nozerd
03-19 06:57 PM
Please see answers in blue below
so you mean to say that if I try to enter in fourth year, then itself I have to go to an immigration hearing and the judge would decide whether he would let me stay or not ?
Please see the following link for all details
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/newcomer/res-oblig.html
Also can I apply for CA SIN staying in USA ?
I think you can apply via fax, but would have to give someones address in Canada to actually recieve it.
Should I be filing taxes there ?
No you shouldnt if you are not residing in Canada and have no Canadian income. You would if you had Canadian income or you were residing in Canada but working in US.
How do I get an address if I dont stay there ?
Same way you got an address to receive your PR card. Friends, family etc.
Thanks for your help.
You are welcome.
so you mean to say that if I try to enter in fourth year, then itself I have to go to an immigration hearing and the judge would decide whether he would let me stay or not ?
Please see the following link for all details
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/newcomer/res-oblig.html
Also can I apply for CA SIN staying in USA ?
I think you can apply via fax, but would have to give someones address in Canada to actually recieve it.
Should I be filing taxes there ?
No you shouldnt if you are not residing in Canada and have no Canadian income. You would if you had Canadian income or you were residing in Canada but working in US.
How do I get an address if I dont stay there ?
Same way you got an address to receive your PR card. Friends, family etc.
Thanks for your help.
You are welcome.
wallpaper Kanye West Trash Talks Amber
bostonian28
06-01 09:00 PM
Somehow we need to include citizenship in the mix, i.e. citizenship for some one who contributed Social security and medicare for 10 years, only than would politicians be interested because these numbers could potential convert into votes. That is what politicians all over the world care about.
Basically message is, this is a reasonably big chunk of your vote bank, you can support them and gain their loyalty.
Basically message is, this is a reasonably big chunk of your vote bank, you can support them and gain their loyalty.
chanduv23
02-04 09:10 AM
:(
http://www.murthy.com/nflash/nf_020207.html
Looks like the final version may be different and may have some loopholes to satisfy AILA and employer lobby.
http://www.murthy.com/nflash/nf_020207.html
Looks like the final version may be different and may have some loopholes to satisfy AILA and employer lobby.
2011 Wiz is at the peak of his
krishmunn
07-27 06:11 PM
Oh yeahhh..."1099-int" was a rhetorical statement as you mentioned it.
Don't worry I have already done my homework with law offices or CIS, as I had to show all incomes during interviews. Keep on squeaking.
One somewhat unrelated question --- Why did you have to attend an interview with CIS (and show your income) ?
AFAIK CIS interviews only during adjudication of 485 (for some cases) .. never heard of CIS interviewing for extension of H1 or other matters. If they are interviewing EB 3 2006 cases it is a good sign
Don't worry I have already done my homework with law offices or CIS, as I had to show all incomes during interviews. Keep on squeaking.
One somewhat unrelated question --- Why did you have to attend an interview with CIS (and show your income) ?
AFAIK CIS interviews only during adjudication of 485 (for some cases) .. never heard of CIS interviewing for extension of H1 or other matters. If they are interviewing EB 3 2006 cases it is a good sign
more...
Osiris
07-22 12:37 AM
One of the main problems with Indians is that they are too nice to say "No" most of the times! Stop being nice or polite to these guys! I have been approached by these people before and the only thing that I say them is "Just leave me alone! I have a life unlike you."
mihird
10-09 03:34 PM
I too am in the US for 6 years now and because my lawyer insisted on transferring to H1 status from TN before filing the GC (wasted a full year in that waiting for the quota to open up), it has gotten me to this state...
Overall, I still feel, its cleaner to go from H1 to GC. TN to GC requires careful planning and deeper understanding of the laws. Strictly going by the books though, TN is not a dual intent status, so the road to the GC might get murcky...
Overall, I still feel, its cleaner to go from H1 to GC. TN to GC requires careful planning and deeper understanding of the laws. Strictly going by the books though, TN is not a dual intent status, so the road to the GC might get murcky...
more...
