chi_shark
06-11 12:49 AM
ratturani, i am seeing an increasing number of posts that state the facts as clearly as you have stated... thats great... now i think somewhere some day, someone will float a good idea of motivating employers such as MS, Intel, BAC etc to fight for us instead of trying to motivate only the congress... see, we dont have too much of power in congress... :-(
Don't think of it as punishment. The US wants to allow a certain number of people to immigrate each year. The demand far outstrips the supply. That's where the problem is.
There are two ways to address this:
Increase the supply
Decrease the demand
Those are the only two ways. One option would be to go for a points based system that awards the limited visas to those with the best qualifications or where the need is greatest. After all the US is in a "buyer's market" and can pick and choose those immigrants that add most to the country.
The other option (which is at present politically infeasible) is to increase the annual immigrant quotas. Tough to support this in a recession with 10% unemployment.
I'm not sure you can characterize this as unfair... ultimately it is left to the US to determine how many people they want immigrating.
Don't think of it as punishment. The US wants to allow a certain number of people to immigrate each year. The demand far outstrips the supply. That's where the problem is.
There are two ways to address this:
Increase the supply
Decrease the demand
Those are the only two ways. One option would be to go for a points based system that awards the limited visas to those with the best qualifications or where the need is greatest. After all the US is in a "buyer's market" and can pick and choose those immigrants that add most to the country.
The other option (which is at present politically infeasible) is to increase the annual immigrant quotas. Tough to support this in a recession with 10% unemployment.
I'm not sure you can characterize this as unfair... ultimately it is left to the US to determine how many people they want immigrating.
wallpaper OpenOffice.org 3.1
StillonH1B
03-27 03:42 PM
I was going through all the posts and I am surprised that there is no mention of Jayaprakash Narayan.
Jayaprakash Narayan(Doctor and ex IAS officer) is founder and President of LokSatta Party. If you are thinking its just another political party then you are completely wrong. Please go to www.loksatta.org to find out more about him and LokSatta party. And there lot of videos about him on Youtube and here is the one of the link to his speeches at Mumbai University
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4xFCdOYTv4
Jayaprakash Narayan(Doctor and ex IAS officer) is founder and President of LokSatta Party. If you are thinking its just another political party then you are completely wrong. Please go to www.loksatta.org to find out more about him and LokSatta party. And there lot of videos about him on Youtube and here is the one of the link to his speeches at Mumbai University
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4xFCdOYTv4
dks
10-04 08:12 AM
Desi companies are to blame but not always.
This is a common practice in big companies. Guess which companies have got the most number of LC's to substitute. It is some of the big software and consulting firms. Myself being a part of one such company have seen a lot of my co-workers use it to get their GC. I will admit though that in big companies it is used after one of the following has happened:
1> You have been stuck in LC stage for a long time.
2> The initial original LC got messed up due to lawyer or company negligence.
3> The I-140 stage got messed up due to lawyer or company negligence.
4> You are an old employee but did not somehow start your GC process till you only had a year or less remaining on your H-1.
Unfortunately for me, none of the above has happened so the company will not use LC substitution for me. But it is a common practice.
This is a common practice in big companies. Guess which companies have got the most number of LC's to substitute. It is some of the big software and consulting firms. Myself being a part of one such company have seen a lot of my co-workers use it to get their GC. I will admit though that in big companies it is used after one of the following has happened:
1> You have been stuck in LC stage for a long time.
2> The initial original LC got messed up due to lawyer or company negligence.
3> The I-140 stage got messed up due to lawyer or company negligence.
4> You are an old employee but did not somehow start your GC process till you only had a year or less remaining on your H-1.
Unfortunately for me, none of the above has happened so the company will not use LC substitution for me. But it is a common practice.
2011 Screen shot OpenOffice.org
vjkypally
09-23 05:41 PM
Like I said earlier March is the real bottleneck for year 2005. More than 3000 applications.October bulletin has already moved to Jan22'2005. From other tracking sites there are not too many Feb'2005 applications. But we have plenty of March 2005 applicants. Once it crosses March it will zoom ahead to end of 2005.
But it could be September 2010 by the time it comes to March,2005.
But it could be September 2010 by the time it comes to March,2005.
more...
chantu
03-30 02:48 PM
If a Italian citizen controll the major Party of India; why not a Brazilian knows more?:)
Any way I will update soon....
