Libra
09-27 11:03 AM
First we come here which is completely different environment and struggle to adjust, then after 10 yrs or so, if we go back then struggle to adjust in home country.
wallpaper (Pixie Lott Lipsy Floral
dealsnet
08-22 09:58 AM
We are not terrorist. Majority are from India, China etc. You are asking for help from terrorists !!!!!!!!!!! (according to you)
We didn't blow up any buildings. We built buildings, civilized world, literature and technology.
We have more than 5000 years of civilized history. That time your people and Europeans are nomads and barbarians. We have great universities and Cities during ancient times.
You are totally ignorant about the world you live. Leave about immigration. You are day dreaming. You thought just file I-485 will give you GC, you need to file I-130 or I-140 before that.
The majority of you people are cruel and harsh individuals, how dare you insult a man that is sick just because of his weight. The majority of you are also from middle eastern countries - not exactly buddies with the USA. Canadians didn't come here to blow up buildings, people from your part of the world did. Canadians were here to help, and were one of the first countries on the scene.
Canadians are allies, not enemies. You folks need to be the ones to go back where you came from!
We didn't blow up any buildings. We built buildings, civilized world, literature and technology.
We have more than 5000 years of civilized history. That time your people and Europeans are nomads and barbarians. We have great universities and Cities during ancient times.
You are totally ignorant about the world you live. Leave about immigration. You are day dreaming. You thought just file I-485 will give you GC, you need to file I-130 or I-140 before that.
The majority of you people are cruel and harsh individuals, how dare you insult a man that is sick just because of his weight. The majority of you are also from middle eastern countries - not exactly buddies with the USA. Canadians didn't come here to blow up buildings, people from your part of the world did. Canadians were here to help, and were one of the first countries on the scene.
Canadians are allies, not enemies. You folks need to be the ones to go back where you came from!
jsquare
08-19 04:45 PM
Hi,
This is for EAD Renewal (I-765)
I was working on H1 till May 08 now I am working on EAD
What should I write in column 15.(Current Immigration Status) in I-765 form
When I was on H1 in 2007, during first time EAD appliaction I filled with H1B
Please advice.
Thanks
JSQUARE
This is for EAD Renewal (I-765)
I was working on H1 till May 08 now I am working on EAD
What should I write in column 15.(Current Immigration Status) in I-765 form
When I was on H1 in 2007, during first time EAD appliaction I filled with H1B
Please advice.
Thanks
JSQUARE
2011 Star Style Gallery: Pixie Lott
justAnotherFile
12-30 05:25 PM
this is mostly a san-diego base community not sure how popular it is in other cities.
http://www.sasural.com/san_diego/classifieds/counseling/view/?10841
http://www.sasural.com/san_diego/classifieds/counseling/view/?10841
more...
qesehmk
02-11 07:31 PM
So, according to you, what happens when no action is taken for assigned visa number?
What matters is number of visas used. Have you looked at the numbers?
I actually was saying I agreed w you. Read my post again... I was trying to say a few things over and above...
Aside from that, I have questioned Ron's correctness on this particular issue well before you produced that data.
Also if people somehow do not want to pay attention to facts then so be it.. Why be rude?
What matters is number of visas used. Have you looked at the numbers?
I actually was saying I agreed w you. Read my post again... I was trying to say a few things over and above...
Aside from that, I have questioned Ron's correctness on this particular issue well before you produced that data.
Also if people somehow do not want to pay attention to facts then so be it.. Why be rude?
chanduv23
12-26 04:37 PM
If financial institutions are following govt regulations, does it mean that Govt mandated this against h1b? One of those gimmicks where a H1b is subject to difficulty like obtaining driver lisence etc...is this the same gimmick to legally give hardship to h1b?
more...
neelu
12-13 12:17 AM
I'm with you - less talk and more action.
Also, members should all show support for all goals.
I am not in the I-485 stage but would certainly fax USCIS.
In the same way, members should fax DOL to clear up their backlogs.
the whole point of this forum is united action, so lets show support
Add one more member to this effort. I will support any effort to call/fax for both fixes to LC backlogs as well as provision to allow 485 filing without visa number availability.