TeddyKoochu
09-24 10:28 AM
I believe that to maintain a steady 485 EB2-I queue the dates should advance fairly fast till maybe the end of 2007 much sooner than September. Following are the reasons, 6 months back probably there were less pre-adjudicated applications so the focus was reviewing and completing these cases, now most of the applications are pre-adjudicated and the route for steady approvals looks clear like what has happened in Sep 2009 for 2004 cases. There will be a time if the spillover happens as many have predicted then most of the cases will get approved and the pre-adjudicated applications will be less or even dry out, so in the letter and spirit I feel that the 485 pipeline should be equally populated at all steps, considering that the 485 approval process is long and has several steps. This year represents great hope for people who missed Jul 07; I guess its time for the next batch to get EAD/AP, I hope Iam not being over optimistic. Feedback and comments welcome for all.
2010 COM:Amber Rose Talks Kanye
MunnaBhai
06-27 05:55 PM
According to the AILA, approximately 40,000 visas remain in all employment-based categories, other than EW, for FY2007, according to its sources, and that the USCIS has far more than 40,000 adjustment applications in the backlog queue that are ready for approval, not to mention the additional numbers which will be consumed in concular immigrant visa processing. It is thus possible that the cap may reach within a short period in July, even though no one can predict it until after July 2, 2007. The USCIS at this time does not have any policy announced with reference to July 2007 I-485 filings which are filed after certain date in July when the total number is exhausted. However, considering the fact that the USCIS currently rejects the "Other Worker" category I-485 applications even though June 2007 Visa Bulletin show current for certain applicants because the "other worker" category quota was exhausted on June 5, 2007. This raises a serious concern because as we reported earlier today, the USCIS appears to be picking up the speed of processing of backlog I-485 applications in anticipation of flood of July 485 applications. The USCIS hands may be tied, should the EB visa numbers for FY 2007 is exhausted before the end of July.
http://www.immigration-law.com/
http://www.immigration-law.com/
more...
mirage
07-04 08:21 AM
One thing which is missing in the News article about this fiasco is they are sounding like some precedural hitch happened they are not sounding scandal, conspiratory, I mean their title should be like 'DOS plays joke on Legals', 'DOS arbitrary decisions hurt legals' types......
hair makeup Kanye West and Wiz
GCwaitforever
01-23 05:34 PM
If there is a need for companies to save money by going for substituted labor, then maybe the DOL and USCIS should work out to make the priority date of substitution case same as the 140 date and not the labor filing date.
I am not sure of validity of substitution labor at all. When the original labor petition was applied, they could not find suitable candidates and hence they had to approve the labor. Fine. What about at the time of labor substitution? They ought to check the labor market again for a suitable candidate and only after confirming that there are not any candidates, the substitution labor should be approved with priority date of the substitution labor filing, not the original priority date. This will make labor substitution difficult for Desi companies and keeps it fair for everybody - immigrants, local candidates.
I am not sure of validity of substitution labor at all. When the original labor petition was applied, they could not find suitable candidates and hence they had to approve the labor. Fine. What about at the time of labor substitution? They ought to check the labor market again for a suitable candidate and only after confirming that there are not any candidates, the substitution labor should be approved with priority date of the substitution labor filing, not the original priority date. This will make labor substitution difficult for Desi companies and keeps it fair for everybody - immigrants, local candidates.
more...
salnarayan
10-27 12:02 AM
Greetings:
My EB-2 I-140 was approved with March 2006 as priority date and I had filed for I-485 on July 2007, and the approval is still pending. I do have an EAD and AP.
However, my EB-1 I-140 petition which I had filed on February 2007 got approved in September of 2008. Since I am from India there is retrogression for my EB-2petition, I want to apply for my I-485 through EB-1 since it is current.
Is it possible to transfer my EB-2 I-485 petition which I filed in July 2007 to the recently approved EB-1 petition or should I file a new I-485 petition again.
