pointlesswait
09-10 02:37 PM
Instead of working on recapture..we must work on filing for 485 even if PD's are not current.. this way.. atleast in this recession ppl can be assured of some piece of mind.
visa recapturing will not happen..am not being pessimistic..its just too much of a hassle...needs a law and all that.. too complicated.
allowing to file for 485 can be bought back as a temporary relief..we should work on that!
visa recapturing will not happen..am not being pessimistic..its just too much of a hassle...needs a law and all that.. too complicated.
allowing to file for 485 can be bought back as a temporary relief..we should work on that!
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
sss9i
05-23 07:56 AM
I sent to Mr.SessionsMr.Graham and Mrs.Clinton
Dear Senator:
Good morning~
Subject: Treating the currently backlogged legal skilled immigrants at parity with undocumented immigrants and family-based applicants in the Immigration Reform bill S. 1348.
Immigration Voice (www.immigrationvoice.org) represents the interest of 500,000 legal skilled immigrants in the United States on the path to green cards who have been stuck in enormous backlogs and delays in immigration process.
The career growth, job mobility and qualify of life of these half a million legal skilled immigrants is subverted by the bill in its current form.
1. Section 501(b) reduces the number of green cards to legal skilled immigrants from the current 140,000/year to 90,000/year and diverts the major portion of those green cards to future low-skills guest workers under the Y visa program. Instead of increasing that number to reduce the backlogs this section take a step backwards and would exacerbate the backlogs. On the other hand, 503(f)(2) of this act would allocate an estimated 11 million green cards over a time frame of 5 years – 2.2 million a year – to undocumented immigrants. Immigration Voice requests congress to treat legal skilled immigrants at parity with undocumented immigrants and increase the number of green cards to at least 250,000 for 5 years for currently backlogged applicants defined under Sec. 502(d)(2) in order to reduce to current backlog before the untested points based merit system is functional.
2. Immigration Voice requests congress to waive per-country ceilings on backlogged petitions to be processed under Sec. 502(d)(2) in order to make the backlog reduction more efficient. The bill provides a very similar waiver from per-country ceilings to family based pending petitions in section 508(b).
3. Immigration Voice requests congress to allow legal skilled immigrants to file for adjustment of status for those applicants who have been certified by DOL to be doing jobs no US citizen is willing qualified or able to do. This would be at parity with provisions for undocumented immigrants who would qualify for instant work permit (probationary card) that allows them to work without employer sponsor and without department of labor’s certification by simply by registering.
Immigration Voice strongly opposes the bill S 1348 in its current form and requests congress to amend this bill and treat the legal skilled immigrants at parity with undocumented immigrants, future guest-workers and pending family-based applicants.
Thanks,
Dr.Gaddipati
Dear Senator:
Good morning~
Subject: Treating the currently backlogged legal skilled immigrants at parity with undocumented immigrants and family-based applicants in the Immigration Reform bill S. 1348.
Immigration Voice (www.immigrationvoice.org) represents the interest of 500,000 legal skilled immigrants in the United States on the path to green cards who have been stuck in enormous backlogs and delays in immigration process.
The career growth, job mobility and qualify of life of these half a million legal skilled immigrants is subverted by the bill in its current form.
1. Section 501(b) reduces the number of green cards to legal skilled immigrants from the current 140,000/year to 90,000/year and diverts the major portion of those green cards to future low-skills guest workers under the Y visa program. Instead of increasing that number to reduce the backlogs this section take a step backwards and would exacerbate the backlogs. On the other hand, 503(f)(2) of this act would allocate an estimated 11 million green cards over a time frame of 5 years – 2.2 million a year – to undocumented immigrants. Immigration Voice requests congress to treat legal skilled immigrants at parity with undocumented immigrants and increase the number of green cards to at least 250,000 for 5 years for currently backlogged applicants defined under Sec. 502(d)(2) in order to reduce to current backlog before the untested points based merit system is functional.
2. Immigration Voice requests congress to waive per-country ceilings on backlogged petitions to be processed under Sec. 502(d)(2) in order to make the backlog reduction more efficient. The bill provides a very similar waiver from per-country ceilings to family based pending petitions in section 508(b).
3. Immigration Voice requests congress to allow legal skilled immigrants to file for adjustment of status for those applicants who have been certified by DOL to be doing jobs no US citizen is willing qualified or able to do. This would be at parity with provisions for undocumented immigrants who would qualify for instant work permit (probationary card) that allows them to work without employer sponsor and without department of labor’s certification by simply by registering.
