hiralal
06-19 06:59 AM
the above post is a good explanation. I wonder if there are any ladies in the forum who can say that the article above sounds correct or if it is incorrect :D:rolleyes:
wallpaper men hairstyle ideas. men
stucklabor
03-22 04:01 PM
All, our last interpretation has been confirmed by one immigration lawyer, but we are trying to get more opinions. It looks like all EB visas will now have a hard 10% country cap.
Here is the latest interpretation of the country quotas. The loss of 202(a)(5) will definitely be a problem. I can't write any plainer than this, so if someone else wants to take a shot at explaining, please do.
Sec 202(a)(3):
(3) Exception if additional visas available. - If because of the application of paragraph (2) with respect to one or more foreign states or dependent areas, the total number of visas available under both subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who otherwise may be issued such a visa, paragraph (2) shall not apply to visas made available to such states or areas during the remainder of such calendar quarter.
Our analysis:
This paragraph clubs together EB (subsection b of Sec 203) and Family-based (subsection a of Sec 203) immigrant visas. So if there are excess visas under both in a calendar quarter, then country quotas (paragraph 2 above) do not apply. So this leaves a lot of room for creative interpretation. Under a strict reading, the country quotas would not apply only when BOTH EB and FB categories have excess visas. FB has been oversubscribed for 10+ years.
Sec 202(a)(5):
(5) 2/ RULES FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS-
(A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
Our analysis:
Excess visas in each EB category will first be given to oversubscribed countries in that same category. E.g., EB2 excess visas will be given to EB2 applicants from EB2 oversubscribed countries. If there are visas even after that, then they will spill over to the next lower EB category. This is the provision that is proposed to be stricken out.
Here is the latest interpretation of the country quotas. The loss of 202(a)(5) will definitely be a problem. I can't write any plainer than this, so if someone else wants to take a shot at explaining, please do.
Sec 202(a)(3):
(3) Exception if additional visas available. - If because of the application of paragraph (2) with respect to one or more foreign states or dependent areas, the total number of visas available under both subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who otherwise may be issued such a visa, paragraph (2) shall not apply to visas made available to such states or areas during the remainder of such calendar quarter.
Our analysis:
This paragraph clubs together EB (subsection b of Sec 203) and Family-based (subsection a of Sec 203) immigrant visas. So if there are excess visas under both in a calendar quarter, then country quotas (paragraph 2 above) do not apply. So this leaves a lot of room for creative interpretation. Under a strict reading, the country quotas would not apply only when BOTH EB and FB categories have excess visas. FB has been oversubscribed for 10+ years.
Sec 202(a)(5):
(5) 2/ RULES FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS-
(A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
Our analysis:
Excess visas in each EB category will first be given to oversubscribed countries in that same category. E.g., EB2 excess visas will be given to EB2 applicants from EB2 oversubscribed countries. If there are visas even after that, then they will spill over to the next lower EB category. This is the provision that is proposed to be stricken out.
jkays94
05-30 11:14 PM
My PD is Sept 2005 and EB3 India. With the new company I can file EB2. What will be your recommendation?
I'm not an attorney and with that necessary disclaimer out of the way in regards to not offering legal advice: The danger here is in the details of the bill. Say you move to the new company and you file your LC. And the bill passes, the problem you will face is that your I-140 will have been filed well after the date of introduction of the bill and you would have to go through the proposed merit system. Unless some miracle happens and you get the GC before the bill becomes law, then its a long shot, but life is about risks, if the bill fails then you will have wasted valuable time. I'd suggest you weigh your options carefully and if costs are not an issue, go for it. I'll also urge you to read the IV analysis of the bill which you can find on the home page.
I'm not an attorney and with that necessary disclaimer out of the way in regards to not offering legal advice: The danger here is in the details of the bill. Say you move to the new company and you file your LC. And the bill passes, the problem you will face is that your I-140 will have been filed well after the date of introduction of the bill and you would have to go through the proposed merit system. Unless some miracle happens and you get the GC before the bill becomes law, then its a long shot, but life is about risks, if the bill fails then you will have wasted valuable time. I'd suggest you weigh your options carefully and if costs are not an issue, go for it. I'll also urge you to read the IV analysis of the bill which you can find on the home page.
2011 tattoo Men long hairstyles
amitjoey
03-26 11:56 AM
I've just got all the info for setting up conference call and meeting with the lawmakers "info" kit.