That is the tragedy of India. Except Indians everybody has ruled India and still people have no remorse, no self respect.
Any way I will update soon....
That is the tragedy of India. Except Indians everybody has ruled India and still people have no remorse, no self respect.
walking_dude
02-13 11:13 AM
This theory that 'AILA/AILF lawsuit threat overturned July VB' is out of touch with the reality. Threatening lawsuit was bad for AILA. They were not involved in the discussions that finaly resulted in reversal. IV was a participant but AILA was not.
We shouldn't repeat their mistake. The moment IV files a lawsuit, USCIS will stop discussing with us. We will be off the discussion table. Only place they'll talk to us will be in the courtroom. We also shouldn't forget the pressure applied by Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren on USCIS and DOS. She was ready to wash their dirty linen in public. No doubt, she was influenced by rally in San Jose - which happens to be her constituency.
3 year EAD/AP, AC21 interpretation are rules that USCIS makes, there's no way a judge can dictate what rules a government department should make. You wrote "there is nothign to lose but a lot to win" . Like someone pointed out we won't even be recovering 10k -20k spent on it, even if we win. We'll be getting into a case which has no chances or very slim chances of winning.
If we lose the case, there's no going back to discussions with USCIS. They won't be entertaining us after we sued them. It's a grave risk you should understand. I feel tired at having to explain it the Nth time to some of you who still consider AILA as a messiah. Nothing happens because of just one factor. It's a combination of several factors that ultimately produces results. There are no silver bullets that fix every problem. Its the reality.
it is the threat of a massive lwsuit from immigration lawyers association that made uscis backtrack and open up july 2 filing..we are all benefeciaries of that.
itz not our flowers or the rally that did the trick it is the threat of lawsuit.
if we consult lawyers we can check if we have a case and on what grounds. even f not anything else we may win on things like 3 yr AP relaxed ac21 rules etc. these are operational policies and dont need congress. USCIS can change these rules.
there is nothign to lose but a lot to win.
we can even appeal on the grounds that USCIS policies led us in to a bonded labor situation unable to change employer , foregone career choices and income potential..etc.. this violates the concept of free will and just labor practices. Many rules in AC21 and AP still try to tie us down to the employer who has already enjoyed > 5 years of our hardwork.
We shouldn't repeat their mistake. The moment IV files a lawsuit, USCIS will stop discussing with us. We will be off the discussion table. Only place they'll talk to us will be in the courtroom. We also shouldn't forget the pressure applied by Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren on USCIS and DOS. She was ready to wash their dirty linen in public. No doubt, she was influenced by rally in San Jose - which happens to be her constituency.
3 year EAD/AP, AC21 interpretation are rules that USCIS makes, there's no way a judge can dictate what rules a government department should make. You wrote "there is nothign to lose but a lot to win" . Like someone pointed out we won't even be recovering 10k -20k spent on it, even if we win. We'll be getting into a case which has no chances or very slim chances of winning.
If we lose the case, there's no going back to discussions with USCIS. They won't be entertaining us after we sued them. It's a grave risk you should understand. I feel tired at having to explain it the Nth time to some of you who still consider AILA as a messiah. Nothing happens because of just one factor. It's a combination of several factors that ultimately produces results. There are no silver bullets that fix every problem. Its the reality.
it is the threat of a massive lwsuit from immigration lawyers association that made uscis backtrack and open up july 2 filing..we are all benefeciaries of that.
itz not our flowers or the rally that did the trick it is the threat of lawsuit.
if we consult lawyers we can check if we have a case and on what grounds. even f not anything else we may win on things like 3 yr AP relaxed ac21 rules etc. these are operational policies and dont need congress. USCIS can change these rules.
there is nothign to lose but a lot to win.
we can even appeal on the grounds that USCIS policies led us in to a bonded labor situation unable to change employer , foregone career choices and income potential..etc.. this violates the concept of free will and just labor practices. Many rules in AC21 and AP still try to tie us down to the employer who has already enjoyed > 5 years of our hardwork.
more...
deepakjain
01-22 04:17 PM
Deepak, are you a consultant or FTE?
I work on full time basis. have pending 485 and do have EAD and AP, per my attorney decided to get visa stamped on my passport so that do not have to renew AP and EAD every year. I do not intend to leave the employer neither does my employer has any intention of kicking me out.
