jungalee43
02-16 03:11 PM
I did some research on murthy.com and found that AC21 did abolish 'per country of birth quota' on recycled numbers. I am posting a link to this murthy.com article of Oct 6, 2000 which clarifies the issue.
http://www.murthy.com/news/UDh1det.html
If the link fails I am reporducing the paragraph here: -
Major highlights of ACTA are listed below :
Per Country Quotas for Immigrant Visas
"Under Section 104, with respect to immigrant visas, the per country quota, which has been adversely affecting those from China and India and which the U.S. State Department had stated could possibly affect those from the Philippines in the near future, may have been resolved with this Bill. It has always been the case that not all of the available immigrant visas were issued, since most countries did not have enough applicants to use the total available. ACTA provides that if the INS or the U.S. State Department does not issue all of the immigrant visas that should be issued in that FY, the unused immigrant visa numbers should be made available to all countries without the per country quota limit applying."
Retrogression started as the recycled numbers are no longer available and with that country quota showed its horrible effect. It is clear guys we have to concentrate our energy and our thoughts on this quota. Quota on the basis of "country of birth" on talent or skill needed is really hard to explain and we can have good logical arguments to support its abolition.
http://www.murthy.com/news/UDh1det.html
If the link fails I am reporducing the paragraph here: -
Major highlights of ACTA are listed below :
Per Country Quotas for Immigrant Visas
"Under Section 104, with respect to immigrant visas, the per country quota, which has been adversely affecting those from China and India and which the U.S. State Department had stated could possibly affect those from the Philippines in the near future, may have been resolved with this Bill. It has always been the case that not all of the available immigrant visas were issued, since most countries did not have enough applicants to use the total available. ACTA provides that if the INS or the U.S. State Department does not issue all of the immigrant visas that should be issued in that FY, the unused immigrant visa numbers should be made available to all countries without the per country quota limit applying."
Retrogression started as the recycled numbers are no longer available and with that country quota showed its horrible effect. It is clear guys we have to concentrate our energy and our thoughts on this quota. Quota on the basis of "country of birth" on talent or skill needed is really hard to explain and we can have good logical arguments to support its abolition.
wallpaper jennifer lopez kids 2011.
njboy
09-20 10:41 AM
dont look a gift horse in the mouth
Ennada
09-13 12:25 PM
EB2 and EB3 at one point were in the same boat. Now that EB2 is advancing and is way ahead of EB3, the EB3 applicants are upset and angry. Their anger is very much justified. However, their anger should not be directed towards EB2 applicants.
As I pointed out in another post, we are all players here and we are all playing by the rules. The system is not fair. Anger should be directed towards the system and not towards EB2s.
"hate the game, don't hate the playa....Chris Rock" is appropriate here.
Most of the EB2s, if not all, are supportive of reform and are supportive towards EB3 friends. The anger may lead to the disruption of this support.
We are all in this together. We all need to stay together.
As I pointed out in another post, we are all players here and we are all playing by the rules. The system is not fair. Anger should be directed towards the system and not towards EB2s.
"hate the game, don't hate the playa....Chris Rock" is appropriate here.
Most of the EB2s, if not all, are supportive of reform and are supportive towards EB3 friends. The anger may lead to the disruption of this support.
We are all in this together. We all need to stay together.
2011 jennifer lopez kids 2011.
abhatti
07-16 02:56 PM
where do you all see/consult for updates or news on USCIS activities?
more...
wandmaker
06-10 01:36 AM
you better consult a very good attorney rather than asking for someone give you expert opinion.:eek:
rock945
02-21 12:21 PM
that is for last month updated jan 17,2007 not for feb?
Now it is updated for Feb.
Now it is updated for Feb.
more...
fasterthanlight�
06-06 02:55 PM
Hahah ya i know, it was pretty much sarcasm.