Once I've digested the contents of both, I'll be setting up a call, probably early next week. Here is the IV lawmaker kit http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=53&Itemid=36
Any help on this would be appreciated, since I'm feeling a little overwhelmed with info! Volunteers for meeting people with me would also be great
I'll post to the yahoo group shortly.
Here're the details on NC_Immigration_Voice:
Group home page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NC_Immigration_Voice
Group email address: NC_Immigration_Voice@yahoogroups.com
It is our time to seize the reigns and kick start some momentum
Thanks Franklin, I got your PM. I am ready to get involved. Please PM me the documents.
Once I've digested the contents of both, I'll be setting up a call, probably early next week. Here is the IV lawmaker kit http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=53&Itemid=36
Any help on this would be appreciated, since I'm feeling a little overwhelmed with info! Volunteers for meeting people with me would also be great
I'll post to the yahoo group shortly.
Here're the details on NC_Immigration_Voice:
Group home page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NC_Immigration_Voice
Group email address: NC_Immigration_Voice@yahoogroups.com
It is our time to seize the reigns and kick start some momentum
Thanks Franklin, I got your PM. I am ready to get involved. Please PM me the documents.
more...
willwin
04-05 09:16 AM
How you filled this much fast? You posted adds before you got PWD? My attorney is saying that we need to wait untill we get PWD to post adds
Well, I am not sure how it works but my attorney assured me that it's all taken care. Looks like the recruitment can happen prior.
Perhaps, the attorney team here on this forum can help us understand how this works.
Well, I am not sure how it works but my attorney assured me that it's all taken care. Looks like the recruitment can happen prior.
Perhaps, the attorney team here on this forum can help us understand how this works.
crystal
08-16 02:36 PM
You are saying u have applied F1 after filing I-485 or before filing? What was the gap between them ? All I know is that the less the duration between them the more the trouble.
please do reply .I am waiting.
please do reply .I am waiting.
more...
chanduv23
08-05 11:13 PM
PA members most welcome to merge with Tri State members on the rally effort. We have a lunch meeting in NYC on Saturday and you are all most welcome to join us.
Please join us for a tri state lunch meet. We would like to start working on volunteers/ mobilizing members for the DC rally. Even if you cannot take the day off and come to DC please come by for the lunch. We could really use help with banners/posters/ and ideas to make this a success.
WHEN: Saturday AUGUST 11th
LOCATION- 148 E 48TH St, New York, NY 10017 (between Lexington and Third Avenues.)
TIME: 1:30 pm
ALSO- PLEASE DO UPDATE YOUR CONTACT INFORMATION
Thank you!
Please join us for a tri state lunch meet. We would like to start working on volunteers/ mobilizing members for the DC rally. Even if you cannot take the day off and come to DC please come by for the lunch. We could really use help with banners/posters/ and ideas to make this a success.
WHEN: Saturday AUGUST 11th
LOCATION- 148 E 48TH St, New York, NY 10017 (between Lexington and Third Avenues.)
TIME: 1:30 pm
ALSO- PLEASE DO UPDATE YOUR CONTACT INFORMATION
Thank you!
2010 Men Hairstyle Image of. Indian
swita
03-25 02:56 PM
Thanks for your replies....Do you have to go on vacation before you file the labor certification application or can you file your PERM and then go on vacation and then apply for recapture .
more...
phigi
03-28 12:35 PM
your payroll should be run against the place of your work and not your employer's state!
This is important!!!
This is important!!!
hair best asian hairstyles. picture
eb3_nepa
10-06 03:46 PM
If your I-485 EAD comes through you have to use that and not the F1 EAD.
Where did you get this information from? Can you please show a source?