I thank you sincerely for your time and help
My EB-2 I-140 was approved with March 2006 as priority date and I had filed for I-485 on July 2007, and the approval is still pending. I do have an EAD and AP.
However, my EB-1 I-140 petition which I had filed on February 2007 got approved in September of 2008. Since I am from India there is retrogression for my EB-2petition, I want to apply for my I-485 through EB-1 since it is current.
Is it possible to transfer my EB-2 I-485 petition which I filed in July 2007 to the recently approved EB-1 petition or should I file a new I-485 petition again.
I thank you sincerely for your time and help
hot Amber Rose talk about Dating
rick_rajvanshi
03-20 11:27 AM
You can renew your permanent resident card only if you lived in canada for atleast 2 years in 5 years. And to get the card, you need to get a guarantor signature who knows you for atleast 2 years e.g. a physician, attorney, etc
If you dont have guarantor - you can use any public notary - not a big deal . they 'll sign your PR Card application for $60 Canadian per application - This is only for people who are already a landed immigrant and do not have a plastic PR Card. You can also keep traveling to Canada without a Plastic PR Card ( for your US visa renewals etc. ) but in your own car only. But the max limit is 3 years from the date you have first landed - You must start maintaining your residence in Canada with in these 3 years before your residency becomes invalid.
If you dont have guarantor - you can use any public notary - not a big deal . they 'll sign your PR Card application for $60 Canadian per application - This is only for people who are already a landed immigrant and do not have a plastic PR Card. You can also keep traveling to Canada without a Plastic PR Card ( for your US visa renewals etc. ) but in your own car only. But the max limit is 3 years from the date you have first landed - You must start maintaining your residence in Canada with in these 3 years before your residency becomes invalid.
more...
house Wiz Khalifa#39;s girlfriend Amber
mundada
12-13 02:00 PM
I think you have made a great argument. The original intention of diversity quota was to prevent people from certain European countries from becoming a dominant race in the US in 1920s.
However, the Civil Rights Act that protects national origin came into effect in 1964.
I am not a lawyer but have been taking business law course. I therefore believe if national origin discrimination is not allowed in the employment then unusually high (5 years) green card delays for certain nationalities is promoting national origin discrimination by detering employers from hiring people born in certain countries.
I think this argument will fly. I am not sure family based restrictions could be lifted but national origin quota restriction on employment and national origin non-discrimination in employment are definitely contradicting each other.
FYI:
TITLE VII of the 1964 CIVIL RIGHTS ACT (1964)
The protected classes: race, color, sex, religion & national origin. Employers with 15 or more employees. The most well known employment discrimination statute. Prohibits employment discrimination against the protected classes - race, color, sex, religion & national origin – in every aspect of employment, i.e. hiring, firing, promotion, training, working conditions, compensation, etc.
Hello All,
First and foremost, i must thank everyone from IV, who is working tirelessly to resolve the issues of retrogression in the GC process. As an affected individual I am very grateful that leaders of IV are ready to contribute so much effort for its goals. And even though I do not actively work for the IV agenda, I have contributed money to some IV action items.
I have a question/suggestion regarding the IV agenda. On IV's about page, pt number 2 asserts amongst other things,
The Discriminatory Per-Country Rationing of Green Cards That Exacerbates the Delays.
and further in the same point
We do not allow employers to discriminate hiring based on their nationality or country of origin. Therefore, the employment-based immigration, which is a derivative benefit of employment, should also be free from rationing based on nationality or country of birth.
I am curious to know what is the "legal" strength of these assertions is. Are they just "moral" statements or can the validity of these statements be tested in the legal framework of this country? In other words, my question is what is the constitutionality of the "Per Country Caps" in Employment / Family Based Immrigration procedures.
A lot of Laws and Statutes have been challenged in the Judicial System of USA. And many more are challenged every year. And if the laws are not constitutional then they can be repealed.
I am sure the leaders of IV must have thought about this argument however a quick search of the forums with 'constitutionality' as the search term did not return any results.
