have a difficult time satisfying themselves that the job requires a bachelors degree plus five years or masters degree. However; if you work at a staffing company you go straight to eb2 because that is what is needed to keep you there (remember, it is supposed to be the minimum requirements for the job). If software engineer or programmer analyst minimum requirement is masters or bachelors plus five then company is saying that is the "minimum" job requirements. However, if it is the "minimum" requirements then how are companies getting people here on h-1b who only have a bachelors degree?
Although people like to say "immigration system is broken" it can mean two things. From greencard wannabes; it is too much red tape, not friendly enough, etc. From other side it is broken because it is not being used as its intended purpose. You can mark my words that if/when rules are relaxed on h-1b or quota; you will see a whole bunch of enforcement with it. It actually is already happening at the consulates; department of labor and revocations of 140's by companies who are sponsoring too many people.
more...
raysaikat
07-14 12:10 PM
Hi,
I have an EB2 I-140 approved; PD Aug 29, 2007. The corresponding LC was filed with "Special Handling" for university teachers.
1. If I change into a non-academic job, then can the PD be retained when I refile?
2. If I go out of US for a few years (say 3-5 years) and then come back with a new job, will I be able to retain this PD when I refile?
Thanks for your time.
I have an EB2 I-140 approved; PD Aug 29, 2007. The corresponding LC was filed with "Special Handling" for university teachers.
1. If I change into a non-academic job, then can the PD be retained when I refile?
2. If I go out of US for a few years (say 3-5 years) and then come back with a new job, will I be able to retain this PD when I refile?
Thanks for your time.
hot accepts the Webby Award
vdlrao
09-17 11:01 AM
7 pages of this and I don't think there is any clear information on how many applied betweek Jan and April-1 of 2005. I saw a post somewhere where someone said Cisco alone had about 1000 applications. Now if you add dependents to it that is almost a years quota of EB2,just from Cisco!!! I think easily there are around 5000 EB2 applicants in just that time frame. My 2 cents.
When it took about 2 years spill over visas (2008 and 2009) for the EB2 India dates to move from April 2004 to Jan 2005, I am sure you could estimate how long it would take to cross a year.
When it took about 2 years spill over visas (2008 and 2009) for the EB2 India dates to move from April 2004 to Jan 2005, I am sure you could estimate how long it would take to cross a year.
more...
house images for the Webby Awards
nc14
07-03 10:44 PM
GO IV GO!!
http://digg.com/politics/Rep_Lofgren_Issues_Statement_on_Updated_Visa_Bulle tin
please DIGG
Thank you
http://digg.com/politics/Rep_Lofgren_Issues_Statement_on_Updated_Visa_Bulle tin
please DIGG
Thank you
tattoo 14th Annual Webby Awards
newtoearth
05-02 04:58 PM
...
more...
pictures the webby awards.
kuhelica2000
02-13 02:01 PM
Grupak, I am not suggesting any single country is monopolizing the foreign worker pool. Employment laws in the US are fairly non-discriminatory except the diversity in workplace or "Affarmative Action" component which prefers a minority when two candidates possess the same skills.
My comment was on someone suggesting moving ahead without the ROW participation since they only comprise 20% of the membership pool.
I don't understand this logic. We are talking about employment based GC.
Lets be clear that we are talking about people who are employed in the US and their employers have sponsored their green cards (except the EB2-NIW, EB1_EA). These people are employed because of their skill at jobs not their national origin.
Are you suggesting that somehow people of some countries have monopolized the foreign worker pool by born in the same country and NOT because of their skill.
Since we are talking about a privilege and benefit that comes from being employed in the US, you are actually suggesting that US employers should consider country of birth and not just skill in the employment.
Tell me how did the Chinese, Indian, Mexican and Filipino workers unfairly monopolized the foreign worker pool. As far as I am aware, these countries have large populations and a lot of Science and Engineering graduates happen to be from these countries.
The country cap makes sense in family based immigration system when extended beyond the immediate family members. IV is not for FB GC issues.
Again, employment in the US is based on skill not country of birth. The foreign workers are here because they are needed, and US will benefit by keeping these skilled workers long term. What IV is doing benefits all employment based GC.
My comment was on someone suggesting moving ahead without the ROW participation since they only comprise 20% of the membership pool.
I don't understand this logic. We are talking about employment based GC.
Lets be clear that we are talking about people who are employed in the US and their employers have sponsored their green cards (except the EB2-NIW, EB1_EA). These people are employed because of their skill at jobs not their national origin.
Are you suggesting that somehow people of some countries have monopolized the foreign worker pool by born in the same country and NOT because of their skill.
Since we are talking about a privilege and benefit that comes from being employed in the US, you are actually suggesting that US employers should consider country of birth and not just skill in the employment.