Where did you get this information from? Can you please show a source?
more...
kcindian
08-03 11:11 PM
I have a follow-up question. If I do not get my EAD before my current one expires, am i out of status? I have a LIN number for the renewal submission.
hot seminole indian men hairstyles
itstimenow
08-08 12:12 AM
hey Ration_Card - if u don't mind.. let's talk in private - just wanted to see and check few things on my side. Hope it's not a problem to you? where are you located? let me know.
more...
house tattoo Long Hairstyles Men
coolvigo
07-12 11:02 PM
Guys,
Looks like a good news here....read following link.....looks like couple ppl have posted that their lawyers advised them to file for 485 in this case :-)
http://www..com/discussion-forums/i485-1/114468227/
:)
Looks like a good news here....read following link.....looks like couple ppl have posted that their lawyers advised them to file for 485 in this case :-)
http://www..com/discussion-forums/i485-1/114468227/
:)
tattoo Many trendy hairstyles for men
raysaikat
05-04 11:02 PM
Hi All,
Recently I received an RFE on my Wife's 485 application asking to prove that we both are still married. My lawyer is asking for around $400 to respond to this RFE, We have already paid the lawyer about $7500 until now for our GC process and she is no longer the preferred lawyer for the company that I am working for, but I had to keep my case with her as she has processed all of my applications until now. My questions are:
1. Can we ourselves respond to the RFE and save the $400.00,
2. If so, What's the process and what documents that we need to send to prove that we are still married.
Appreciate all of your help in this regard.
Thanks
Other than the copy of your marriage certificate, pictures, children's birth certificate, etc., you can send an affidavit signed by a notary public, perhaps someone who works at the local municipality/city hall, etc. In addition, you should submit proof of joint financial holdings such as copy of this year's 1040 and state tax forms filled as "married filing jointly" (if you did so), a joint bank account, joint property ownership such as house and car, joint car insurance, home insurance, other bills (to show both of you are living at the same address), etc.
However, I would recommend using a lawyer (if not your lawyer whom you seem not to like) for preparing the RFE; I guess you do not want to suffer setbacks in your GC processing merely for saving $400!
Recently I received an RFE on my Wife's 485 application asking to prove that we both are still married. My lawyer is asking for around $400 to respond to this RFE, We have already paid the lawyer about $7500 until now for our GC process and she is no longer the preferred lawyer for the company that I am working for, but I had to keep my case with her as she has processed all of my applications until now. My questions are:
1. Can we ourselves respond to the RFE and save the $400.00,
2. If so, What's the process and what documents that we need to send to prove that we are still married.
Appreciate all of your help in this regard.
Thanks
Other than the copy of your marriage certificate, pictures, children's birth certificate, etc., you can send an affidavit signed by a notary public, perhaps someone who works at the local municipality/city hall, etc. In addition, you should submit proof of joint financial holdings such as copy of this year's 1040 and state tax forms filled as "married filing jointly" (if you did so), a joint bank account, joint property ownership such as house and car, joint car insurance, home insurance, other bills (to show both of you are living at the same address), etc.
However, I would recommend using a lawyer (if not your lawyer whom you seem not to like) for preparing the RFE; I guess you do not want to suffer setbacks in your GC processing merely for saving $400!
more...
pictures Mens Medium Hairstyle Ideas
saint_2010
09-10 06:43 AM
yes...really what might have happened that day?..
dresses Today Indian men and women are
waitnwatch
05-25 07:40 PM
Here is my reading of the amendment.
If you look at the original bill (S2611) Section 508 reads
SEC. 508. VISAS FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH ADVANCED DEGREES.
(a) Aliens With Certain Advanced Degrees Not Subject to Numerical Limitations on Employment Based Immigrants-
(1) IN GENERAL- Section 201(b)(1) (8 U.S.C. 1151(b)(1)), as amended by section 505, is amended by adding at the end the following:
`(G) Aliens who have earned an advanced degree in science, technology, engineering, or math and have been working in a related field in the United States under a nonimmigrant visa during the 3-year period preceding their application for an immigrant visa under section 203(b).
`(H) Aliens described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of section 203(b)(1)(A) or who have received a national interest waiver under section 203(b)(2)(B).
`(I) The spouse and minor children of an alien who is admitted as an employment-based immigrant under section 203(b).'.
**************************************************
Bingaman Amendment 4181 and 4182 on the other hand state
Notwithstanding any other provisions of this act the language in Title V Sec. 501 under the heading ``(2) VISAS FOR SPOUSES AND CHILDREN'' is null and void and the following shall be applicable in lien thereof.
``(2) VISAS FOR SPOUSES AND CHILDREN.--
``(A) IN GENERAL.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B), immigrant visas issued on or after October 1, 2004, to spouses and children of employment-based immigrants shall not be counted against the numerical limitation set forth in paragraph (1).