IV's efforts to utilize Lobbying to bring about change to alleviate/eliminate retrogression are certainly beneficial. However, if IV has not already considered and eliminated this legal argument, then it should explore whether there is any substance to this approach.
Hence this post. Below are some of the links that might be relevant.
wikipedia article on constitutionality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutionality)
wikipedia category on US immigration case law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_immigration_and_naturalizat ion_case_law)
thanks and sincerely,
--soljabhai
However, the Civil Rights Act that protects national origin came into effect in 1964.
I am not a lawyer but have been taking business law course. I therefore believe if national origin discrimination is not allowed in the employment then unusually high (5 years) green card delays for certain nationalities is promoting national origin discrimination by detering employers from hiring people born in certain countries.
I think this argument will fly. I am not sure family based restrictions could be lifted but national origin quota restriction on employment and national origin non-discrimination in employment are definitely contradicting each other.
FYI:
TITLE VII of the 1964 CIVIL RIGHTS ACT (1964)
The protected classes: race, color, sex, religion & national origin. Employers with 15 or more employees. The most well known employment discrimination statute. Prohibits employment discrimination against the protected classes - race, color, sex, religion & national origin – in every aspect of employment, i.e. hiring, firing, promotion, training, working conditions, compensation, etc.
Hello All,
First and foremost, i must thank everyone from IV, who is working tirelessly to resolve the issues of retrogression in the GC process. As an affected individual I am very grateful that leaders of IV are ready to contribute so much effort for its goals. And even though I do not actively work for the IV agenda, I have contributed money to some IV action items.
I have a question/suggestion regarding the IV agenda. On IV's about page, pt number 2 asserts amongst other things,
The Discriminatory Per-Country Rationing of Green Cards That Exacerbates the Delays.
and further in the same point
We do not allow employers to discriminate hiring based on their nationality or country of origin. Therefore, the employment-based immigration, which is a derivative benefit of employment, should also be free from rationing based on nationality or country of birth.
I am curious to know what is the "legal" strength of these assertions is. Are they just "moral" statements or can the validity of these statements be tested in the legal framework of this country? In other words, my question is what is the constitutionality of the "Per Country Caps" in Employment / Family Based Immrigration procedures.
A lot of Laws and Statutes have been challenged in the Judicial System of USA. And many more are challenged every year. And if the laws are not constitutional then they can be repealed.
I am sure the leaders of IV must have thought about this argument however a quick search of the forums with 'constitutionality' as the search term did not return any results.
IV's efforts to utilize Lobbying to bring about change to alleviate/eliminate retrogression are certainly beneficial. However, if IV has not already considered and eliminated this legal argument, then it should explore whether there is any substance to this approach.
Hence this post. Below are some of the links that might be relevant.
wikipedia article on constitutionality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutionality)
wikipedia category on US immigration case law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_immigration_and_naturalizat ion_case_law)
thanks and sincerely,
--soljabhai
tattoo Kanye West recently took a
BharatPremi
12-13 05:52 PM
Note that it would certainly not benefit the other 60%+ from countries other than India that are also stuck in various steps (EB3, name check). So, unless you want IV to stand for IndiaVoice, you should concentrate your admirable effort on increasing the overall quota (with increased per-country quota), excluding dependents, etc.
Do not worry about that. IV has everything in the agenda what you mentioned.This thread is about 'Constitutionality argument against per-country ceilings'.Nobody here is saying to promote the fight against "Per country ceiling" ONLY.
Do not worry about that. IV has everything in the agenda what you mentioned.This thread is about 'Constitutionality argument against per-country ceilings'.Nobody here is saying to promote the fight against "Per country ceiling" ONLY.
more...
pictures wallpaper Amber Rose Wiz
jsb
06-03 03:29 PM
Where does one contribute to said lawsuit? If someone is willing to lead the effort, I'm willing to contribute a little money.
On July 17, 2007, when USCIS retracted cancellation of July '07 bulletin, as per link below:
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/VisaBulletinUpdate17Jul07.pdf
They said, ..."Department of State has advised that Bulletin #107 (dated June 12) should be relied upon as the current July Visa Bulletin for purposes of determining employment visa number availability..."
