priti8888
10-01 01:03 PM
This is how PD and RD work.
ASSUME ALL ARE EB3
Mr. A PD JULY 2004 RD MARCH 2005(1)
Mr B PD FEB 2004 RD DECEMBER 2005 (2)
MR C PD JAN 2003 RD JANAURY 2006 (3)
USCIS Processes applications based on RD. After they are processed they are in the "staging area" (pre-adjudicated)
IF ALL visa bulletin DATES ARE "CURRENT" MR A would get GC first
If visa bulletin date has a PD of "May 2003" Mr. C would get GC first
If visa bulletin date has a PD of "MAY 2004 "MR B would get GC first
If visa bulletin date is August 2004 "Mr A would get GC first"
In a summary, when PD is current, people with the earliest RD would get GC first. Your PD HAS to be CURRENT to be eligible for a visa number.
ASSUME ALL ARE EB3
Mr. A PD JULY 2004 RD MARCH 2005(1)
Mr B PD FEB 2004 RD DECEMBER 2005 (2)
MR C PD JAN 2003 RD JANAURY 2006 (3)
USCIS Processes applications based on RD. After they are processed they are in the "staging area" (pre-adjudicated)
IF ALL visa bulletin DATES ARE "CURRENT" MR A would get GC first
If visa bulletin date has a PD of "May 2003" Mr. C would get GC first
If visa bulletin date has a PD of "MAY 2004 "MR B would get GC first
If visa bulletin date is August 2004 "Mr A would get GC first"
In a summary, when PD is current, people with the earliest RD would get GC first. Your PD HAS to be CURRENT to be eligible for a visa number.
wallpaper david eckham arm tattoo
perm2gc
08-24 09:18 PM
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=1540
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 24TH, 2006?Start being creative first.. dont just copy some captions and come up...
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 24TH, 2006?Start being creative first.. dont just copy some captions and come up...
knowDOL
04-24 11:05 AM
Looks like this rule may not come into effect for fiscal year 2006 ie 30th september 2006. lookat todays immigration-law post.
2011 david eckham forearm tattoos
trueguy
12-11 01:43 AM
In a testimony to the House Judiciary Committee back in Apr/May 08, the USCIS clearly stated that it had changed its policy regarding which applications would be adjudicated first.
As I remember, USCIS stated that it was now following a policy where cases that had a possibility of getting a visa number in the near future were adjudicated first. It said that this change in policy was made in order to reduce waste of immigrant visas.
The problem with this approach is that:
- It is not FIFO
- EB2-I/C and EB3 not only continue to remain retrogressed, but retrogression worsens.
Here is how:
Since EB2-I/EB3-I categories are already retrogressed, the I-485 applications in this category will be shelved until it appears that a visa number may become available in the foreseeable future.
So, USCIS puts most of these cases in cold storage while it adjudicates and approves the EB2ROW applications as it receives them on a continuous basis.
When time comes to roll over excess EB2 ROW numbers, two things happen:
- Already substantial use of EB2ROW numbers make few numbers available for roll over
- Limited adjudication of Eb2-I/C and EB3 cases make a very small pool of pre-adjudicated applications. USCIS requests DOS to move dates so that it has access to a larger pool for cherry picking.
The result is that VB dates move forward by leaps and bounds and cases are approved haphazardly with PDs all over the map. When the excess numbers are used up, the dates for EB2-I/C and EB3 retrogress back to previous cutoff dates because there are still a lot of old cases that have not even been brought out of cold storage. The EB2ROW dates are again current because USCIS has adjudicated and approved EB2ROW cases throughout the year- so no backlog there.
If USCIS followed FIFO, then the following would happen:
- USCIS would be adjudicating old EB2I/C and EB3 cases right now, and not the recently received EB2ROW cases.
- This would reduce the number of pre-adjudicated EB2ROW cases and hence lower the demand in the EB2ROW category.
- When time would come to roll over numbers not used by EB2ROW:
- A large pool number of excess visas would be available
- A large pool of pre-adjudicated EB2-I/C and EB3 cases with old PDs would be available that could be readily assigned visa numbers.