At the same time, I do want to caution that we need to take measured steps, because USCIS and DOL though they are public service departments are unlike the congress which is a representative body of the people and so by definition there to 'hear' our problems and address them. In summary, DOL and USCIS might not be as receptive or even be irritated (might hurt our cause).
I would suggest that a group of say around 10-15 with a couple of core members (am not volunteering them here!) who have had both media exposure and well versed with the issues, meet these people at the top and seek explanations. But even as I write this, I doubt how much effect that kind of thing would have, unless we do this on a regular basis.
I know many of these suggestions are easier said than done, but better something said than none! :)
Also, members should all show support for all goals.
I am not in the I-485 stage but would certainly fax USCIS.
In the same way, members should fax DOL to clear up their backlogs.
the whole point of this forum is united action, so lets show support
Add one more member to this effort. I will support any effort to call/fax for both fixes to LC backlogs as well as provision to allow 485 filing without visa number availability.
At the same time, I do want to caution that we need to take measured steps, because USCIS and DOL though they are public service departments are unlike the congress which is a representative body of the people and so by definition there to 'hear' our problems and address them. In summary, DOL and USCIS might not be as receptive or even be irritated (might hurt our cause).
I would suggest that a group of say around 10-15 with a couple of core members (am not volunteering them here!) who have had both media exposure and well versed with the issues, meet these people at the top and seek explanations. But even as I write this, I doubt how much effect that kind of thing would have, unless we do this on a regular basis.
I know many of these suggestions are easier said than done, but better something said than none! :)
2010 pixie lott hair 2011,
coopheal
04-10 04:56 AM
Visa Bulletin for May 2010 (http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4805.html)
The biggest surprise is EB3 Mexico. It just turned to U. How is that possible??
Can this happen to EB3-I India as well??
The biggest surprise is EB3 Mexico. It just turned to U. How is that possible??
Can this happen to EB3-I India as well??
more...
pappu
08-03 01:01 PM
if there is diff emails with diff content it will be better. it will show diversity. even though we all will say the same thing.
on second thoughts i feel lou dobbs is unlikely to change his opinion even if 1K people send him mails. send it anyways to all other cnn anchors so that IV can get some coverage on cnn.
on second thoughts i feel lou dobbs is unlikely to change his opinion even if 1K people send him mails. send it anyways to all other cnn anchors so that IV can get some coverage on cnn.
hair Started when youre out pixie
abhijitp
07-25 09:37 AM
Yes, I have this feeling already. Now, what happens if someone switches jobs using AC-21 and then this RFE is received? You have to submit the NEW employment / offer letter right? So how does this help the current employer to stop you from switching jobs?
Bump... experts, please opine.
Bump... experts, please opine.
more...
rodnyb
04-11 01:05 AM
I agree wholeheartedly. CIS has the burden for cases. DOS should do sth. too, not just a number game. They should have exact visa approval number published every months. Due to this past pdf error, I have concerns on all their numbers published.. did they give enough numbers to CIS.. are all those reports which show they approved 140K EB real?
If we know, they issued only 50K in 11 months, and we should have concern they can let CIS approve 90K in one month due to spill over... make sense? Or they can make it up some way?
Man, we paid for all these, and they even didn't blink...
Here, DOS has a bigger role than CIS...
Here is what I think; possible answers/comments. I am not an expert but am thinking following:
1. Any category being "current" is based on "DOS's guesstimate" based on demand numbers they receive and so it is never "perfect". So yes, you are true that technically EB1 should be retrogressed "slightly", but considering the small number of spillover (now called fall down numbers) it used, it may not have been able to be predicted prior to the end of fiscal year.
2. That is the biggest hope and assumption that there will be more fall down from EB5 and EB1 due to "economy". Caveat is, more and more people are trying to switch to "current" categories and so actual usage may not be commensurate with "economy". We have never been given any "usage data". So everything is a pure guess on this front. Looking at data, I honestly do not see any difference in number of EB1 cases from 2008-2009-2010.
3. Yes, it is due to "spillover" from Family based category. (This is where DOS is using the word "spillover" and any visa number that go from one EB to another EB category, they all it "fall across" and "fall down"). These numbers used to be higher before and now lower as they are more efficient in using as many numbers as possible for a particular category.