Thus, a lot of us sent I-485 based on "visa availability" communicated herein. Can't lawyers now force USCIS to adjudicate all pending I-485 filings based on this. USCIS said in July, 2007 that visa is available for us (and on that basis we sent in our I-485's), where did it go away? Isn't it now their problem to somehow find those supposedly available visas advised in July 2, '07 bulletin?
On July 17, 2007, when USCIS retracted cancellation of July '07 bulletin, as per link below:
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/VisaBulletinUpdate17Jul07.pdf
They said, ..."Department of State has advised that Bulletin #107 (dated June 12) should be relied upon as the current July Visa Bulletin for purposes of determining employment visa number availability..."
Thus, a lot of us sent I-485 based on "visa availability" communicated herein. Can't lawyers now force USCIS to adjudicate all pending I-485 filings based on this. USCIS said in July, 2007 that visa is available for us (and on that basis we sent in our I-485's), where did it go away? Isn't it now their problem to somehow find those supposedly available visas advised in July 2, '07 bulletin?
dresses Kanye West amp; Wiz Khalifa
old_hat
05-02 02:38 PM
The issue started long before LTTE but it has not stayed static. There were many opportunities to set it correct which LTTE shunned. Again a lot of Tamils joined mainstream in Lanka and LTTE went after them too.
more...
makeup Amber Rose King Magazine Cover
imneedy
03-20 10:01 AM
I second that!!
If anyone who is stuck in with labor gets oppurtunity must use it. Even people who are jealous are given this oppurtunity will be first to run with that.
If anyone who is stuck in with labor gets oppurtunity must use it. Even people who are jealous are given this oppurtunity will be first to run with that.
girlfriend dresses Kanye West paranoid
n2b
09-23 06:15 PM
i cant believe ppl think this is a brilliant idea..
economy is screwed for a while..citizens are on life support..and you want immigrants to be welcomed with open arms..
did i wake up in a fools paradise...:eek:
Yes, you did wake up in fools paradise!!! And the first thing you did was saw yourself in the mirror!!! :p
economy is screwed for a while..citizens are on life support..and you want immigrants to be welcomed with open arms..
did i wake up in a fools paradise...:eek:
Yes, you did wake up in fools paradise!!! And the first thing you did was saw yourself in the mirror!!! :p
hairstyles Wiz Khalifa wants us to
JunRN
02-12 07:14 PM
We are all expecting that the VB will go back to June 2007 figure...it looks like that RoW has been so fast in getting the latest PD back which could come in a very few months time.
I was not expecting this to come too soon but in June 2008.
I was not expecting this to come too soon but in June 2008.
dummgelauft
06-24 01:39 PM
This is what I received from a immigration lawyer ......
LATEST GRIM VISA BULLETIN PROJECTIONS FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED GREEN CARDS ILLUSTRATE NEED FOR COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION REFORM
There are few things that clearly demonstrate the overarching need for immigration reform than the most recent information provided by the U.S. Department of State's (DOS) Visa Bulletin. The Visa Bulletin provides information on the availability of immigrant visa numbers, which dictates when foreign nationals may apply for green cards under various preference categories. The July installment of the Visa Bulletin shows complete unavailability for the vast majority of employment-based cases. Moreover, DOS projections show that demand for higher-preference green card categories could reach record levels, which would lead to backlogs in these categories where green card numbers were traditionally available in the past.
The Visa Bulletin establishes "cut-off" dates based on the demand for green cards versus the amount actually available under immigration law to each specific employment-based (and family-based) category per country for each fiscal year. As it assesses green card demand in relation to availability, the DOS may move these cut-off dates forward or back, or not at all. When the DOS believes that all immigrant visa numbers in a particular category will be exhausted (or allocated) by the end of a particular fiscal year (i.e., September 30th), it will indicate an "unavailability" of numbers (marked as "U") in the Visa Bulletin. The law prevents any single country from overuse of immigrant visa numbers during a particular fiscal year. As a result, foreign nationals born in countries from which there is significant immigration to the U.S. will typically have a separate "cut-off" date (and longer waiting times for an available green card number) in the Visa Bulletin.