2010 jennifer lopez kids 2011.
saileshdude
10-15 02:42 PM
I don't think it has anything to do with H1. I think its just a mistake on their part that they issued this to derivative instead of principal applicant. This is because they are asking for intended permanent employer letter and that terms of LC /I-140 is same. This seems typical of standard employment letter RFE that is issued to the principal applicant.
Is there a way you contact the IO to get confirmation if the RFE is for you or principal applicant? Do keep us updated on how your attorney plans to respond to this.
Is there a way you contact the IO to get confirmation if the RFE is for you or principal applicant? Do keep us updated on how your attorney plans to respond to this.
more...
Vitriol
04-13 09:12 AM
Gurus, your inputs please: Can I take up a position in India with an American Firm while on H1B?
hair jennifer lopez kids 2011.
pom
05-27 09:16 AM
Come on, don't be modest, you deserve this!
more...
SAPGURU
07-13 09:04 PM
I was searching on internet and this is what i found on Murthy.com.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recently, the Nebraska Service Center (NSC) provided instructions on how to notify them regarding an earlier priority date (PD) when filing the I-140 and I-485 for an individual. It is possible to transfer a PD from one employment-based green card case to another, filed for the same individual, if the first case has reached the point where the 1-140 petition has been approved. Similarly, it is possible, in certain limited situations, to transfer a priority date from an approved I-130 petition to a later family-based filing. On occasion, however, it is difficult to make the service centers aware that the beneficiary has an earlier priority date.
The NSC, on June 14, 2005, provided instructions for a person filing a petition and requesting an earlier priority date based upon a previous case. A brightly-colored, flagged sheet of paper should be included to indicate that there is an earlier priority date. A copy of the prior I-797 Approval Notice of the I-140 petition should be inserted directly behind the brightly-colored sheet of paper. Though the NSC did not indicate where this should go in the filing, it is generally best to put such requests on the top of the filing or directly behind the cover sheet, to maximize the chance that it will be seen and acknowledged. This will avoid a rejection of the file, based on the priority date not being current, and a needless delay in processing the new filing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is that mean i can file I-485 with my previously approved I-140? I have also drop an email to my HR regarding the same. We do not have direct access to Attorney as every thing has to be directed by HR.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recently, the Nebraska Service Center (NSC) provided instructions on how to notify them regarding an earlier priority date (PD) when filing the I-140 and I-485 for an individual. It is possible to transfer a PD from one employment-based green card case to another, filed for the same individual, if the first case has reached the point where the 1-140 petition has been approved. Similarly, it is possible, in certain limited situations, to transfer a priority date from an approved I-130 petition to a later family-based filing. On occasion, however, it is difficult to make the service centers aware that the beneficiary has an earlier priority date.
The NSC, on June 14, 2005, provided instructions for a person filing a petition and requesting an earlier priority date based upon a previous case. A brightly-colored, flagged sheet of paper should be included to indicate that there is an earlier priority date. A copy of the prior I-797 Approval Notice of the I-140 petition should be inserted directly behind the brightly-colored sheet of paper. Though the NSC did not indicate where this should go in the filing, it is generally best to put such requests on the top of the filing or directly behind the cover sheet, to maximize the chance that it will be seen and acknowledged. This will avoid a rejection of the file, based on the priority date not being current, and a needless delay in processing the new filing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is that mean i can file I-485 with my previously approved I-140? I have also drop an email to my HR regarding the same. We do not have direct access to Attorney as every thing has to be directed by HR.
hot jennifer lopez kids 2011.
sands_14
06-11 03:21 PM
I dont want your colour to change but media keeps writing stuff,i guess we are intelligent enough to make our informed judgements.
I do respect your view if you hold that as per your own judgement but I feel the time calls for teaming up with President rather than going after him.
This will do us good I guess.Rest, its your color,you can decide which one you want to wear:)
I do respect your view if you hold that as per your own judgement but I feel the time calls for teaming up with President rather than going after him.