Immigration Voice strongly opposes the bill S 1348 in its current form and requests congress to amend this bill and treat the legal skilled immigrants at parity with undocumented immigrants, future guest-workers and pending family-based applicants.
Thanks,
Dr.Gaddipati
makemygc
08-01 08:44 PM
Up until July 29, 2007 (incl.) when sorting of files was going on, NSC did a load sharing of files with TSC. (and btw they did not look at where ones' I-140 is adjudicated when making the selection, it was random. I know several such cases)
This in my opinion is a very good way of making sure adjudicating resources are kept in balance at both centers.
Like somone quiet rightly pointed out it is akin to the old Labor Certification process where some states were way faster than others (less demand faster process).
In the direct filing which started July 30, 2007 the load sharing has a great possibilty of being tilted one way or the other (though maybe not as much as old LC's). They have made a geographical distribution and not one that factors # of applications traditionally received from states.
On the other hand, may be USCIS has figured that the particular geographical jurisdiction produces the right load sharing between NSC and TSC!
CA and NY were the two states which were always backlogged during those bad old days of labor processing. Now, CA application goes to TSC and NY goes to NSC and that might keep both the centers balanced going forward.
But I think rather than dividing based on the states, they should rather do a load balancing based on the request coming..just like our network works :)
Load balancing can be simply based on the round robin fashion..one goes to TSC other goes to NSC and so on.
How difficult is to build that kind of system and to keep it balanced and fair for all.
This in my opinion is a very good way of making sure adjudicating resources are kept in balance at both centers.
Like somone quiet rightly pointed out it is akin to the old Labor Certification process where some states were way faster than others (less demand faster process).
In the direct filing which started July 30, 2007 the load sharing has a great possibilty of being tilted one way or the other (though maybe not as much as old LC's). They have made a geographical distribution and not one that factors # of applications traditionally received from states.
On the other hand, may be USCIS has figured that the particular geographical jurisdiction produces the right load sharing between NSC and TSC!
CA and NY were the two states which were always backlogged during those bad old days of labor processing. Now, CA application goes to TSC and NY goes to NSC and that might keep both the centers balanced going forward.
But I think rather than dividing based on the states, they should rather do a load balancing based on the request coming..just like our network works :)
Load balancing can be simply based on the round robin fashion..one goes to TSC other goes to NSC and so on.
How difficult is to build that kind of system and to keep it balanced and fair for all.
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
eastindia
01-14 09:58 AM
Has anyone been checking all the predictions if they are now true after 4 months?
more...
rajsand
08-29 03:40 PM
There are 1000s waiting for receipts , filed before July 24th . Hope someone apprises USCIS that people are aware of it & they cannot fool millions just by a silly update (who is asking for it anyways!)!
Applied to NSC on 18th July and received on 19th by F.HAUINER (has anyone received application by this person.. asking just to check if mine reached the right place)
Receipts : Not Yet
PD : Feb 2003
Applied to NSC on 18th July and received on 19th by F.HAUINER (has anyone received application by this person.. asking just to check if mine reached the right place)
Receipts : Not Yet
PD : Feb 2003
visa_reval
11-17 04:22 PM
Done.
more...
arun_ramani
02-01 02:36 PM
Contributed $100 for Advocacy day. I will also inform few of my friends who can also contribute.
Best Wishes,
Arun
Best Wishes,
Arun
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
ushkand
09-04 03:07 PM
Just got my checks cashed for I-485. I did not apply for EAD or AP with my 485.
Btw.. I did not have my medical exam and used the wrong G-325 form but still got receipted. I hope the second application I sent in does not cause any issues. :(
Btw.. I did not have my medical exam and used the wrong G-325 form but still got receipted. I hope the second application I sent in does not cause any issues. :(
more...
nat23
02-05 03:40 PM
"Naitik, you just completed your payment.
Your receipt number for this payment is: 1607-9931-0030-0509."
Donated $50
Your receipt number for this payment is: 1607-9931-0030-0509."