An individual's priority date or "place in line" for a visa number under the employment-based categories is the date on which his or her employer files a labor certification or immigrant visa petition with the government. Individuals assigned priority dates that are earlier than the relevant preference category cut-off date noted in the Visa Bulletin are eligible to move to the last step in the employment-based green card process - either processing of an adjustment of status application with United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), or processing of an immigrant visa at a U.S. consulate abroad. When the category is "unavailable," individuals cannot file for adjustment of status or receive an immigrant visa.
In the most recent Visa Bulletin, immigrant visa numbers continue to be unavailable for all third preference (EB-3) employment-based cases. Third preference cases comprise the majority of pending employment-based green card cases, as they include positions requiring at minimum either a bachelor's degree or two years of work experience.
The July Visa Bulletin indicates that the first, second and fourth and fifth preference employment categories remain current for July. However, since demand in the second. preference category for individuals from China and India exceeds the per-country limitations, these two countries have second-preference cut-off dates of January 2000.
Overall, the July Visa Bulletin continues a substantial decrease in green card availability over the government's 2009 fiscal year. Admittedly, the retrogression, or backward movement of the cut-off dates, has been more common for employment-based green card numbers in recent years. Yet the complete exhaustion of EB-3 numbers and the sharp decline in India and China's EB-2 numbers are staggering reversals given the slow yet steady improvement in these cut-off dates during the present fiscal year.
DOS has projected that, as a result of significant filings in the EB-4 and EB-5 categories, there will be fewer numbers to supplement the EB-1 and EB-2 categories. In previous years, thousands of unused EB-4 and EB-5 numbers "spilled over" into other preference categories. However, greater-than-anticipated EB-4 and EB-5 usage, as well as greater demand in the EB-1 category itself, will create an even greater dearth of available "spill over" immigrant visa numbers in the EB-2 category.
In addition, the DOS has indicated that the EB-1 category for individuals born in India or China may backlog or retrogress later this summer, and may do so again in the coming fiscal year. Predictably, prognostications for the EB-2 category for India and China are also quite grim - in the next month or two, the EB-2 category could become unavailable. In particular, USCIS has indicated that it has about 25,000 EB-2 India cases and "significant numbers" of cases for Chinese nationals that have been reviewed and are simply awaiting visa number availability. This category has a typical fiscal-year limit of 2,800, plus any remaining numbers from the EB-1, EB-4 and EB-5 categories.
With respect to the EB-3 category, the DOS has stated that the worldwide, China and Mexico quotas for the EB-3 category will become available again with the start of the new fiscal year in October 2009, with a projected cut-off date of March 1, 2003 for each. However, the EB-3 India quota may have a November 1, 2001 cut-off date.
The federal quotas limiting employment-based green card numbers have remained unchanged since 1990, nearly two decades ago. Since that time, the United States has undergone unprecedented expansion, technological development, and cultural diversification, in large part through immigration. During this progress, skilled immigrants have continued one of our country's oldest and proudest traditions - the search for better lives for their families, and the desire to contribute to and to participate in our free society. Still, these quotas remain stagnant, potentially stifling the future of our nation's ability in the 21st century to prosper as an economic competitor in our world, to build a broad-based infrastructure in our localities, and to live together as families in our homes.
A quarter-century prior to 1990, major revisions to the immigration quotas sparked a historic influx of individuals to our nation of immigrants. In 1965, this broad-based increase in immigration levels across all preference categories allowed some of the world's most talented individuals to come to our shores and share their knowledge as academics, increase our economic fortunes as innovators and entrepreneurs, build vibrant communities as leaders and organizers, and inspire with their tales of strife and triumph as refugees. For many ethnicities and nationalities, the "post-65" generation was the real beginning of their stories in America.
