bigboy007
06-11 11:12 AM
no need to worry about this proposal, as some one said this is a proposal like thousands of bills gone inside the whirl wind of politics in Senate and Congress, but as a precaution, IV warned everyone to sign this and send it to senators so they are extra aware of this situation. discussing on this is a waste of time. because this not even a burning issue and no one can pass and amendment without making aware of all the Senators.
Grassley is always against H1B and the latest Jan 8th memo is because of his push. but this proposal of his will not work out. and H1B memo is currently sued in the court.
Folks, Please do not get extra alarmed ont his stupid proposal.
Its better to be prepared rather ignore it. I understand what you are saying but it doesnt hurt to oppose.. if one doesnt oppose you never know.
Grassley is always against H1B and the latest Jan 8th memo is because of his push. but this proposal of his will not work out. and H1B memo is currently sued in the court.
Folks, Please do not get extra alarmed ont his stupid proposal.
Its better to be prepared rather ignore it. I understand what you are saying but it doesnt hurt to oppose.. if one doesnt oppose you never know.
wallpaper coverings of heart. coverings
newbee7
07-05 01:56 PM
Total so far approx. $300.
Monthly contrib: $20 for over 7 months.
This purpose of this post in not to boast about my contribution. It is to motivate others who are on the sidelines.
Please contibute to the best of your ability.
Monthly contrib: $20 for over 7 months.
This purpose of this post in not to boast about my contribution. It is to motivate others who are on the sidelines.
Please contibute to the best of your ability.
logiclife
08-03 02:30 PM
Copying from the reply I posted here:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=133404#post133404
I consulted a high profile ($200 per 15 minutes) lawyer to discuss this issue. 1) He told me that he would re-submit the AOS. The comparison to the medical clearance requirement, according to him, was pointless, as they are two different things. If USCIS issues a statement they will not reject solely based on the EVL, then we can assume that is the truth. Their statement on Medical clearance cannot be interpreted to say they won't reject on the basis of another missing requirement, say the EVL.
2) Filing two AOS packets can indeed also cause confusion, but it is a smaller risk according to him, and should be mitigated by a covering letter that says you are re-submitting to provide the XYZ document that was missed from the first packet.
Based on this info, I have asked my lawyer to get a confirmation from the USCIS on the document that he missed in my case-- the EVL. If USCIS okays that, we do not resubmit. If they don't do that within a week, I will try to re-submit... not going to be easy considering my lawyer may not be in agreement... but that is what would be the correct way out of this, according to the second opinion I got today.
Thanks
If you are resubmmitting or planning to resubmit, one tip...you need medical originals again, so call your doctor and ask him to create new sealed envelopes with original I-693...do this ahead of time coz this is only thing not in your control when filing a second 485. I am sure you might have thought about this, but just in case if you havent, then remember you will need I-693 original with your and doctor's signature with other stuff in sealed envelopes again.
Wish you all the luck Abhijit.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=133404#post133404
I consulted a high profile ($200 per 15 minutes) lawyer to discuss this issue. 1) He told me that he would re-submit the AOS. The comparison to the medical clearance requirement, according to him, was pointless, as they are two different things. If USCIS issues a statement they will not reject solely based on the EVL, then we can assume that is the truth. Their statement on Medical clearance cannot be interpreted to say they won't reject on the basis of another missing requirement, say the EVL.
2) Filing two AOS packets can indeed also cause confusion, but it is a smaller risk according to him, and should be mitigated by a covering letter that says you are re-submitting to provide the XYZ document that was missed from the first packet.
Based on this info, I have asked my lawyer to get a confirmation from the USCIS on the document that he missed in my case-- the EVL. If USCIS okays that, we do not resubmit. If they don't do that within a week, I will try to re-submit... not going to be easy considering my lawyer may not be in agreement... but that is what would be the correct way out of this, according to the second opinion I got today.
Thanks
If you are resubmmitting or planning to resubmit, one tip...you need medical originals again, so call your doctor and ask him to create new sealed envelopes with original I-693...do this ahead of time coz this is only thing not in your control when filing a second 485. I am sure you might have thought about this, but just in case if you havent, then remember you will need I-693 original with your and doctor's signature with other stuff in sealed envelopes again.
Wish you all the luck Abhijit.
2011 B. Coverings of the Heart
nlssubbu
12-27 02:33 PM
Dubai - no issues without valid stamp
Frankfurt, Munich, Hamburg - I heard no issues now, if u have valid i 797 - waiting forr some comments
Amsterdam/Schiphol - No issue without valid stamp
London - ?????