Tell me how did the Chinese, Indian, Mexican and Filipino workers unfairly monopolized the foreign worker pool. As far as I am aware, these countries have large populations and a lot of Science and Engineering graduates happen to be from these countries.
The country cap makes sense in family based immigration system when extended beyond the immediate family members. IV is not for FB GC issues.
Again, employment in the US is based on skill not country of birth. The foreign workers are here because they are needed, and US will benefit by keeping these skilled workers long term. What IV is doing benefits all employment based GC.
dresses 2011 13th Annual Webby Awards
Openarms
12-14 03:06 PM
It has to be fair both ways, why can not they issue employment visa on per country basis. Then there is no argument at all. So that people won't come and stuck in the black hole.
more...
makeup The 14th Annual Webby Awards
jthomas
05-29 07:18 PM
I google my name to find this
http://www.alipac.us/ftopict-153059.html
Foreign laborers break the law by collecting unemployment
Anti-immigrants have been comming to our site and collecting information about your discussion.
If you check "Job networking on IV" thread you can see the RED's (0 of 1 found the post not helpful)
Please do not fight with conflicting topics EB1 etc... We need to get with some action plan.
http://www.alipac.us/ftopict-153059.html
Foreign laborers break the law by collecting unemployment
Anti-immigrants have been comming to our site and collecting information about your discussion.
If you check "Job networking on IV" thread you can see the RED's (0 of 1 found the post not helpful)
Please do not fight with conflicting topics EB1 etc... We need to get with some action plan.
girlfriend webby awards logo. pictures At
lskreddy
04-22 06:36 PM
Check your messages Suresh. Thanks.
hairstyles the webby awards.
jayleno
07-21 02:18 PM
Chill my friend. See where it is posted.
Immigration Voice > General Information > Interesting Topics
This is a very informative topic....well unless you are a quickstar member who is proud of it.
Please for GOD SAKE understand that this is an immigration Portal.
Not a fish market where we can discuss the prices of item at different stores.
Please stop this Admin
Immigration Voice > General Information > Interesting Topics
This is a very informative topic....well unless you are a quickstar member who is proud of it.
Please for GOD SAKE understand that this is an immigration Portal.
Not a fish market where we can discuss the prices of item at different stores.
Please stop this Admin
sachug22
10-07 05:10 PM
Sachug, it is a great attempt to compare the quarterly and annual spill overs. I made rough calculations couple of weeks ago with annual spill over. However, I assumed around 25K ROW visas(both pending and new) for EB2. And assumed only aroudn 125K for AOS keeping 15K for CP. I will compile all of my assumptions and post here. Overall, my calcs estimated EB2 move to Dec 2006. By the way, I hope you took China in to consideration for spill over.
My numbers
EB1 all - 17K
EB2 ROW - 22K
EB2-I 30K
EB2-C 9K
EB3 all - 40K
EB4 all - 7K
EB5 all - 7K
CP - 8K
I am assuming zero spill over from family category and lower CP numbers (no retrogress country applicant will wait for CP and new applications are low)
My numbers
EB1 all - 17K
EB2 ROW - 22K
EB2-I 30K
EB2-C 9K
EB3 all - 40K
EB4 all - 7K
EB5 all - 7K
CP - 8K
I am assuming zero spill over from family category and lower CP numbers (no retrogress country applicant will wait for CP and new applications are low)
sumagiri
07-23 02:07 PM
that EB3 quota has been used up for this fiscal and will re-open in October only. I assume you're wondering whether some FB spill over would go to EB3. If that's the case they wouldn't have announced EB3 quota is over.
Legal, Thanks again. Also that is where exactly is the contradiction in analysis.
In my understanding, they must apply any spill over to EB3 too. EB3 gets 28.6% of total quota (Including spill overs). If some one is sure that it is not the case, please correct me.
If spill over was already applied and if EB3 will not open up again, then EB3 already got its share of spill over and EB2 also used up some part of that spill over, so only part of that spill over is left for the 2 months.
If spill over is not applied yet, then EB3 should get 28.6% of what ever is spilled over to total EB quota. Hence EB3 should open up again.
Please note that I am not making this complex. I am only pointing at complexities.
Legal, Thanks again. Also that is where exactly is the contradiction in analysis.
In my understanding, they must apply any spill over to EB3 too. EB3 gets 28.6% of total quota (Including spill overs). If some one is sure that it is not the case, please correct me.
If spill over was already applied and if EB3 will not open up again, then EB3 already got its share of spill over and EB2 also used up some part of that spill over, so only part of that spill over is left for the 2 months.
If spill over is not applied yet, then EB3 should get 28.6% of what ever is spilled over to total EB quota. Hence EB3 should open up again.
Please note that I am not making this complex. I am only pointing at complexities.
0 comments:
Post a Comment