I work on full time basis. have pending 485 and do have EAD and AP, per my attorney decided to get visa stamped on my passport so that do not have to renew AP and EAD every year. I do not intend to leave the employer neither does my employer has any intention of kicking me out.
2010 house openoffice 3.3 logo.
harsh
02-13 08:42 PM
I am following this discussion and it is interesting. Here is what I get so far.
USCIS is not allotting excess visa number horizontally. Unused visas from Eb1 and EB2 are not going to over subscribed countries but to EB3 ROW. The "total" visas in the law can be read as total visa across all categories. If this is true then it is likely that untill EB3 ROW becomes current, India and China will only get 7%. But here is what I do not get.
1) From november 2005 bulletin, USCIS is saying that they are going to suspend AC21. Why did they decide to suspend ac21? Can they decide on their own when they are going to apply to AC21 and when they are not? Is AC21 not a law?
2) Why or how did USCIS allocate large number of visas to over subscribed countries India and China before? Like in the November bulletin, USCIS says india used up around 44000 visas. Were they allocating more visas by following AC21? If yes, then why did they decide to suspend AC21? If no, then how they allocated so many numbers?
I am trying to understand the how the USCIS decides to allocate visa numbers. And it is very complex.
USCIS is not allotting excess visa number horizontally. Unused visas from Eb1 and EB2 are not going to over subscribed countries but to EB3 ROW. The "total" visas in the law can be read as total visa across all categories. If this is true then it is likely that untill EB3 ROW becomes current, India and China will only get 7%. But here is what I do not get.
1) From november 2005 bulletin, USCIS is saying that they are going to suspend AC21. Why did they decide to suspend ac21? Can they decide on their own when they are going to apply to AC21 and when they are not? Is AC21 not a law?
2) Why or how did USCIS allocate large number of visas to over subscribed countries India and China before? Like in the November bulletin, USCIS says india used up around 44000 visas. Were they allocating more visas by following AC21? If yes, then why did they decide to suspend AC21? If no, then how they allocated so many numbers?
I am trying to understand the how the USCIS decides to allocate visa numbers. And it is very complex.
more...
at0474
12-13 01:05 PM
"If you read the history of immigration this country you will see that such measures are typically taken with restriction in mind not diversity."
--Any country's immigration policy has to have some control measures built into it. I cannot imagine any country opening its gates wide open for the entire world to migrate into her without any limitations. So the question is, whom to "restrict" and whom to allow? This leads to the same argument, do you see this "restriction" as discrimination? There are others who see as fair "reservation" for them.
"Diversity is the nice sounding cloak."
--True. Every concept has been used and abused.
"There is a definite fear that FB will bring in many mexican migrants ( "chain migration") and the country quota holds that back imho. you think it's because of indian programmers? It was made long before those existed. remember we are a minuscule number- don't feel so important- the programmers are about 2% of all immigrants. 11% is all EB, half are families, half again are techies- not all those are programmers. do the math."
--I did not say EB quota system was framed due to high influx of indian programmers. You missed the whole point.
"Also remember that 50,000 Gc are given a year by lottery for "diversity". as a result more bangladeshis get Gc in a year than indians on EB. so why do we need the country quota in EB again?"
--Good question. If we look at what qualifies a country to be included in the lottery program (oversubscription etc?), it would again lead to the "balancing" intent with regards to immigration.
"To the person bringing up caste system and fences, here is my proposal.
i am a physician, i am being held behind hoardes of techies who can easily have PD's much before mine since i am training and working longer and the J1 holds me back. 12 years here and no where in the line...so i should get a fast track too. let's have a cap for the techies...hey it looks great from my side of the fence...i'm sure you will agree that i should be pushed up the line."
--Precisely why I said your viewpoint would differ depending on which side of the fence you are.
"either it's wrong or right. the caste system is wrong, from every side of the fence. it may benefit some and hurt others. but it's wrong, wrong and wrong.
same for this country quota. sure it helps some, and looks good from "their side of the fence". that does not change the fact that it is wrong."
--You are opining that it is wrong. You cannot state that it is a fact.
"none of this is an argument for a legal approach. just responding to stuff here."
--Same here. I appreciate your response though.
--Any country's immigration policy has to have some control measures built into it. I cannot imagine any country opening its gates wide open for the entire world to migrate into her without any limitations. So the question is, whom to "restrict" and whom to allow? This leads to the same argument, do you see this "restriction" as discrimination? There are others who see as fair "reservation" for them.