Donated $50
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
snathan
02-09 09:24 PM
Any one else....today?
more...
bmosur
08-31 01:57 PM
PD - July 2004 Category - EB3
I-140 cleared June 2006
I-485 - send 07/27/2007
Cheqs encashed 08/31
Receipt Date - Not yet
Hope this helps. Looks like they are processing randomly
I-140 cleared June 2006
I-485 - send 07/27/2007
Cheqs encashed 08/31
Receipt Date - Not yet
Hope this helps. Looks like they are processing randomly
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
reddymjm
06-08 12:19 PM
looks like NSC is not working at all on receipts today.
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
magicmonkey
09-20 11:18 AM
Sent to Nebraska on 11th July.
My and my wife's all 6 checks got cashed today.
Receipt number starts from LIN.
Notice date: 14 sept
Thanks
My and my wife's all 6 checks got cashed today.
Receipt number starts from LIN.
Notice date: 14 sept
Thanks
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
acecupid
07-03 02:00 PM
http://www.yorkflowers.com/cgi-bin/yorkitem-dba.cgi/C39-2942
This works for me!:D
This works for me!:D
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
abq_gc
08-18 02:44 PM
How do you know that people with more recent priority dates are getting approved and you have been left out? You know this because these members of IV share this info with you and you are talking about using this info against them.
I won't be surprised if this will discourage people to just silently leave the forum after getting approvals.
well if they want to do that.. they can do that... wont discourage us from fighting this injustice against everyone in the legal immigration community... i for one consider the plight of EB-3 at this time to be more than that of EB-2... but why are just fighting among ourselves... instead of doing something as a group ??
I won't be surprised if this will discourage people to just silently leave the forum after getting approvals.
well if they want to do that.. they can do that... wont discourage us from fighting this injustice against everyone in the legal immigration community... i for one consider the plight of EB-3 at this time to be more than that of EB-2... but why are just fighting among ourselves... instead of doing something as a group ??
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
GCneeded
05-23 01:04 PM
Sent Email to all 10 senators + 2 senators from CA
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
tonyHK12
02-17 04:57 PM
thanks Madhuri, updating total...
girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14%
desi3933
07-09 11:50 AM
The text you quoted below only states that the AOS petition can only be approved if a visa number is available, no where does it say that AOS petition cannot be accepted if visa number is not available. we are not asking for AOS petition to be approved we are only asking that AOS petition be filed and accepted by USCIS.
Read again -
(3) an immigrant visa is immediately available to him at the time his application is filed
it means that
At the time of application (i.e. when I-485 is filed), an immigrant visa is immediately available to him
Also read my other post
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=103927&postcount=103
______________________
Not a legal advice.
Read again -
(3) an immigrant visa is immediately available to him at the time his application is filed
it means that
At the time of application (i.e. when I-485 is filed), an immigrant visa is immediately available to him
Also read my other post
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=103927&postcount=103
______________________
Not a legal advice.
hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11%
Macaca
07-10 10:13 AM
Thanks for posting this link. This is a must read on AOS.
8 CFR PART 245 -- ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR PERMANENT RESIDENCE (http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cf90b70814c3464912a08093ce96e 83c)
This link is for section 245 in TITLE 8 OF CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS (8 CFR) (I think!) . This CFR may have other sections of use for us. For example, there may be section 240 that explains some other GC stage.
Please post a link that is table of contents of CFR. That is, it gives all section titles in CFR: Sec 1, Sec 2, .. Sec 245, Sec 246, ... Thanks!
8 CFR PART 245 -- ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR PERMANENT RESIDENCE (http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cf90b70814c3464912a08093ce96e 83c)
This link is for section 245 in TITLE 8 OF CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS (8 CFR) (I think!) . This CFR may have other sections of use for us. For example, there may be section 240 that explains some other GC stage.
Please post a link that is table of contents of CFR. That is, it gives all section titles in CFR: Sec 1, Sec 2, .. Sec 245, Sec 246, ... Thanks!
sanhari
08-09 09:12 AM
Did anyone hear anything from their local congressman or USCIS on the visa spillover usage? I am planning to send in more requests this week, let's see...
abhijitp
01-24 08:01 PM
People spending time on this thread, why not spend 5 minutes to print and sign a letter, then spend 82c and mail one copy each to USCIS and IV.
Do you not like the idea of 3 year long EAD's and more job portability which will come from a revised definition of "same or similar" job description??
Do you not like the idea of 3 year long EAD's and more job portability which will come from a revised definition of "same or similar" job description??
No comments:
Post a Comment