This will do us good I guess.Rest, its your color,you can decide which one you want to wear:)
more...
house jennifer lopez kids 2011.
vkrishn
08-12 03:37 PM
Why am i not surprised at USCIS ineffcieny. I made a similar enquory through my congresswoman and they got the response that my PD is Feb 2007 and there are no VISA's available where as my I40 approval notice and PERM laber certification approval shows as Feb 16th 2006.
Stopped by again at the congreswoman office with my I140 approval notice that shows my PD as Feb 16th 2006 (EB2).
Second instance where USCIS has some knuckle heads looking at cases is when i field a SR on July12th about my I485 to which i got a response that they cannot find my approved I140 in their system and told me to call back with the receipt number. Now when i call back they refused to take my receipt number as its not been 30 days of my SR and in order for them to take my receipt number they need to open another case and can do it only after 30 days.
Absolutely no accountability! I have mailed Ombudsman with all the replies i got from USCIS and hoping that my case is adjudicated properly.
Stopped by again at the congreswoman office with my I140 approval notice that shows my PD as Feb 16th 2006 (EB2).
Second instance where USCIS has some knuckle heads looking at cases is when i field a SR on July12th about my I485 to which i got a response that they cannot find my approved I140 in their system and told me to call back with the receipt number. Now when i call back they refused to take my receipt number as its not been 30 days of my SR and in order for them to take my receipt number they need to open another case and can do it only after 30 days.
Absolutely no accountability! I have mailed Ombudsman with all the replies i got from USCIS and hoping that my case is adjudicated properly.
tattoo jennifer lopez kids 2011.
Humhongekamyab
05-21 12:46 PM
The example he has given is a special case. The guy needs H1, because his son was out of status. Something is missing in the case. The child came to US 10 years back on B2 and stayed on B2 forever without extending or changing the status???
We need H1 only when we are not married or we have not filed I-485 for the dependants.
I agree. This was a special case and the attorney initially filling the 485 should have caught this error.
We need H1 only when we are not married or we have not filed I-485 for the dependants.
I agree. This was a special case and the attorney initially filling the 485 should have caught this error.
more...
pictures Jennifer Lopez lights up In
eb3_nepa
04-13 09:56 AM
People on here mentioned that there was a special provision for a a further 3 month wait for the director of immigration studies to examine it. Is that true?
Now is 90 days a normal wait time, or is there something special in this bill?
Now is 90 days a normal wait time, or is there something special in this bill?
dresses 2011 jennifer lopez kids
sc3
01-09 12:43 PM
No the current one!
No, you are supposed to return all I-94s!!.
No, you are supposed to return all I-94s!!.
more...
makeup jennifer lopez kids 2011.
Be_Pragmatic
06-20 12:57 PM
Guys: I have invoked my AC21 and am a consultant PM though my LC mentions "Programmer/Analyst". I came to this country because it is a land of opportunity and have been in the US for over 9 years now. I can't let this stupid AC21 provisions of "Same or Similar occupation" scepter of fear stop me from moving forward.
I'm also looking for a Full-time job as a Manager and if I get it I intend on taking it in a heart-beat without worrying about the consequences. Hey, it's not like I'm doing something illegal but merely exercising my due growth in my career. So, I'm moving on and if something bad were to happen like a NOID or a RFE, I'm ready to pack my bags back home with a satisfaction that I was atleast in the driver's seat.
My 2 cents but please do what is right for you.
I'm also looking for a Full-time job as a Manager and if I get it I intend on taking it in a heart-beat without worrying about the consequences. Hey, it's not like I'm doing something illegal but merely exercising my due growth in my career. So, I'm moving on and if something bad were to happen like a NOID or a RFE, I'm ready to pack my bags back home with a satisfaction that I was atleast in the driver's seat.
My 2 cents but please do what is right for you.
girlfriend Jennifer Lopez and Marc
nayekal
08-18 06:30 PM
Exactly.....You nailed it correctly.