"Diversity is the nice sounding cloak."
--True. Every concept has been used and abused.
"There is a definite fear that FB will bring in many mexican migrants ( "chain migration") and the country quota holds that back imho. you think it's because of indian programmers? It was made long before those existed. remember we are a minuscule number- don't feel so important- the programmers are about 2% of all immigrants. 11% is all EB, half are families, half again are techies- not all those are programmers. do the math."
--I did not say EB quota system was framed due to high influx of indian programmers. You missed the whole point.
"Also remember that 50,000 Gc are given a year by lottery for "diversity". as a result more bangladeshis get Gc in a year than indians on EB. so why do we need the country quota in EB again?"
--Good question. If we look at what qualifies a country to be included in the lottery program (oversubscription etc?), it would again lead to the "balancing" intent with regards to immigration.
"To the person bringing up caste system and fences, here is my proposal.
i am a physician, i am being held behind hoardes of techies who can easily have PD's much before mine since i am training and working longer and the J1 holds me back. 12 years here and no where in the line...so i should get a fast track too. let's have a cap for the techies...hey it looks great from my side of the fence...i'm sure you will agree that i should be pushed up the line."
--Precisely why I said your viewpoint would differ depending on which side of the fence you are.
"either it's wrong or right. the caste system is wrong, from every side of the fence. it may benefit some and hurt others. but it's wrong, wrong and wrong.
same for this country quota. sure it helps some, and looks good from "their side of the fence". that does not change the fact that it is wrong."
--You are opining that it is wrong. You cannot state that it is a fact.
"none of this is an argument for a legal approach. just responding to stuff here."
--Same here. I appreciate your response though.
hair OpenOffice 3.3 Document
pappu
07-04 12:12 PM
Thanks you everyone and taking a lead on this thread. we must try to get a lot of media coverage on this issue.
more...
alterego
12-14 01:33 PM
Think of lobbying as polite negotiation.
Think of Supreme court case as picking a fist fight, in which we are badly out numbered.
Once you have started a fist fight it is much harder to negotiate, especially from a loosing position.
This is exactly correct. It is not the question of right or wrong here. That is what gets folks so upset on this thread, they feel since their viewpoint s right then.......... Most neutral observers like mbartosik can see this as unjust and there may be many in the US as well, however certainly not the majority. However, there are many ways in which this could backfire. One example is the recently seen debate over illegal immigration and the turn in public sentiment. Truth be told, if someone did something wrong 12 yrs ago(crossed the fence), now is married to a US citizen and has 3 US children, what do you do with them? What about the 3yr old who was brought to the USA by their parents and knows no other system? Perhaps a few years ago joe public would have given them a pass, no more, the debate has become so nasty that positions have been hardened to the point that reason does not prevail. Another reason has something to do with the perceived sense of entitlement Americans sensed in the illegal immigrant community(of course fanned by Lou Dobbs and his ilk). These are complex issues and generally you will get a lot further appealing to someones sense of fairness than explaining how you are entitled to something and will take it from them if it is not given to you.
Think of Supreme court case as picking a fist fight, in which we are badly out numbered.
Once you have started a fist fight it is much harder to negotiate, especially from a loosing position.
This is exactly correct. It is not the question of right or wrong here. That is what gets folks so upset on this thread, they feel since their viewpoint s right then.......... Most neutral observers like mbartosik can see this as unjust and there may be many in the US as well, however certainly not the majority. However, there are many ways in which this could backfire. One example is the recently seen debate over illegal immigration and the turn in public sentiment. Truth be told, if someone did something wrong 12 yrs ago(crossed the fence), now is married to a US citizen and has 3 US children, what do you do with them? What about the 3yr old who was brought to the USA by their parents and knows no other system? Perhaps a few years ago joe public would have given them a pass, no more, the debate has become so nasty that positions have been hardened to the point that reason does not prevail. Another reason has something to do with the perceived sense of entitlement Americans sensed in the illegal immigrant community(of course fanned by Lou Dobbs and his ilk). These are complex issues and generally you will get a lot further appealing to someones sense of fairness than explaining how you are entitled to something and will take it from them if it is not given to you.
hot Download OpenOffice.org 3.3.0
gonecrazyonh4
03-16 12:23 PM
All the people in the piple line are saved, but atleast it will prevent further misuse of this loophole.