Seoul - ?????
Singapore - ??????
Bangkok - ?????
Kuwait - ?????
Zurich -- ????
Geneva -- ???
I know that Seoul, Bangkok and Singapore does not need transit visa, if you do not step out of the Airport and have a connecting flight resevered for your outbound destination.
Frankfurt, Munich, Hamburg - I heard no issues now, if u have valid i 797 - waiting forr some comments
Amsterdam/Schiphol - No issue without valid stamp
London - ?????
Seoul - ?????
Singapore - ??????
Bangkok - ?????
Kuwait - ?????
Zurich -- ????
Geneva -- ???
I know that Seoul, Bangkok and Singapore does not need transit visa, if you do not step out of the Airport and have a connecting flight resevered for your outbound destination.
more...
webm
06-06 01:56 PM
It sounds NSC is approving lot of EB2 cases these past few months..good for EB2 folks with PD current..:)
----------------------
PD EB3-I Oct ,2001 (TSC)
----------------------
PD EB3-I Oct ,2001 (TSC)
Indirant
01-31 08:22 PM
Hi,
Good work Varsha, are we having the conf call today let us know.
Thanks
Sekar
Good work Varsha, are we having the conf call today let us know.
Thanks
Sekar
more...
deepimpact
09-10 01:53 PM
If USCIS wants to do another JULY 2007 they never learnt their lession. With the Quarterly/annual quota I dont think USCIS legally can make EB2 current. I hate another JULY 2007 for sure.
They can make a category current when Demand < Supply. So once all I-485s prior to 2007 are approved the monthly demand data they publish will show demand Prior to CY2011 = 200. So unless they use approved I-140 to determine demand , DOS will make the dates current(even if for 1 month). As long as USCIS uses pending I-485 data to determine demand, the July 2007 fiasco will keep on repeating every 3-4 years. The key here is to have USCIS provide the actual demand (people with approved I-140s). It was mentioned somewhere that the current USCIS database is not capable of sorting the I-140s by country of chargebility and hence the I-140 data can't be used to determine per country demand.
They can make a category current when Demand < Supply. So once all I-485s prior to 2007 are approved the monthly demand data they publish will show demand Prior to CY2011 = 200. So unless they use approved I-140 to determine demand , DOS will make the dates current(even if for 1 month). As long as USCIS uses pending I-485 data to determine demand, the July 2007 fiasco will keep on repeating every 3-4 years. The key here is to have USCIS provide the actual demand (people with approved I-140s). It was mentioned somewhere that the current USCIS database is not capable of sorting the I-140s by country of chargebility and hence the I-140 data can't be used to determine per country demand.
2010 Doggles Comfort Hearts
prioritydate
12-20 07:09 PM
Thanks for the clarification, Logiclife. I enter U.S in the first week of Feb, 2001. The economy was bad and I didn't manage to get a job. In fact, I didn't managed to get a job for a year. My then employer didn't revoked my H1B and the I-94 was valid until Oct, 2002. I didn't know that I was out of status till now. I don't remember seeing any section in I-485 form, asking for information about out of status. I did attach my previous H1-B approval notice(2000 -2002) while filing I-485. One thing I want to know is, did anyone got a query(RFE), asking to provide all W2 forms since their entry into this country? I am interested to know that.
Now I am really afraid. G-325 form has section to provide last 5 jobs. Since I had a gap, I didn't provide the details for the year 2001. I am royally screwed now! :(
Now I am really afraid. G-325 form has section to provide last 5 jobs. Since I had a gap, I didn't provide the details for the year 2001. I am royally screwed now! :(
more...
va_il
07-04 07:48 PM
Details behind your theory and their source information please
hair Flowers of the heart: A
gcdreamer05
03-09 01:47 PM
hey bsbawa atleast ur pd is apr 04, now it is feb 04 for you , there is hope that you will get it by this year end atleast, think about folks like me, i have to wait till 2019 to get my eb3 to current......... so stop crying and be happy that atleast ur in EB2........ :o
more...
coopheal
05-06 08:57 PM
I got a reply from USCIS saying that they can process the request sorted by priority date and country of birth of the applicant. Processing time will be around 15 months and that they have got their answer on priority date.
what are the next steps?
Thanks for sending the letter to USCIS and now posting the response here. IV has taken action in this regards.
what are the next steps?