``(B) NUMERICAL LIMITATION.--The total number of visas issued under paragraph (1)(A) and paragraph (2), excluding such visas issued to aliens pursuant to section 245B or section 245C of the Immigration and Nationality Act, may not exceed 650,000 during any fiscal year.
************************************************** ****
Reading S2611 Section 508 in conjunction with SA4811 and SA4812 specifically shows that STEM + 3 applicants as well as their spouses and children are not subject to any caps. On the other had the troubling part is that those not covered by STEM+3 will have 450,000 principal applicant slots and therefore only 200,000 spouse and children slots. This discrepancy arises from the fact that Bingaman multiplied 290,000 by 1.2 to arrive at his figure while S2611 allows for 450,000 principal applicants in the 1st 10 years to remove backlog.
SA 4188 is not currently available for reading and it will be interesting to see what change has been made to the language in 508(a)(1)(G) to allow all STEM +3 to be exempt. It would also be interesting to see whether language in Sec 508(b)(3)(III) has been changed to reflect the changes in 508(a)(1)(G)
Note that if both these sections are changed to allow all STEM+3 then labor certification too becomes easier. Hopefully changes here can provide some relief from Bingaman's torpedo.
I would appreciate comments as my analysis may be wrong.
If you look at the original bill (S2611) Section 508 reads
SEC. 508. VISAS FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH ADVANCED DEGREES.
(a) Aliens With Certain Advanced Degrees Not Subject to Numerical Limitations on Employment Based Immigrants-
(1) IN GENERAL- Section 201(b)(1) (8 U.S.C. 1151(b)(1)), as amended by section 505, is amended by adding at the end the following:
`(G) Aliens who have earned an advanced degree in science, technology, engineering, or math and have been working in a related field in the United States under a nonimmigrant visa during the 3-year period preceding their application for an immigrant visa under section 203(b).
`(H) Aliens described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of section 203(b)(1)(A) or who have received a national interest waiver under section 203(b)(2)(B).
`(I) The spouse and minor children of an alien who is admitted as an employment-based immigrant under section 203(b).'.
**************************************************
Bingaman Amendment 4181 and 4182 on the other hand state
Notwithstanding any other provisions of this act the language in Title V Sec. 501 under the heading ``(2) VISAS FOR SPOUSES AND CHILDREN'' is null and void and the following shall be applicable in lien thereof.
``(2) VISAS FOR SPOUSES AND CHILDREN.--
``(A) IN GENERAL.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B), immigrant visas issued on or after October 1, 2004, to spouses and children of employment-based immigrants shall not be counted against the numerical limitation set forth in paragraph (1).
``(B) NUMERICAL LIMITATION.--The total number of visas issued under paragraph (1)(A) and paragraph (2), excluding such visas issued to aliens pursuant to section 245B or section 245C of the Immigration and Nationality Act, may not exceed 650,000 during any fiscal year.
************************************************** ****
Reading S2611 Section 508 in conjunction with SA4811 and SA4812 specifically shows that STEM + 3 applicants as well as their spouses and children are not subject to any caps. On the other had the troubling part is that those not covered by STEM+3 will have 450,000 principal applicant slots and therefore only 200,000 spouse and children slots. This discrepancy arises from the fact that Bingaman multiplied 290,000 by 1.2 to arrive at his figure while S2611 allows for 450,000 principal applicants in the 1st 10 years to remove backlog.
SA 4188 is not currently available for reading and it will be interesting to see what change has been made to the language in 508(a)(1)(G) to allow all STEM +3 to be exempt. It would also be interesting to see whether language in Sec 508(b)(3)(III) has been changed to reflect the changes in 508(a)(1)(G)
Note that if both these sections are changed to allow all STEM+3 then labor certification too becomes easier. Hopefully changes here can provide some relief from Bingaman's torpedo.
I would appreciate comments as my analysis may be wrong.
more...
makeup hairstyles Today Indian men
wandmaker
02-04 02:32 PM
How do I can contact NSC to know what the hell are they doing with my I-140? Guys share your experience so we all can prevail this another backlog mess.
You are merely a beneficiary of 140 application, the petitioner is your GC sponsoring company - only the company or representative has the authority to make inquiries. First step, you should ask your attorney or company to call USCIS and mention that your 140 is outside processing time and also you had responded to an RFE , it has passed standard response/decision time (usually 60 days) - ask the CSR to open an SR. For the most cases that I know, this has triggered a decision with in 45 days from the date of SR. Hope this helps.