4. Pending 485 data is extremely deceptive for "current" categories. Look at the approval timeframe of EB2 ROW or EB1 cases; majority of them are approved before ever counted as "pending". Remember. "pending cases" DO NOT reflect "usage".
The main thing missing in all these is the "USAGE", this should be a very easy information that can be made available by DOS, but they have not. If I had one "wish" to get one piece of info; would be this: "number of visa used in each category every month and YTD". Without that info, no prediction of spillover/fall down-across is ever possible.
If we know, they issued only 50K in 11 months, and we should have concern they can let CIS approve 90K in one month due to spill over... make sense? Or they can make it up some way?
Man, we paid for all these, and they even didn't blink...
Here, DOS has a bigger role than CIS...
Here is what I think; possible answers/comments. I am not an expert but am thinking following:
1. Any category being "current" is based on "DOS's guesstimate" based on demand numbers they receive and so it is never "perfect". So yes, you are true that technically EB1 should be retrogressed "slightly", but considering the small number of spillover (now called fall down numbers) it used, it may not have been able to be predicted prior to the end of fiscal year.
2. That is the biggest hope and assumption that there will be more fall down from EB5 and EB1 due to "economy". Caveat is, more and more people are trying to switch to "current" categories and so actual usage may not be commensurate with "economy". We have never been given any "usage data". So everything is a pure guess on this front. Looking at data, I honestly do not see any difference in number of EB1 cases from 2008-2009-2010.
3. Yes, it is due to "spillover" from Family based category. (This is where DOS is using the word "spillover" and any visa number that go from one EB to another EB category, they all it "fall across" and "fall down"). These numbers used to be higher before and now lower as they are more efficient in using as many numbers as possible for a particular category.
4. Pending 485 data is extremely deceptive for "current" categories. Look at the approval timeframe of EB2 ROW or EB1 cases; majority of them are approved before ever counted as "pending". Remember. "pending cases" DO NOT reflect "usage".
The main thing missing in all these is the "USAGE", this should be a very easy information that can be made available by DOS, but they have not. If I had one "wish" to get one piece of info; would be this: "number of visa used in each category every month and YTD". Without that info, no prediction of spillover/fall down-across is ever possible.
hot Pixie Lott rocks out the
we_can
12-27 12:32 PM
Posted on IndiaGrid.com
http://www.indiagrid.com/cgi-bin/viewarticle.cgi?dmmy=ok&postid=6560&stq=&cat=art
and
http://www.indiagrid.com/cgi-bin/viewpost.cgi?dmmy=ok&postid=85359&stq=&cat=ser&subcatid=seo
http://www.indiagrid.com/cgi-bin/viewarticle.cgi?dmmy=ok&postid=6560&stq=&cat=art
and
http://www.indiagrid.com/cgi-bin/viewpost.cgi?dmmy=ok&postid=85359&stq=&cat=ser&subcatid=seo
more...
house girlfriend,style,pixie lott
transpass
04-10 12:07 PM
Here are the details for last year and years before:
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
Thanks Kondur. That was a very good presentation of the numbers. I very much appreciate it.
Now,
1. Why did EB1 last year needed spillover visas, although it was current all the time? If a category is current, isn't that it has less demand than allocated numbers?
2. As per May bulletin, EB4 might need a cut off. So we cannot expect any spillover from EB4. So that is clear. Now the spillover chances are from EB5, EB2 ROW and EB1(?). I am including EB1 because, given the current economy over the past year, should there be a better possibility of more spillover from EB2 ROW and EB1 compared to last year?
3. Also why are the total EB numbers different in different fiscal years (e.g., 141020 in FY2009, 162949 in FY 2008 and 154497 in FY2007)? In FYs 2007 and 2008 did the extra visas come from Family based while it did not for FY 2009? If so, why is it so?
4. Based on Pending 485 data of March 2010, I barely see few hundred EB4s. And hardly considerable number of EB1s. What's going on? If we go by this data, we should be getting good chunk of spillover numbers...
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Green%20Card/Green%20Card%20Through%20a%20Job/Employment%20Based%20I-485%20Pending%20Inventory-Total%203-8-2010.pdf
Thanks,
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
Thanks Kondur. That was a very good presentation of the numbers. I very much appreciate it.