Faced with a major financial downturn and an increasingly competitive global economy, our country cannot choose the path of closed borders and restricted immigration. At this very moment, historically restrictive nations are expanding their immigration policies and attracting valuable immigrants otherwise bound for our shores.
Absent relief provided by potential legislation, there will be substantial backlogs for nationals of India and China in all categories for many years. Careful and strategic planning for employers and foreign nationals entering into or engaged in the immigrant visa process will be necessary while we continue to advocate zealously for reform to address these antiquated quotas.
These green card backlogs illustrate the need for comprehensive immigration reform. In particular, a long-overdue increase in employment-based green card availability would play a major role in making future generations of individuals feel welcome to come to our nation of immigrants and in spurring sorely needed innovation and prosperity.
..I am waiting for the punch line. What's the point of this? We all know it...
LATEST GRIM VISA BULLETIN PROJECTIONS FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED GREEN CARDS ILLUSTRATE NEED FOR COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION REFORM
There are few things that clearly demonstrate the overarching need for immigration reform than the most recent information provided by the U.S. Department of State's (DOS) Visa Bulletin. The Visa Bulletin provides information on the availability of immigrant visa numbers, which dictates when foreign nationals may apply for green cards under various preference categories. The July installment of the Visa Bulletin shows complete unavailability for the vast majority of employment-based cases. Moreover, DOS projections show that demand for higher-preference green card categories could reach record levels, which would lead to backlogs in these categories where green card numbers were traditionally available in the past.
The Visa Bulletin establishes "cut-off" dates based on the demand for green cards versus the amount actually available under immigration law to each specific employment-based (and family-based) category per country for each fiscal year. As it assesses green card demand in relation to availability, the DOS may move these cut-off dates forward or back, or not at all. When the DOS believes that all immigrant visa numbers in a particular category will be exhausted (or allocated) by the end of a particular fiscal year (i.e., September 30th), it will indicate an "unavailability" of numbers (marked as "U") in the Visa Bulletin. The law prevents any single country from overuse of immigrant visa numbers during a particular fiscal year. As a result, foreign nationals born in countries from which there is significant immigration to the U.S. will typically have a separate "cut-off" date (and longer waiting times for an available green card number) in the Visa Bulletin.
An individual's priority date or "place in line" for a visa number under the employment-based categories is the date on which his or her employer files a labor certification or immigrant visa petition with the government. Individuals assigned priority dates that are earlier than the relevant preference category cut-off date noted in the Visa Bulletin are eligible to move to the last step in the employment-based green card process - either processing of an adjustment of status application with United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), or processing of an immigrant visa at a U.S. consulate abroad. When the category is "unavailable," individuals cannot file for adjustment of status or receive an immigrant visa.
In the most recent Visa Bulletin, immigrant visa numbers continue to be unavailable for all third preference (EB-3) employment-based cases. Third preference cases comprise the majority of pending employment-based green card cases, as they include positions requiring at minimum either a bachelor's degree or two years of work experience.
The July Visa Bulletin indicates that the first, second and fourth and fifth preference employment categories remain current for July. However, since demand in the second. preference category for individuals from China and India exceeds the per-country limitations, these two countries have second-preference cut-off dates of January 2000.
Overall, the July Visa Bulletin continues a substantial decrease in green card availability over the government's 2009 fiscal year. Admittedly, the retrogression, or backward movement of the cut-off dates, has been more common for employment-based green card numbers in recent years. Yet the complete exhaustion of EB-3 numbers and the sharp decline in India and China's EB-2 numbers are staggering reversals given the slow yet steady improvement in these cut-off dates during the present fiscal year.
DOS has projected that, as a result of significant filings in the EB-4 and EB-5 categories, there will be fewer numbers to supplement the EB-1 and EB-2 categories. In previous years, thousands of unused EB-4 and EB-5 numbers "spilled over" into other preference categories. However, greater-than-anticipated EB-4 and EB-5 usage, as well as greater demand in the EB-1 category itself, will create an even greater dearth of available "spill over" immigrant visa numbers in the EB-2 category.