As a result, old cases would be assigned visa numbers and backlog would be reduced.
Unfortunately, USCIS has confused its process of adjudicating cases (which is FIFO) with its effort to enforce the country quota. The country limits come into picture only when cases ready for adjudication are to be assigned visa numbers. The process of adjudication should still be FIFO, and not determined by the country quota.
Very good points. I can't agree with you any more.
The question is how do we raise it as an issue so USCIS follow FIFO.
As I remember, USCIS stated that it was now following a policy where cases that had a possibility of getting a visa number in the near future were adjudicated first. It said that this change in policy was made in order to reduce waste of immigrant visas.
The problem with this approach is that:
- It is not FIFO
- EB2-I/C and EB3 not only continue to remain retrogressed, but retrogression worsens.
Here is how:
Since EB2-I/EB3-I categories are already retrogressed, the I-485 applications in this category will be shelved until it appears that a visa number may become available in the foreseeable future.
So, USCIS puts most of these cases in cold storage while it adjudicates and approves the EB2ROW applications as it receives them on a continuous basis.
When time comes to roll over excess EB2 ROW numbers, two things happen:
- Already substantial use of EB2ROW numbers make few numbers available for roll over
- Limited adjudication of Eb2-I/C and EB3 cases make a very small pool of pre-adjudicated applications. USCIS requests DOS to move dates so that it has access to a larger pool for cherry picking.
The result is that VB dates move forward by leaps and bounds and cases are approved haphazardly with PDs all over the map. When the excess numbers are used up, the dates for EB2-I/C and EB3 retrogress back to previous cutoff dates because there are still a lot of old cases that have not even been brought out of cold storage. The EB2ROW dates are again current because USCIS has adjudicated and approved EB2ROW cases throughout the year- so no backlog there.
If USCIS followed FIFO, then the following would happen:
- USCIS would be adjudicating old EB2I/C and EB3 cases right now, and not the recently received EB2ROW cases.
- This would reduce the number of pre-adjudicated EB2ROW cases and hence lower the demand in the EB2ROW category.
- When time would come to roll over numbers not used by EB2ROW:
- A large pool number of excess visas would be available
- A large pool of pre-adjudicated EB2-I/C and EB3 cases with old PDs would be available that could be readily assigned visa numbers.
As a result, old cases would be assigned visa numbers and backlog would be reduced.
Unfortunately, USCIS has confused its process of adjudicating cases (which is FIFO) with its effort to enforce the country quota. The country limits come into picture only when cases ready for adjudication are to be assigned visa numbers. The process of adjudication should still be FIFO, and not determined by the country quota.
Very good points. I can't agree with you any more.
The question is how do we raise it as an issue so USCIS follow FIFO.
more...
dreamworld
10-26 11:57 AM
Hi guys,
My 8th year extension was filed on June 14th. I have not heard from them since. Lawyer says he has contacted USCIS on Oct 3rd and has not heard back yet either. He has asked me to wait for one month before initiating any further communication with them. Does anyone know how long h1 processing is taking these days? I live in Texas. Now, if I want to transfer this to Premium processing:
a) is it possible to transfer now?
b) how long will the transfer take?
Thanks a lot for your advice/information :)
A) Yes, you can transfer the pending h1 extension to premium.
B) For current status https://egov.immigration.gov/cris/jsps/ptimes.jsp with your respective service center.
My 8th year extension was filed on June 14th. I have not heard from them since. Lawyer says he has contacted USCIS on Oct 3rd and has not heard back yet either. He has asked me to wait for one month before initiating any further communication with them. Does anyone know how long h1 processing is taking these days? I live in Texas. Now, if I want to transfer this to Premium processing:
a) is it possible to transfer now?
b) how long will the transfer take?
Thanks a lot for your advice/information :)
A) Yes, you can transfer the pending h1 extension to premium.
B) For current status https://egov.immigration.gov/cris/jsps/ptimes.jsp with your respective service center.
kerstbrd
08-31 12:53 PM
maybe I should register another country, declare war on your's, and then all your citizens can apply for refugee/asylum.
more...
ssnd03
07-12 04:32 PM
Every guy thinks that his/her problem is always the biggest bottleneck
Eliminating FBI delays will restore FIFO and stop such visa bulletin fiascos.