There should be some enquiry or auditing done on the old LC substituion cases and green cards revoked for those whose received theirs illegally and those visa numbers added back (wishful thinking).
Any auditing done on these cases would reveal lots of scams and possibily avert others from being unscrupulous.
Its so unfair that people jumb ahead of the que for upto 5 years using LC substitution.
There should be some enquiry or auditing done on the old LC substituion cases and green cards revoked for those whose received theirs illegally and those visa numbers added back (wishful thinking).
Any auditing done on these cases would reveal lots of scams and possibily avert others from being unscrupulous.
Its so unfair that people jumb ahead of the que for upto 5 years using LC substitution.
more...
house images Images OpenOffice 3.3.0
immigration_indian
07-04 01:43 AM
I sent it to CNN I REPORT
Thanks
Thanks
tattoo openoffice 3.4.
vkrishn
07-21 02:38 PM
Wow. Nice to see so many Bay area folks with bad experience. When i moved to Folsom, CA from Arizona in 2005 and knew no one at Folsom, I was in a Indian grocery store buying stuff and this guy comes to me and starts talking to me nicely.. At that point i did not know about this Amway Crap and infact stayed at the same apartment complex where i was staying. he invited me for tea and started talking about how to beocme your own boss etc.. Thats about it. I politely told him i am not interested and unfortuantely i gave him phone number at that time just to keep in touch and with the only reason not to be rude. He Kept on calling me 2-3 times in a week over two weeks and had to literally be very blunt and really rude to stop harassing me! Thats the end of it.
I met a person at Great Mall in the Bay area at Bath and Body works and i did not even give him a sec to start his pleasantires. He had a blank look on his face when i told him that if you are befriending me to join you about Amway, I will go to the Police right now that you are stalking me. He left me immediatly. :)
One of the complaints i have heard from my other friends that if they go to a new place and try to make friends , the locals think of them as related to Amway and was also rightly pointed in this thread.
I met a person at Great Mall in the Bay area at Bath and Body works and i did not even give him a sec to start his pleasantires. He had a blank look on his face when i told him that if you are befriending me to join you about Amway, I will go to the Police right now that you are stalking me. He left me immediatly. :)
One of the complaints i have heard from my other friends that if they go to a new place and try to make friends , the locals think of them as related to Amway and was also rightly pointed in this thread.
more...
pictures and openoffice 3.3 mac.
snram4
01-18 10:16 AM
It is true.They were implemented stirctly. But to cheat that many of bodyshoppers are creating fake Paystubs. Getting just payroll expenses and tax from consultant and creating paystubs. How do you prevent that? When good faith effort fails more and more regulations are coming. If our bodyshoppers are honest there would have no regulations like that.
All your relatives are like you only...just plain dump.:D The salary on bench is already stricly enforced. First they asked for end client verification. Now employer-employee verification. First they should fix the backlog for GC.
All your relatives are like you only...just plain dump.:D The salary on bench is already stricly enforced. First they asked for end client verification. Now employer-employee verification. First they should fix the backlog for GC.
dresses Figure 3.3. OpenOffice.org
gc_chahiye
06-26 12:49 PM
I did not see any precedance for stopping I485 in the middle of months for past 10 years. If it happens that will be first time
did'nt that just happen to EB3-Other_Workers? The July visa bulletin turned their dates into U, and at the same time USCIS was asked to stop accepting applications (although dates were ok per the June bulletin). That was the note on immigration-law.com (with another note that AILA was looking into the legality of doing this)
================================================== =====================================
06/16/2007: Unskilled Worker EB Category Visa Exhausted Even in June 2007
* This is a truly bizzare news. AILA has reported that State Department had advised the the USCIS that the EB-3 Other Worker category had been exhausted., and based on this advice, thedUSCIS HQ has informed the Texas Service Center and the Nebraska Service Center to reject EB-3 Other Worker I-485 applications even though the June Visa Bulletin shows visa availability. It is indeed a double blow news to the Unskilled Worker community. AILA is looking into legality of this action.