In addition, the DOS has indicated that the EB-1 category for individuals born in India or China may backlog or retrogress later this summer, and may do so again in the coming fiscal year. Predictably, prognostications for the EB-2 category for India and China are also quite grim - in the next month or two, the EB-2 category could become unavailable. In particular, USCIS has indicated that it has about 25,000 EB-2 India cases and "significant numbers" of cases for Chinese nationals that have been reviewed and are simply awaiting visa number availability. This category has a typical fiscal-year limit of 2,800, plus any remaining numbers from the EB-1, EB-4 and EB-5 categories.
With respect to the EB-3 category, the DOS has stated that the worldwide, China and Mexico quotas for the EB-3 category will become available again with the start of the new fiscal year in October 2009, with a projected cut-off date of March 1, 2003 for each. However, the EB-3 India quota may have a November 1, 2001 cut-off date.
The federal quotas limiting employment-based green card numbers have remained unchanged since 1990, nearly two decades ago. Since that time, the United States has undergone unprecedented expansion, technological development, and cultural diversification, in large part through immigration. During this progress, skilled immigrants have continued one of our country's oldest and proudest traditions - the search for better lives for their families, and the desire to contribute to and to participate in our free society. Still, these quotas remain stagnant, potentially stifling the future of our nation's ability in the 21st century to prosper as an economic competitor in our world, to build a broad-based infrastructure in our localities, and to live together as families in our homes.
A quarter-century prior to 1990, major revisions to the immigration quotas sparked a historic influx of individuals to our nation of immigrants. In 1965, this broad-based increase in immigration levels across all preference categories allowed some of the world's most talented individuals to come to our shores and share their knowledge as academics, increase our economic fortunes as innovators and entrepreneurs, build vibrant communities as leaders and organizers, and inspire with their tales of strife and triumph as refugees. For many ethnicities and nationalities, the "post-65" generation was the real beginning of their stories in America.
Faced with a major financial downturn and an increasingly competitive global economy, our country cannot choose the path of closed borders and restricted immigration. At this very moment, historically restrictive nations are expanding their immigration policies and attracting valuable immigrants otherwise bound for our shores.
Absent relief provided by potential legislation, there will be substantial backlogs for nationals of India and China in all categories for many years. Careful and strategic planning for employers and foreign nationals entering into or engaged in the immigrant visa process will be necessary while we continue to advocate zealously for reform to address these antiquated quotas.
These green card backlogs illustrate the need for comprehensive immigration reform. In particular, a long-overdue increase in employment-based green card availability would play a major role in making future generations of individuals feel welcome to come to our nation of immigrants and in spurring sorely needed innovation and prosperity.
..I am waiting for the punch line. What's the point of this? We all know it...
mirage
03-31 09:22 PM
You don't want to give any credit to 'Modi' than by your logic, Chandrababu Naidu shouldn't be give credit of 'Andhra' turnaround, Vajpayee shouldn't be given credit for Infrastructure turnaround...In India Politics & Politicians are so important, until they are pro-work, nothing works. UPA govt's attitude was sit & watch for Orders from 10 Janpath, so all of us know how they performed..A person who assists in the murder of people whom he has taken an oath to protect, cannot be really thinking about the country or for its development. By saying that HE is responsible for the development is clearly under estimating the capabilities of the gujrati people. The gujratis and rajasthanis are leaders in creating wealth and they did that for thousands of years successfully with world's envy before this ugly Indian came into picture. With your logic fodder eating Lalu is the smartest politician ever born....remember his $20Billion revenue he is bringing in from railways....never heard of from any sector...leave alone the ever losing railways...the only thing lalu can be given credit for is...not stopping the elite civil services managing directors and the academia (IIM, ISB) from doing their work...which they have been trying to for several decades....so I dont think the theory is right that one person (call him black spot of India) had done something....when each individual in the state is born with the blood which carries enterpreneurship.....kudos to all gujaratis....