It will not solve retrogression which is a bigger problem, but requires congressional action for number increases
Eliminating FBI delays will restore FIFO and stop such visa bulletin fiascos.
It will not solve retrogression which is a bigger problem, but requires congressional action for number increases
2010 David Beckham | Tattoos
FraudGultee
04-21 11:00 AM
You will find the weather challenging if you are moving from North East
more...
.jpg "eckham tattoos. david eckham")
stucklabor
07-14 10:50 AM
Pappu is right. At this point, no one knows when the SKIL bill will be debated, or if support for it is strong enough that it can even be brought to the floor.
The core team has said this N times and let me say it for the N+1th time. We DON'T HAVE any timelines. All we can do is try to influence but we are a small part of the puzzle. The House and Senate leadership decide what they want to do, based on the larger picture.
We are 5000 members, only 1000 contributing. Is it any wonder that things are at such a pass?
BTW, Pappu, your link didn't work for me.
The core team has said this N times and let me say it for the N+1th time. We DON'T HAVE any timelines. All we can do is try to influence but we are a small part of the puzzle. The House and Senate leadership decide what they want to do, based on the larger picture.
We are 5000 members, only 1000 contributing. Is it any wonder that things are at such a pass?
BTW, Pappu, your link didn't work for me.
hair David Beckham Tattoo
gparr
May 22nd, 2005, 08:29 PM
My business travels took me, once again, to Las Vegas. Armed with a polarizer and more time on this trip, I was determined to do a better job of photographing the views in Red Rock Canyon than I did the last time. Was able to shoot in the canyon area at both sunrise and sunset. I'm much happier with the results this time. Here are three of my favorites from the effort. Several more in my gallery. Comments/critiques appreciated.
Gary
http://www.dphoto.us/forumphotos/data/500/rrc06.jpg
http://www.dphoto.us/forumphotos/data/500/rrc03.jpg
http://www.dphoto.us/forumphotos/data/500/rrc04.jpg
Gary
http://www.dphoto.us/forumphotos/data/500/rrc06.jpg
http://www.dphoto.us/forumphotos/data/500/rrc03.jpg
http://www.dphoto.us/forumphotos/data/500/rrc04.jpg
more...
Dhundhun
10-13 11:59 AM
:confused:
Dear gurus,
I have one fundamental question.
why EAD renewal can take up to 3 months? (90 days). It just does not make sense. I can understand if it is fresh application OR it has been expired for quite sometime before applying for renewal. If it is fresh app, there might be some security checks, application verificaiton checks etc. But EAD Renewal is very simple. You were approved once, your application does not boast any address changes. All you are requesting is renewal based on pending I-485. No common sense!:eek:
This is very very unacceptable and shows the lazyness of USCIS in adjucating timely. But they are VERY TIMELY in increasing fees....:eek:
I know I am very furious but dont we think we should raise some momentum in allowing special processing for EAD renewal or allowing local offices to issue Renewals for EAD which has been eliminated now????
Sincerely...
Almost everyone knows USCIS rule that EAD can be applied 120 days in advance before previous EAD expires and normal processing time for EAD is 90 days.
With few exceptions, people are applying in time. They have other issue such as one person got in 6 days. In 20-30 days it is not uncommon.
You are one of the few people who did not apply EAD in time and trying to draw attention.
Dear gurus,
I have one fundamental question.
why EAD renewal can take up to 3 months? (90 days). It just does not make sense. I can understand if it is fresh application OR it has been expired for quite sometime before applying for renewal. If it is fresh app, there might be some security checks, application verificaiton checks etc. But EAD Renewal is very simple. You were approved once, your application does not boast any address changes. All you are requesting is renewal based on pending I-485. No common sense!:eek:
This is very very unacceptable and shows the lazyness of USCIS in adjucating timely. But they are VERY TIMELY in increasing fees....:eek:
I know I am very furious but dont we think we should raise some momentum in allowing special processing for EAD renewal or allowing local offices to issue Renewals for EAD which has been eliminated now????