Thanks for sending the letter to USCIS and now posting the response here. IV has taken action in this regards.
hot Couple with Heart Figure
Jaime
09-11 05:44 PM
We have the time now! The time to plan and to attend the rally! Once the rally passes we will be out of time! We have this huge opportunity! Let us all seize it!!! LET US ALL ATTEND THE RALLY!!!!
more...
house of wall-coverings after my
BECsufferer
02-19 07:00 AM
What do you wish? You need gc the moment you enter the country? If anyone who stays 5 years get green card.That is excellent if legal or illegal immigrant. This is apart from 140K regular quota. This will reduce backlog substantially.
And who do you think is going to process the paperwork for illegals? ... guess again, the same agency that is processing for Legal would-be-could-be immigrants. So how is it not going to increase processing time which would ultimately result in further delay?
Moreover, it doesn't matter wether their is delay or not. Simply, putting illegals in front of legals is ethically, morally and legally wrong!!
And who do you think is going to process the paperwork for illegals? ... guess again, the same agency that is processing for Legal would-be-could-be immigrants. So how is it not going to increase processing time which would ultimately result in further delay?
Moreover, it doesn't matter wether their is delay or not. Simply, putting illegals in front of legals is ethically, morally and legally wrong!!
tattoo Built right in the heart of
feedfront
09-21 12:23 PM
Hi Guys,
I am in tough spot. I was laid off from my GC sponsoring employer (A) in 2008 and joined another employer B . I did not do a AC21 notification. My dates are current and now I received an RFE to provide employment letter from current employer. The exact words of RFE are as follows:
"Submit a letter of employment attesting to applicant's current employment. This letter should be written on the company's official letterhead, citing the date the applicant began working, if a permanent full time position, the position offered, the position the applicant is currently working and the salary offered. Include corroborating evidence such as recent pay stubs, income tax returns, with all W2s or other evidence as appropriate. "
Now I am not working for original GC employer. I don't have a problem providing above from my current employer B. But whether the EVL should also mention that I am not working for GC sponsoring employer and that my current employers job profile is in same classification as previous based on AC21. Do I mention about the AC21 also in the letter? My current employer's attorneys are not that great but my current employer only wants me to use their own attorney.
Now here is the situation:
I have a job offer from another employer (Employer C) and they are in the middle of doing a H-1 transfer. In fact by tomorrow they will file the H1 paperwork. Now I don't know whether I should provide the letter from my potential new employer C . In that case, I won't be able to provide W2 or pay stubs until I join them. I have an opportunity to use my own attorney here (like murthy, Ron Gothcer..)
OR
should I provide a letter from my current employer using their attorneys and whether or not I should mention about AC21 in the employment letter.
Also they sent the RFE to my previous employer's attorney even though my current employer's attorney had sent the new G-28 forms. Can my current attorney respond to the RFE or will the response get rejected because USCIS still has old attorney on file.
Thanks.
Don't worry too much, just follow the instructions and respond. Well, I will suggest to use your current employer and their attorney as paperword will be smooth, efficient and fast.
You can hold your H1 transfer for a week or two till you don't respond.
I think your attorney (whoever you pick to work on RFE) will definitely mention AC-21 to keep it issueless.
I have also switched my employer and not filed AC-21. I've been sent RFE and that's what my attorney will do (I assume). I had asked him before (after switching job) if I needed to file AC21 letter. He said it's not mandatory and added that it can be handled if any RFEs are issued. Well, I did not send AC21 because he was asking for fee and I did not want to DIY project on such important. He's my previous employer's attorney.
I think for these RFEs you don't need great attorney as case is not complex. I think anything will work as long as you've not misused any GC's requirements.
Good Luck!
I am in tough spot. I was laid off from my GC sponsoring employer (A) in 2008 and joined another employer B . I did not do a AC21 notification. My dates are current and now I received an RFE to provide employment letter from current employer. The exact words of RFE are as follows:
"Submit a letter of employment attesting to applicant's current employment. This letter should be written on the company's official letterhead, citing the date the applicant began working, if a permanent full time position, the position offered, the position the applicant is currently working and the salary offered. Include corroborating evidence such as recent pay stubs, income tax returns, with all W2s or other evidence as appropriate. "
Now I am not working for original GC employer. I don't have a problem providing above from my current employer B. But whether the EVL should also mention that I am not working for GC sponsoring employer and that my current employers job profile is in same classification as previous based on AC21. Do I mention about the AC21 also in the letter? My current employer's attorneys are not that great but my current employer only wants me to use their own attorney.