Some people did mistakes in the past and tried to correct it. If they are successful in correcting the mistake legally, then you should feel happy about it and wish them success.
At least don't wish them bad luck....
Some people did mistakes in the past and tried to correct it. If they are successful in correcting the mistake legally, then you should feel happy about it and wish them success.
At least don't wish them bad luck....
hairstyles jennifer lopez kids 2011.
alterego
10-27 12:15 PM
It is precisely this type of ignorance and reluctance to address the real issues by both sides of the issue that makes our predicament so difficult to fix(as with many other policy issues that need fixing in this country). It is an almost insurmountable feat to get the policy makers and even the debaters on this issue to distinguish between the issues of illegal immigration and legal immigration in this country. This obfuscation is not by accident but by clear intent to serve each their specific interests.
Were that not the case, why don't these "we need to stand by the rule of law" enforcement types, call for an improvement in the situation for those "who have followed the law", simply put, it is only convenient for them to say that when they are speaking about the illegals, but alas they are against us legals as well................. so how can they ask anyone to believe that they are anything but anti immigrant period.
The pro immigrant guys blur the distinction specifically because they consider us a sweetener in the deal no less and no more they really don't consider the way we came any better or worse than the way others arrived, it is simply either all or none for them.
A rational policy that the American people can be asked to accept IMHO would involve, strict enforcement both at the border and interior at multiple sites including workplace, policies to alleviate the plight of the legals to demonstrate that way is rewarded and finally a strict case by case evaluation of illegals where some are given amnesty(if they have US children, spouse, lived here over X number of years and can prove it etc) Some will have to be made to have to leave to demonstrate that illegal behavior is not condoned or rewarded, be they Mexicans, Indians or Irish.
Alas, this cannot and will not be done due to the cowardice OF BOTH SIDES of this debate. Cowardice is sadly now changing to outright disdain for immigrants and that is sad in this great country of immigrants. Now the obfuscation will see a backlash emerging against us legals as well.
Were that not the case, why don't these "we need to stand by the rule of law" enforcement types, call for an improvement in the situation for those "who have followed the law", simply put, it is only convenient for them to say that when they are speaking about the illegals, but alas they are against us legals as well................. so how can they ask anyone to believe that they are anything but anti immigrant period.
The pro immigrant guys blur the distinction specifically because they consider us a sweetener in the deal no less and no more they really don't consider the way we came any better or worse than the way others arrived, it is simply either all or none for them.
A rational policy that the American people can be asked to accept IMHO would involve, strict enforcement both at the border and interior at multiple sites including workplace, policies to alleviate the plight of the legals to demonstrate that way is rewarded and finally a strict case by case evaluation of illegals where some are given amnesty(if they have US children, spouse, lived here over X number of years and can prove it etc) Some will have to be made to have to leave to demonstrate that illegal behavior is not condoned or rewarded, be they Mexicans, Indians or Irish.
Alas, this cannot and will not be done due to the cowardice OF BOTH SIDES of this debate. Cowardice is sadly now changing to outright disdain for immigrants and that is sad in this great country of immigrants. Now the obfuscation will see a backlash emerging against us legals as well.
sbdol
08-05 06:33 PM
...
What if all the background adjudication of 485 is done in 1 year and then we change from EB3 to EB2, its not going to affect the current 485 ? It will just put the file in a better category ?
If every EB3 is ported to EB2 then EB2 will retrogress to 2001 and EB3 will become current.
What if all the background adjudication of 485 is done in 1 year and then we change from EB3 to EB2, its not going to affect the current 485 ? It will just put the file in a better category ?
If every EB3 is ported to EB2 then EB2 will retrogress to 2001 and EB3 will become current.
Honda
09-08 11:40 PM
Thanks. No LUDs. Just got it in the mail straight. Try contacting your senator or congressperson.
Congrats...
Congrats...
No comments:
Post a Comment