Sincerely...
Almost everyone knows USCIS rule that EAD can be applied 120 days in advance before previous EAD expires and normal processing time for EAD is 90 days.
With few exceptions, people are applying in time. They have other issue such as one person got in 6 days. In 20-30 days it is not uncommon.
You are one of the few people who did not apply EAD in time and trying to draw attention.
hot eckham 2011 tattoo.
Sakthisagar
10-14 03:59 PM
here are the links...
View Rule (http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=200904&RIN=1615-AB82)
View Rule (http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=200910&RIN=1615-AB82)
View Rule (http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=200904&RIN=1615-AB82)
View Rule (http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaViewRule?pubId=200910&RIN=1615-AB82)
more...
house David Beckham tattoos that
kprgroup
08-03 01:45 PM
Did your denial letter has similar wording?..............just curious
tattoo Beckham
bazuka6
09-01 11:41 AM
I-140 and I-485 are always for future employment. Current employment only assures that employer has future permanent employment on your GC approval (employment on H1 is supposed to be temporary). There is nothing to stop you from working anywhere (or not working at all) until you get GC, at which time sponsoring employer is obligated to give you a job (for which he got LC and I-140 approved), and you are obligated to work for him. If AOS is not approved within 180 days, AC21 can be applied leaving no obligation to work for sponsoring employer.
BTW, I-140 is an employer filing. They are expected to pay for it. Since July 07 it is illegal for employers to ask employees to pay immigration related fees (or ask to fill a bond to work for certain period).
You may not use AC-21 AOS portability for future employment green cards. This is because the start date of employment on your AC-21 letter(from I assume your current employer) should be 180 days after filing of your future employment 485. Since you have been working for your current employer prior to that - USCIS will deny your 485
BTW, I-140 is an employer filing. They are expected to pay for it. Since July 07 it is illegal for employers to ask employees to pay immigration related fees (or ask to fill a bond to work for certain period).
You may not use AC-21 AOS portability for future employment green cards. This is because the start date of employment on your AC-21 letter(from I assume your current employer) should be 180 days after filing of your future employment 485. Since you have been working for your current employer prior to that - USCIS will deny your 485
more...
pictures Beckham#39;s tattoo tribute
jsb
09-09 12:57 PM
No, Did not port to EB3, He is EB3, Filed for 485 in July '07 fiasco. He is consulting his attorney to see, what to do about the unusual approval. Also did not receive the FP, after filing for 485 in July '07 until last month, when they did the first FP mid-august. Pretty sure about that, from what I heard from my friend.
If case is approved, there is no need to do anything about what you call an unusual approval. Legally, an I-485 can be filed only when visa is immediately available (although we know that is not the case), which he/she did (based on his PD being current when he/she filed his/her I-485). What happens thereafter is all internal matter of USCIS. As far as an I-485 filer is concerned, his/her case is in the works until is approved.
If case is approved, there is no need to do anything about what you call an unusual approval. Legally, an I-485 can be filed only when visa is immediately available (although we know that is not the case), which he/she did (based on his PD being current when he/she filed his/her I-485). What happens thereafter is all internal matter of USCIS. As far as an I-485 filer is concerned, his/her case is in the works until is approved.
dresses David Beckham Tattoos
Marphad
12-03 04:30 PM
My wife is not H4, she is working on EAD and we applied her I-485 last July. She has to travel to India for an emegency. We applied for AP last month, have the receipt but it is not approved. Is it okay if she travels to India without AP approval? I will be here and I can take her approved AP when I go there after two months.
I heard that if she travels without AP, her I-485 is considered abonded. Is this true? Can we apply for her H4 (as I am still on H1). Any advice on how to get her back?
Thanks!
I think you should not take this risk. Once you leave the country without AP, the application is considered as revoked as per my reading somewhere. I am trying to find link.
I heard that if she travels without AP, her I-485 is considered abonded. Is this true? Can we apply for her H4 (as I am still on H1). Any advice on how to get her back?
Thanks!