did'nt that just happen to EB3-Other_Workers? The July visa bulletin turned their dates into U, and at the same time USCIS was asked to stop accepting applications (although dates were ok per the June bulletin). That was the note on immigration-law.com (with another note that AILA was looking into the legality of doing this)
================================================== =====================================
06/16/2007: Unskilled Worker EB Category Visa Exhausted Even in June 2007
* This is a truly bizzare news. AILA has reported that State Department had advised the the USCIS that the EB-3 Other Worker category had been exhausted., and based on this advice, thedUSCIS HQ has informed the Texas Service Center and the Nebraska Service Center to reject EB-3 Other Worker I-485 applications even though the June Visa Bulletin shows visa availability. It is indeed a double blow news to the Unskilled Worker community. AILA is looking into legality of this action.
more...
makeup a valid OpenOffice.org and
binadh
07-11 12:50 PM
Same with the Guy you just Bad Mouthed... He said that he Loves = Prem USA. Oh well forget about it. .... YOU ARE ALWAYS RIGHT.
My "Avtar Name" is "BharatPremi" not "BharatVasi" To do "Prem" you do not have to be "vasi":)
My "Avtar Name" is "BharatPremi" not "BharatVasi" To do "Prem" you do not have to be "vasi":)
girlfriend Oracle Open Office 3.3,
PavanV
09-04 01:04 PM
I am having a gala time reading the threads, thanks for the free entertainment folks :D, please keep going.
hairstyles OpenOffice 3.3
addsf345
05-29 05:21 PM
We need to fix the problem of too few visa numbers available to I/C. If the waits in EB2/3 are not long, there is no reason there will be any significant abuse of EB1 visas. You are targetting the a mosquito and ignoring the elephant in the room.
Gaurav, you are right on the it. I am not saying ignore or accept, but spend your efforts there where you can get maximum return.
like creating new quota for PHD/Masters, Visa Recapture, removing country limit from skilled EB immigration and NOT counting family members/dependents in yearly limit. If we can get even one of above done, it would give the best mileage as compared to go all after EB-1 abuse. You surely can write to CIS/Ombudsman/whoever but support IV for above efforts.
Gaurav, you are right on the it. I am not saying ignore or accept, but spend your efforts there where you can get maximum return.
like creating new quota for PHD/Masters, Visa Recapture, removing country limit from skilled EB immigration and NOT counting family members/dependents in yearly limit. If we can get even one of above done, it would give the best mileage as compared to go all after EB-1 abuse. You surely can write to CIS/Ombudsman/whoever but support IV for above efforts.
ajaypr
06-24 01:24 PM
Why should we punish people who play by the rules? Charles Oppenheim, Guru of the Visa Office in the State Department, has confirmed what we warned employment-based (EB) immigrants about in our June 2009 newsletter. Not only are EB-3 numbers unavailable for the rest of the fiscal year and EB-2 numbers for persons born in China and India oversubscribed, but the situation is going to get worse, much worse. Mr. Oppenheim states that the EB-1, EB-4 and EB-5 categories are all experiencing greatly increased demand, so much so that the EB-4 category (religious workers and special immigrants) may retrogress this...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2009/06/grim-outlook-for-eb-visa-numbers.html)
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.
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2009/06/grim-outlook-for-eb-visa-numbers.html)
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.
old_hat
05-02 11:41 PM
You Moron...open your Freaking eyes and read all the posts here. No one is supporting the LTTE. Why do you deviate from the topic again and again. We are talking about the civilians getting killed...but your freaking mind things and talks only about LTTE.
dude if u have no arguments, stop from calling names. i am not the one to be riled by intenet name calling. it is no bravery.
See my other posts and you will clearly see i have said that civilians need to be protected whether they are in darfur, kosovo or lanka. and i was replying to this particular person who was claiming
<i>It is Indian gov. lobbied efforts to ban LTTE by western country. they are well organized, disciplined and high tech group. some people raise another issue, they recruited young children to fight,</i>
this guy is clearly condoning LTTE. Dude either you get a pair of glasses or get some arguments with logic and yeah calling someone moron is not an argument.
dude if u have no arguments, stop from calling names. i am not the one to be riled by intenet name calling. it is no bravery.
See my other posts and you will clearly see i have said that civilians need to be protected whether they are in darfur, kosovo or lanka. and i was replying to this particular person who was claiming
<i>It is Indian gov. lobbied efforts to ban LTTE by western country. they are well organized, disciplined and high tech group. some people raise another issue, they recruited young children to fight,</i>
this guy is clearly condoning LTTE. Dude either you get a pair of glasses or get some arguments with logic and yeah calling someone moron is not an argument.