Now,
1. Why did EB1 last year needed spillover visas, although it was current all the time? If a category is current, isn't that it has less demand than allocated numbers?
2. As per May bulletin, EB4 might need a cut off. So we cannot expect any spillover from EB4. So that is clear. Now the spillover chances are from EB5, EB2 ROW and EB1(?). I am including EB1 because, given the current economy over the past year, should there be a better possibility of more spillover from EB2 ROW and EB1 compared to last year?
3. Also why are the total EB numbers different in different fiscal years (e.g., 141020 in FY2009, 162949 in FY 2008 and 154497 in FY2007)? In FYs 2007 and 2008 did the extra visas come from Family based while it did not for FY 2009? If so, why is it so?
4. Based on Pending 485 data of March 2010, I barely see few hundred EB4s. And hardly considerable number of EB1s. What's going on? If we go by this data, we should be getting good chunk of spillover numbers...
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Green%20Card/Green%20Card%20Through%20a%20Job/Employment%20Based%20I-485%20Pending%20Inventory-Total%203-8-2010.pdf
Thanks,
tattoo Want to steal Pixie Lott#39;s
mheggade
07-20 10:24 AM
The regular quota for EB2 and EB3 combined is only about 9,800. That means 17,700 visas have to come from somewhere. I dont think those many visas are remaining for this year. Be prepared to see FIFO thrown under the bus and approvals with PDs that are all over the place. Please critique this analysis without piling on. Thoughts?
DOS has stated that they have given entire EB1 over flow (approx 25,000 visa's) and EB2 ROW over flow to EB2 I and C. Per my estimate, It is definitely possible that we could see at least 30k to 40k EB2 I approvals for this FY.
If only DOS pulls up some kind of trick and come up with strategy to give similar kind of over flow next year to EB3 I and C. We could see EB3 cut off move to Mid 2003.
DOS has stated that they have given entire EB1 over flow (approx 25,000 visa's) and EB2 ROW over flow to EB2 I and C. Per my estimate, It is definitely possible that we could see at least 30k to 40k EB2 I approvals for this FY.
If only DOS pulls up some kind of trick and come up with strategy to give similar kind of over flow next year to EB3 I and C. We could see EB3 cut off move to Mid 2003.
more...
pictures Long Center Part:Pixie Lott
Asian
11-21 10:46 AM
I like this posting by tjayant. Very personal and detailed message. Except for one thing. You cannot guarantee 2 years from now for those who applied in 2003 and 2004 till getting GC. That is the whole problem for all of us.
My PD is in 2003 and I am EB-3 ROW but I don't think it will happen in two years in this pace. I am trying to move on with the new degree I will get during the long waiting period. Just like many people I had worked for my current company two years before starting GC process. Not many company let you do it right away... So stuck almost five years in current company without career progress just for the hope of GC... How screwed am I?
Back in 2003, my immigration lawyer didn't care much about EB-2 even though I already had a masters degree probably because of the prevailing wage requirement. But they had no clue what was going to happen.
Here is my advice to folks trying to jump job just for $$$, even if the GC situation is bad , money should never be the only factor in moving for another job, plan long term , actually from what I know only startups have good opening but highly unstable so it is a catch 22 for most of the folks, I would suggest if you are in fortune 500 companies and the job is boring and salary is bad stick with it for 2 more years , if you cannot get the GC in the next 1-2 years I dont think you will ever get it, this is applicable for folks who applied GC during 2003/2004, 3+2=5years , for folks who has applied for GC after 2004 you can do what you want !!., here again look for favorable environment, Govt's change and policy change so make hay while the sun shine !!, so if the policy is favorable even if the job is bad but you can get the GC in 1-2 year i would stick with that company, because you will never know what will happen after 2 years , It looks to me like we might be in a cusp of policy change similar to 1999/2000, if you miss this boat you may have to wait for another 6-7 years. But again if my understanding is correct America is like a ocean and there is room for everyone , so no one need to be scared of GC etc, every one will get it in some form or other eventually , it is only a matter of time. As far myself iam still waiting for LC, but never really bothered about GC during my 9+ years stay , I just did what I wanted , but after 9 years I would like to move to a startup but controlling myself with the above logic !!!, But one good thing about waiting for GC is it made me a better person personally in learning ton's of stuff valuable for long run. so there is always pluses, everybody wants to be a Pirate (do what we wanted like jump job's at the fist obstacle/temptation $$$) but sometimes it is good to be controlled by external factors to get the best of ourselfs.