I think you should not take this risk. Once you leave the country without AP, the application is considered as revoked as per my reading somewhere. I am trying to find link.
more...
makeup eckham tattoos. david eckham
xu1
08-24 07:40 PM
Here's a link to a presentation that IV prepared in May for lawmakers. Page 13 has visa availabilities for indians in FY05. Take a look.. The slides has made a strong case with lots of facts compiled together. You can present the slides to your lawmakers or their staff, or the media if you get a chance..
http://immigrationvoice.org/media/ImmigrationVoice_Background_for_Media.pdf
Page 13:
soft quota---- ---- india actual approval---- spill over from ROW
2,803 ---- ---- ---- 6,336 ---- ---- ---- 3,533
2,803 ---- ---- ---- 16,687 ---- ---- ---- 13,884
2,803 ---- ---- ---- 23,399 ---- ---- ---- 20,596
Total
8,408 ---- ---- ---- 46,422 ---- ---- ---- 38,014
http://immigrationvoice.org/media/ImmigrationVoice_Background_for_Media.pdf
Page 13:
soft quota---- ---- india actual approval---- spill over from ROW
2,803 ---- ---- ---- 6,336 ---- ---- ---- 3,533
2,803 ---- ---- ---- 16,687 ---- ---- ---- 13,884
2,803 ---- ---- ---- 23,399 ---- ---- ---- 20,596
Total
8,408 ---- ---- ---- 46,422 ---- ---- ---- 38,014
girlfriend david eckham tattoos back
srarao
07-14 08:49 AM
I see lot of mails asking the Core team to come up with some info.
They are also guys like us and they are good to work for us .
If they have any info it is on the site.
Let us not drag them in every discusssion.
Let them do their job.
-Rao.
They are also guys like us and they are good to work for us .
If they have any info it is on the site.
Let us not drag them in every discusssion.
Let them do their job.
-Rao.
hairstyles David Beckham Tattoos
raydon
09-17 09:50 AM
If CNN drops Lou that will not pass CIR or recapture. There are so much Lou Dobbs are there in USA. It is a waste of time.
Exactly. I was of the same opinion. CNN dumping a pathetic whiny loser like Lou Dobbs might give temporary satisfaction, but it has no positive effect on EB immigration. Plus there are a dozen other idiots who might be ready to replace him as the crazy-in-chief on that stupid talk show. Why even bother?
Forget worrying about about CNN and Lou Dobbs. They are NOBODY and of no significance for the quest for immigration reform.
Exactly. I was of the same opinion. CNN dumping a pathetic whiny loser like Lou Dobbs might give temporary satisfaction, but it has no positive effect on EB immigration. Plus there are a dozen other idiots who might be ready to replace him as the crazy-in-chief on that stupid talk show. Why even bother?
Forget worrying about about CNN and Lou Dobbs. They are NOBODY and of no significance for the quest for immigration reform.
ARUNRAMANATHAN
06-11 03:05 PM
Have you done this ...or do you know some text that say this /....can have a 3 yr extension based on the pervious 140 ...
That is from 2007 to 2010 ....Thanks
3 year H1 extension from date of application (for example: June 2007 to June 2010).
If you move to Company B, you need to restart GC (i.e. new LC and new 140). One can port PD from old 140 to new I-140, however there is a risk involved if the previous I-140 is revoked or canceled.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Please verify details with your lawyer/attorney. This is just my opinion and not be taken as legal advice.
That is from 2007 to 2010 ....Thanks
3 year H1 extension from date of application (for example: June 2007 to June 2010).
If you move to Company B, you need to restart GC (i.e. new LC and new 140). One can port PD from old 140 to new I-140, however there is a risk involved if the previous I-140 is revoked or canceled.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Please verify details with your lawyer/attorney. This is just my opinion and not be taken as legal advice.
h1-b forever
04-22 08:33 AM
small correction:
president is not a member of the congress and neither are the judges (separation of powers)
you are right we may sue congress but to win that is much much tough as even the judge is been appointed by the president which i guess is a member of congress :) but one can certainly try.
president is not a member of the congress and neither are the judges (separation of powers)
you are right we may sue congress but to win that is much much tough as even the judge is been appointed by the president which i guess is a member of congress :) but one can certainly try.
No comments:
Post a Comment