Now here is the situation:
I have a job offer from another employer (Employer C) and they are in the middle of doing a H-1 transfer. In fact by tomorrow they will file the H1 paperwork. Now I don't know whether I should provide the letter from my potential new employer C . In that case, I won't be able to provide W2 or pay stubs until I join them. I have an opportunity to use my own attorney here (like murthy, Ron Gothcer..)
OR
should I provide a letter from my current employer using their attorneys and whether or not I should mention about AC21 in the employment letter.
Also they sent the RFE to my previous employer's attorney even though my current employer's attorney had sent the new G-28 forms. Can my current attorney respond to the RFE or will the response get rejected because USCIS still has old attorney on file.
Thanks.
Don't worry too much, just follow the instructions and respond. Well, I will suggest to use your current employer and their attorney as paperword will be smooth, efficient and fast.
You can hold your H1 transfer for a week or two till you don't respond.
I think your attorney (whoever you pick to work on RFE) will definitely mention AC-21 to keep it issueless.
I have also switched my employer and not filed AC-21. I've been sent RFE and that's what my attorney will do (I assume). I had asked him before (after switching job) if I needed to file AC21 letter. He said it's not mandatory and added that it can be handled if any RFEs are issued. Well, I did not send AC21 because he was asking for fee and I did not want to DIY project on such important. He's my previous employer's attorney.
I think for these RFEs you don't need great attorney as case is not complex. I think anything will work as long as you've not misused any GC's requirements.
Good Luck!
more...
pictures Gold Heart Weighted Spray
singhsa3
03-04 10:58 AM
Folks,
I need some help from anyone willing.
There are too many media and I can't cover them all.
Please feel free to replace my name by yours and get the ball rolling.
We won't know unless we try. Don't be discouraged by skeptics, they do serve a purpose by making us think from all angles.
So please, if you can please this to local media and hope someone will take note of it.
So far I have covered,
WSJ
CNN
Foxnews
Realtor
Seeking Alpha
Left voicemails for WSJ and Realtor
I need some help from anyone willing.
There are too many media and I can't cover them all.
Please feel free to replace my name by yours and get the ball rolling.
We won't know unless we try. Don't be discouraged by skeptics, they do serve a purpose by making us think from all angles.
So please, if you can please this to local media and hope someone will take note of it.
So far I have covered,
WSJ
CNN
Foxnews
Realtor
Seeking Alpha
Left voicemails for WSJ and Realtor
dresses camouflaged coverings with
dtekkedil
07-16 06:18 PM
Guys,
Lets come up with some suggestions to counter-attack these false propoganda. Few thoughts??
1. Will gandhigiri work with them? Not just sending flowers but using other Gandhi ways as well.
2. Should core post some article on the home page.."Top 10 Myths About Employment Based Immigration" and include tax as one of the myths.
Reason, i'm saying this is that in my company there are several americans who think that way even though they are ok with immigration. They think that we do not pay any tax here.
3. Educate numberusa and other anti-immigration people about. I know we might not be able to educate the core people over their but we might be able to educate other member joining there.
Any other thoughts?..
The only way to counter this is to fax the senators and reps stating the "real" facts!
Lets come up with some suggestions to counter-attack these false propoganda. Few thoughts??
1. Will gandhigiri work with them? Not just sending flowers but using other Gandhi ways as well.
2. Should core post some article on the home page.."Top 10 Myths About Employment Based Immigration" and include tax as one of the myths.
Reason, i'm saying this is that in my company there are several americans who think that way even though they are ok with immigration. They think that we do not pay any tax here.
3. Educate numberusa and other anti-immigration people about. I know we might not be able to educate the core people over their but we might be able to educate other member joining there.
Any other thoughts?..
The only way to counter this is to fax the senators and reps stating the "real" facts!
more...
makeup my life/heart:
ujjvalkoul
03-07 03:24 PM
at the time when the PD becomes current....and u have used AC21 and now work for new employer. how would the USCIS know. Only way for them to know if to ask for a Employment letter(w/Job Duties, salary etc) and if they notice its not the sponsoring empoyer, they will look at it more closely....By the time all this happens you could be into the next month when you PD could have retrogressed back to 1900 again.....so as I see it....unless USCIS approved GC first thing w/o asking for additional info...is the best case scenario....
girlfriend needed window coverings.
piyu7444
01-30 04:15 PM
Good. That means you were in-status at the I-485 filing. Submit documents mentioned in RFE and you should be good.
>> My question is - Is the time I haven't been working considered as Out of Status?