My PD is in 2003 and I am EB-3 ROW but I don't think it will happen in two years in this pace. I am trying to move on with the new degree I will get during the long waiting period. Just like many people I had worked for my current company two years before starting GC process. Not many company let you do it right away... So stuck almost five years in current company without career progress just for the hope of GC... How screwed am I?
Back in 2003, my immigration lawyer didn't care much about EB-2 even though I already had a masters degree probably because of the prevailing wage requirement. But they had no clue what was going to happen.
Here is my advice to folks trying to jump job just for $$$, even if the GC situation is bad , money should never be the only factor in moving for another job, plan long term , actually from what I know only startups have good opening but highly unstable so it is a catch 22 for most of the folks, I would suggest if you are in fortune 500 companies and the job is boring and salary is bad stick with it for 2 more years , if you cannot get the GC in the next 1-2 years I dont think you will ever get it, this is applicable for folks who applied GC during 2003/2004, 3+2=5years , for folks who has applied for GC after 2004 you can do what you want !!., here again look for favorable environment, Govt's change and policy change so make hay while the sun shine !!, so if the policy is favorable even if the job is bad but you can get the GC in 1-2 year i would stick with that company, because you will never know what will happen after 2 years , It looks to me like we might be in a cusp of policy change similar to 1999/2000, if you miss this boat you may have to wait for another 6-7 years. But again if my understanding is correct America is like a ocean and there is room for everyone , so no one need to be scared of GC etc, every one will get it in some form or other eventually , it is only a matter of time. As far myself iam still waiting for LC, but never really bothered about GC during my 9+ years stay , I just did what I wanted , but after 9 years I would like to move to a startup but controlling myself with the above logic !!!, But one good thing about waiting for GC is it made me a better person personally in learning ton's of stuff valuable for long run. so there is always pluses, everybody wants to be a Pirate (do what we wanted like jump job's at the fist obstacle/temptation $$$) but sometimes it is good to be controlled by external factors to get the best of ourselfs.
dresses Pixie+lott+hair+up
pranavgandhi
07-18 02:05 PM
Type 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
EB1-All 41,672 34,168 14,453 31,291 64,731 36,960 26,697
EB2-All 42,550 44,316 15,406 32,534 42,597 21,911 44,162
EB3-All 85,847 88,002 46,415 85,969 129,070 89,922 85,030
EB-All 179,195 174,968 82,137 155,330 246,878 159,081 155,889
EB1-I 3,543 2,820 1,266 2,998 6,336 3,156 2,855
EB2-I 21,355 21,310 8,536 16,262 16,687 3,720 6,203
EB3-I 16,339 17,354 10,647 19,889 23,250 3,006 17,795
EB-I 41,720 41,919 20,818 39,496 47,160 17,358 26,853
Overall EB3 has got more numbers than EB2 in last 7 years for all and india specific grouping.
All this numbers are I485 approved.
Do you have any idea on numbers which can show how many application(PERM,I140) by Priority date (year) so we can predict how many EB2-I or EB3-I are waiting for given year.
EB1-All 41,672 34,168 14,453 31,291 64,731 36,960 26,697
EB2-All 42,550 44,316 15,406 32,534 42,597 21,911 44,162
EB3-All 85,847 88,002 46,415 85,969 129,070 89,922 85,030
EB-All 179,195 174,968 82,137 155,330 246,878 159,081 155,889
EB1-I 3,543 2,820 1,266 2,998 6,336 3,156 2,855
EB2-I 21,355 21,310 8,536 16,262 16,687 3,720 6,203
EB3-I 16,339 17,354 10,647 19,889 23,250 3,006 17,795
EB-I 41,720 41,919 20,818 39,496 47,160 17,358 26,853
Overall EB3 has got more numbers than EB2 in last 7 years for all and india specific grouping.
All this numbers are I485 approved.