You are merely a beneficiary of 140 application, the petitioner is your GC sponsoring company - only the company or representative has the authority to make inquiries. First step, you should ask your attorney or company to call USCIS and mention that your 140 is outside processing time and also you had responded to an RFE , it has passed standard response/decision time (usually 60 days) - ask the CSR to open an SR. For the most cases that I know, this has triggered a decision with in 45 days from the date of SR. Hope this helps.
girlfriend haircuts 2011 for men. house
sanjay
08-30 12:01 PM
Any one knows , How is my GREEN Light turned to RED ?? Ways to turn back green
because some people might rated you -ve for this post, which serves no purpose, when we have more than enough polls around. Try to refrain from postings if you don't have any constructive info. Its better to refresh page and keep reading others posts.
because some people might rated you -ve for this post, which serves no purpose, when we have more than enough polls around. Try to refrain from postings if you don't have any constructive info. Its better to refresh page and keep reading others posts.
hairstyles makeup Indian men bollywood
vsrinir
06-12 03:30 PM
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0609/White_House_postpones_immigration_meeting_again.ht ml
June 12, 2009
Categories: White House
White House postpones immigration meeting, again
The White House announced this spring it would be hosting a big meeting on immigration policy � a signal that Obama cares about the issue, and perhaps a chance to rub salt in open Republican wounds, if not a serious attempt to move immigration reform this year.
But the meeting was postponed from its original date, June 8, to June 17 � and now it's being postponed again, White House officials have told advocates, with no set date but hopes to do it later in the month. Officials, I'm told, are blaming the supplemental for the delays.
Ana Navarro, a Florida Republican activist who has been arguing that Republicans have a chance to seize the initiative from Obama on this issue and repair their image, e-mails, "Nobody knows when it is. Nobody knows who is going. Nobody knows what the agenda is."
"They are stringing along the immig[ation] advocates and Latino groups to whom Obama owes so much," she writes. "Latinos need to stand their ground, hold his feet to the fire and demand that he deliver on repeated promises to get this done within first year or call him out on it. This is a litmus test for Hispanics, and one which so far Obama is failing."
UPDATE: Frank Sharry of America's Voice, an administration ally, tells Gebe Martinez: "While we are disappointed that the meeting has been delayed, we are confident that immigration reform will move forward this fall. The President has promised to advance the issue many times, and we believe he is a man of his word."
By Ben Smith 01:00 PM
June 12, 2009
Categories: White House
White House postpones immigration meeting, again
The White House announced this spring it would be hosting a big meeting on immigration policy � a signal that Obama cares about the issue, and perhaps a chance to rub salt in open Republican wounds, if not a serious attempt to move immigration reform this year.
But the meeting was postponed from its original date, June 8, to June 17 � and now it's being postponed again, White House officials have told advocates, with no set date but hopes to do it later in the month. Officials, I'm told, are blaming the supplemental for the delays.
Ana Navarro, a Florida Republican activist who has been arguing that Republicans have a chance to seize the initiative from Obama on this issue and repair their image, e-mails, "Nobody knows when it is. Nobody knows who is going. Nobody knows what the agenda is."
"They are stringing along the immig[ation] advocates and Latino groups to whom Obama owes so much," she writes. "Latinos need to stand their ground, hold his feet to the fire and demand that he deliver on repeated promises to get this done within first year or call him out on it. This is a litmus test for Hispanics, and one which so far Obama is failing."
UPDATE: Frank Sharry of America's Voice, an administration ally, tells Gebe Martinez: "While we are disappointed that the meeting has been delayed, we are confident that immigration reform will move forward this fall. The President has promised to advance the issue many times, and we believe he is a man of his word."
By Ben Smith 01:00 PM
lkrastogi
07-16 11:08 PM
My 140 was filed last week and I don't have the receipt number. Can I file 485 without I140 receipt number?
hopelessGC
11-12 04:48 PM
The passport is valid but the visa inside it is not. I suppose you are saying this is not a problem!?:)
Sorry, it's just that she is nervous about buying a $700 plane ticket and running into trouble.
Correct, just the passport. Visa is not checked when traveling withing the US.
Sorry, it's just that she is nervous about buying a $700 plane ticket and running into trouble.
Correct, just the passport. Visa is not checked when traveling withing the US.
No comments:
Post a Comment