No you are not. Like I said out of status UNTIL date of I-485 application is most important.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
I read the thread and have a question for Desi3933 as he seems to have knowledge about how this works..........
I am on h1b with employer B.
Employer A had my h1b and had processed my GC. I applied for 485 in Jul 07 and then in Jun 08 I transfered my h1b to Employer B. I did not notify USCIS about this job change so I did not invoke AC21. (Lawyer suggested to leave it in case we get a RFE)
Now my wife's 485 application is tied with mine. She is on h1b with employer C. Employer C is a consulting agency and her contract will end today Jan 30 2009. Also we are expecting hence she will take a 3 month time off / vacation for the baby (permissible under law) starting End of April 2009. Further she will travel to India on Aug 1 2009 and will return around Nov 15 09.
She has worked only 1 month in 2009 this will be reflected on 2009 w-2. I have couple of questions:
Will she be considered as "out of status" from Feb 1 to April end?
She has h1b valid till 2010 so when she returns back to US in Nov 09 shall she use h1b or enter US on AP given the fact that 485 is pending?
Will you recommend getting paid from Feb thru May to cover the gap? (this could be done with as the employer is willing to help)
Thanks
>> My question is - Is the time I haven't been working considered as Out of Status?
No you are not. Like I said out of status UNTIL date of I-485 application is most important.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
I read the thread and have a question for Desi3933 as he seems to have knowledge about how this works..........
I am on h1b with employer B.
Employer A had my h1b and had processed my GC. I applied for 485 in Jul 07 and then in Jun 08 I transfered my h1b to Employer B. I did not notify USCIS about this job change so I did not invoke AC21. (Lawyer suggested to leave it in case we get a RFE)
Now my wife's 485 application is tied with mine. She is on h1b with employer C. Employer C is a consulting agency and her contract will end today Jan 30 2009. Also we are expecting hence she will take a 3 month time off / vacation for the baby (permissible under law) starting End of April 2009. Further she will travel to India on Aug 1 2009 and will return around Nov 15 09.
She has worked only 1 month in 2009 this will be reflected on 2009 w-2. I have couple of questions:
Will she be considered as "out of status" from Feb 1 to April end?
She has h1b valid till 2010 so when she returns back to US in Nov 09 shall she use h1b or enter US on AP given the fact that 485 is pending?
Will you recommend getting paid from Feb thru May to cover the gap? (this could be done with as the employer is willing to help)
Thanks
hairstyles coverings of heart.
swede
09-19 02:33 AM
Thank you IV and all volunteers that made this rally happen. It was very well organized and I really enjoyed being part of it!!
I really liked Murthy's speech. Short and to the point. "Legal" is the key.
I also liked Mark's little comedy act.
(Wish more would have shown up to show their support, but I guess some people are content waiting 10 or more years for their GC.)
Suggestions for improvement to next time:
1. I liked that the Chinese group joined the rally, but I didn't like their speaker. He was only talking about Chinese and Indian joining forces, and then making some kind of joke about IC chips are only made by Indians and Chinese. It's ok if you want to be an Indian/Chinese-only group, it is your choice. But if you want to change something about your green cards, you will fail with that attitude. You need to attract and change things for EVERYONE, or no one will listen to you. (If you want IV to be for everyone, IV needs to be more clear on that. There are so many Indians on the forums that ppl might think it is only for Indians.)
2. Minor things... Good job on the signs(!), but there were too many of them. Half would be enough. People had trouble focus on them.
Also, keep the message short. Max a few words. No one can, in a few seconds, read a moving sign containing 4 lines of text with 5 words on each, on an unknown subject. The poor people who tried to read them looked like near-sighted old men. Short and big letters is better. "Shorter wait for legals"
rather than
"Reduce the backlog for highly-skilled legal immigrants so we can live the American dream and not wait for 10 years"
But all in all, I was amazed how well everything was planned. The state flags was a nice touch. Flowers too. Water for the participants. Great! Even the nice DC cops blocking the roads for us seemed very happy with us. Following the law is what legals do...
I really liked Murthy's speech. Short and to the point. "Legal" is the key.
I also liked Mark's little comedy act.
(Wish more would have shown up to show their support, but I guess some people are content waiting 10 or more years for their GC.)