Do you have any idea on numbers which can show how many application(PERM,I140) by Priority date (year) so we can predict how many EB2-I or EB3-I are waiting for given year.
more...
makeup hairstyles Pixie Lott Hair
ashwaghoshk
03-19 05:40 PM
Finally, labor filed on March 11.Unfortunately labor process stalled from March 1. Badluck still continues
How do you know that the labour process has slowed down from Mar 01 2011 ? Any source for this info? Please share.
How do you know that the labour process has slowed down from Mar 01 2011 ? Any source for this info? Please share.
girlfriend Pixie Lott
rajuram
11-11 10:33 PM
With democrats in control, at the very minimum we should try to push recapture of lost visa numbers. Tie that with the ability of immigrants to buy houses, we could have a game winner...
hairstyles andreas85: Pixie Lott
singhsa3
02-21 02:53 PM
Just one quick thing though:
Till date USCIS has supposedly received request for 2802 EB2 India visa (India Quota). So it could be assumed that at least 2802 cases are pending before 04/2004 (October and Nov 2007 Visa bulletin).
Assuming you are right then,
average visa issued for EB1 ROW+Non ROW over the last 5 years have been 26K,
Now assuming this year the demand would be close to average then. It leaves 14K for EB2
Implying 12/2003 dates movement is very likely as 14k>5k (your number)
Till date USCIS has supposedly received request for 2802 EB2 India visa (India Quota). So it could be assumed that at least 2802 cases are pending before 04/2004 (October and Nov 2007 Visa bulletin).
Assuming you are right then,
average visa issued for EB1 ROW+Non ROW over the last 5 years have been 26K,
Now assuming this year the demand would be close to average then. It leaves 14K for EB2
Implying 12/2003 dates movement is very likely as 14k>5k (your number)
gveerab
07-03 11:10 PM
Hi Ramus,
I am not posting this message to offend any body's feelings, please don't take it personally. AILA is saying anyone can participate in the LAWSUIT without paying any money, but IV is saying it's an expensive thing and we need to start new funding drive. It's not clear to me and I believe if we start thread with more information more people would have convinced and contributed.
I agree, we need money to maintain the website. if that is the case please mention that clearly. We need to maintain this website to keep our activities , no question about that.
I have been observing from last couple of months any new issue is ending up with fund drive, but no update after that what happened. May be I am wrong, but as an observer this is my openion. Hope you guys will take this as positive comment and respond with more details. I don't have any doubt on the core team capabilities and scincearity.
In ths home page clearly mentioned that contribute for lawsuit. Without taking it personally can you please provide the details of how much money we might need and how we are going to spend this money?
Thanks
Veera
$20 per month $150 on time contributions
I am not posting this message to offend any body's feelings, please don't take it personally. AILA is saying anyone can participate in the LAWSUIT without paying any money, but IV is saying it's an expensive thing and we need to start new funding drive. It's not clear to me and I believe if we start thread with more information more people would have convinced and contributed.
I agree, we need money to maintain the website. if that is the case please mention that clearly. We need to maintain this website to keep our activities , no question about that.
I have been observing from last couple of months any new issue is ending up with fund drive, but no update after that what happened. May be I am wrong, but as an observer this is my openion. Hope you guys will take this as positive comment and respond with more details. I don't have any doubt on the core team capabilities and scincearity.
In ths home page clearly mentioned that contribute for lawsuit. Without taking it personally can you please provide the details of how much money we might need and how we are going to spend this money?
Thanks
Veera
$20 per month $150 on time contributions
ajthakur
07-14 07:14 PM
I left a message for my previous employer. I am not sure whether they will provide this information to me.
That is the reason I was asking you to try to find from your ex-employer if you could get any news.General procedure from what I have read is to issue a NOID but they have given you a RFE which keeps you alive for now.Maybe your ex-emplyer cancelled your 140 after 180 days but again all this is a shot in the dark and only your ex-employer has the answer for this.
That is the reason I was asking you to try to find from your ex-employer if you could get any news.General procedure from what I have read is to issue a NOID but they have given you a RFE which keeps you alive for now.Maybe your ex-emplyer cancelled your 140 after 180 days but again all this is a shot in the dark and only your ex-employer has the answer for this.