Suggestions for improvement to next time:
1. I liked that the Chinese group joined the rally, but I didn't like their speaker. He was only talking about Chinese and Indian joining forces, and then making some kind of joke about IC chips are only made by Indians and Chinese. It's ok if you want to be an Indian/Chinese-only group, it is your choice. But if you want to change something about your green cards, you will fail with that attitude. You need to attract and change things for EVERYONE, or no one will listen to you. (If you want IV to be for everyone, IV needs to be more clear on that. There are so many Indians on the forums that ppl might think it is only for Indians.)
2. Minor things... Good job on the signs(!), but there were too many of them. Half would be enough. People had trouble focus on them.
Also, keep the message short. Max a few words. No one can, in a few seconds, read a moving sign containing 4 lines of text with 5 words on each, on an unknown subject. The poor people who tried to read them looked like near-sighted old men. Short and big letters is better. "Shorter wait for legals"
rather than
"Reduce the backlog for highly-skilled legal immigrants so we can live the American dream and not wait for 10 years"
But all in all, I was amazed how well everything was planned. The state flags was a nice touch. Flowers too. Water for the participants. Great! Even the nice DC cops blocking the roads for us seemed very happy with us. Following the law is what legals do...
gvenkat
10-20 02:38 PM
Look, no one is saying that McCain is the savior, but at the same time, it is important for us to understand that Obama is not the light at the end of the tunnel, its the fast approaching train towards us. So, some of us are just pointing to others that be prepared for the train wreck. That does not necessarily translate into saying that McCain is the savior. It just means what it means.
And you are right, none of us can vote. But if this community supports Obama, its like 300 million Americans voting for the President who works against the interest of majority of Americans. Won't we also be guided by the "misguided" ideology and rhetoric if we act in the same manner.
The irony of the situation is, we are caught between the rock and the hard place. Some of us are saying its better to stay on rocks, others are preaching that its better to be caught in the hard place. That's all.
.
go read my post again. what we need is change. mccain wont do that. he will go to war with iran and our problems will be in the backburner, atleast even if obama is not supportive as much as mccain is we dont need to frigging wait this long... we will either get it or not get the GC. but beofre that we need our jobs and if mcain is there.. we might not have it for long...
And you are right, none of us can vote. But if this community supports Obama, its like 300 million Americans voting for the President who works against the interest of majority of Americans. Won't we also be guided by the "misguided" ideology and rhetoric if we act in the same manner.
The irony of the situation is, we are caught between the rock and the hard place. Some of us are saying its better to stay on rocks, others are preaching that its better to be caught in the hard place. That's all.
.
go read my post again. what we need is change. mccain wont do that. he will go to war with iran and our problems will be in the backburner, atleast even if obama is not supportive as much as mccain is we dont need to frigging wait this long... we will either get it or not get the GC. but beofre that we need our jobs and if mcain is there.. we might not have it for long...
qesehmk
02-11 03:03 PM
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV.pdf
Family based visa used for FY2009 = 215,343
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = 10,567
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2010.
*********
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY08-AR-TableV.pdf
Family based visa used for FY2008 = 226,105
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = ZERO
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2009.
Always go by the facts.
___________________
Not a legal advice.
I agree. I tried to see if there is a way FB category in 2009 might have received a spillover from EB. But thats almost impossible given EB is severely backlogged.
Another way to verify unused 13K in 2009 EB would be to check 2010 FB limit. If there were unused visas from EB in 2009 then they go back to FB in 2010.
Finally, per Ron unused is not same as wasted. Unused is unassigned. Wasted is .... assigned but action is not taken to close the case. If that is the case then wasted visas won't be available .... neither inside or outside category. It is frightening to think that with so many preadjudicated cases USCIS might be wasting visas! I don't believe this .... but if true ... it is outrageous.
Family based visa used for FY2009 = 215,343
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = 10,567
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2010.
*********
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY08-AR-TableV.pdf
Family based visa used for FY2008 = 226,105
Family based immigrant visa numbers = 226,000
Unused visa = ZERO
available for employment based visa numbers for FY2009.
Always go by the facts.
___________________
Not a legal advice.
I agree. I tried to see if there is a way FB category in 2009 might have received a spillover from EB. But thats almost impossible given EB is severely backlogged.
Another way to verify unused 13K in 2009 EB would be to check 2010 FB limit. If there were unused visas from EB in 2009 then they go back to FB in 2010.
Finally, per Ron unused is not same as wasted. Unused is unassigned. Wasted is .... assigned but action is not taken to close the case. If that is the case then wasted visas won't be available .... neither inside or outside category. It is frightening to think that with so many preadjudicated cases USCIS might be wasting visas! I don't believe this .... but if true ... it is outrageous.
No comments:
Post a Comment