Googler
02-15 10:28 PM
My friend, I'm not trying to fight you. All I am saying that you cannot file a class action against USCIS because they have not done anything wrong. They are just following the law.
If you really want to have this change, it is the US congress that you can deal with.
As I've said, I work for a law firm.
Why don't ask your immigration lawyer first regarding the "class action" you are talking about.
(1) There was no shortage of laypeople and even attorneys who asserted that "USCIS isn't doing anything wrong they are just following the law" when it came to FBI name checks. Fortunately for all of us sharper legal brains and sharper judges prevailed, and brought us to this happy day.
(2) On Class Actions: Villamonte, have you read the Mocanu decision (http://www.bibdaily.com/pdfs/Mocanu%202-8-08%20LEXIS.pdf)? If not I encourage you to do so -- that was just individual cases being consolidated, but the situation is not very different -- you should pay particular attention to the part where Judge Baylson recommends a multi-district class action litigation to deal with all the other name check cases (see p. 16, para numbered 6).
The parallels between the those cases and the one being proposed are very strong.
Judge Baylson is not the only judge who has recommended a class action approach to these issues. IV members should also be aware that all we need are a few named plaintiffs, it isn't as though every IV member or even everyone wanting to sue needs to be a named plaintiff. All the judge needs to recognize is that there is a large group of applicants with same or similar grounds for suing USCIS/Emilio Gonzalez. Edit to add: IV the organization doesn't even need to be the primary plaintiff, since that will necessarily cutoff any parallel discussion with the agencies. The IV forums are just a place to organize this.
(3) Preliminary Ideas on the Grounds for Suing (courtesy lazycis):
The grounds for suing USCIS is the same as in Gonzalez v Howerton -- (a) interpreting the law incorrectly (b) not following the statutory requirement that they use up all the greencards available in a given year and therefore being guilty of affirmative misconduct. At the very least, a judge is within his rights to make them make amends -- by recapturing 2003-2004 EB greencards, since they wasted them as a result of their affirmative misconduct -- they waited for name checks or simply not processing applications - no one can say there wasn't an application backlog in 2003-2004.
(4) First Steps
What we need here is to get this matter before a good legal strategist who is familiar with (a) the two sources of affirmative misconduct (FBI name checks and cessation of processing in 2003-2004) (b) precedents and caselaw (note that most immigration law firms are good with filing paperwork, but not necessarily complex litigation, so forget about the usual suspects.) The perfect legal argument will not sprout up immediately. In the same way that the legal arguments in the name check cases were honed over time (lazycis can confirm this), this too will need some serious research and thinking.
Those of you who want everything about this case sorted out, signed, sealed, guaranteed and delivered this week will need a reality check. :)
As will those of you who think that the way to approach this is to discuss these issues without familiarizing yourself with facts and legal precedents in some detail (so arguments about slavery etc are not the ones that will win the day in court, it is arguments that can show that USCIS was not interpreting the law correctly and in doing so caused harm and that the harm can be remedied through recapture.) -- if you want to see how a case like this will work read Mocanu and Galvez. This case will not be a dramatic movie-style civil rights case about slavery, it will involve the most tedious sort of nitty gritty discussion of admin misconduct.
OTOH, for most of us, all we've got is time -- I do not foresee my Jan 2003 EB-2 India PD becoming current any time soon. I'm prepared for a long legal battle. I'd rather do something constructive** that will likely change the process than sit and wait and mope.
**: Yes, I've sent off my letters too. I think of these two things as complementary projects.
If you really want to have this change, it is the US congress that you can deal with.
As I've said, I work for a law firm.
Why don't ask your immigration lawyer first regarding the "class action" you are talking about.
(1) There was no shortage of laypeople and even attorneys who asserted that "USCIS isn't doing anything wrong they are just following the law" when it came to FBI name checks. Fortunately for all of us sharper legal brains and sharper judges prevailed, and brought us to this happy day.
(2) On Class Actions: Villamonte, have you read the Mocanu decision (http://www.bibdaily.com/pdfs/Mocanu%202-8-08%20LEXIS.pdf)? If not I encourage you to do so -- that was just individual cases being consolidated, but the situation is not very different -- you should pay particular attention to the part where Judge Baylson recommends a multi-district class action litigation to deal with all the other name check cases (see p. 16, para numbered 6).
The parallels between the those cases and the one being proposed are very strong.
Judge Baylson is not the only judge who has recommended a class action approach to these issues. IV members should also be aware that all we need are a few named plaintiffs, it isn't as though every IV member or even everyone wanting to sue needs to be a named plaintiff. All the judge needs to recognize is that there is a large group of applicants with same or similar grounds for suing USCIS/Emilio Gonzalez. Edit to add: IV the organization doesn't even need to be the primary plaintiff, since that will necessarily cutoff any parallel discussion with the agencies. The IV forums are just a place to organize this.
(3) Preliminary Ideas on the Grounds for Suing (courtesy lazycis):
The grounds for suing USCIS is the same as in Gonzalez v Howerton -- (a) interpreting the law incorrectly (b) not following the statutory requirement that they use up all the greencards available in a given year and therefore being guilty of affirmative misconduct. At the very least, a judge is within his rights to make them make amends -- by recapturing 2003-2004 EB greencards, since they wasted them as a result of their affirmative misconduct -- they waited for name checks or simply not processing applications - no one can say there wasn't an application backlog in 2003-2004.
(4) First Steps
What we need here is to get this matter before a good legal strategist who is familiar with (a) the two sources of affirmative misconduct (FBI name checks and cessation of processing in 2003-2004) (b) precedents and caselaw (note that most immigration law firms are good with filing paperwork, but not necessarily complex litigation, so forget about the usual suspects.) The perfect legal argument will not sprout up immediately. In the same way that the legal arguments in the name check cases were honed over time (lazycis can confirm this), this too will need some serious research and thinking.
Those of you who want everything about this case sorted out, signed, sealed, guaranteed and delivered this week will need a reality check. :)
As will those of you who think that the way to approach this is to discuss these issues without familiarizing yourself with facts and legal precedents in some detail (so arguments about slavery etc are not the ones that will win the day in court, it is arguments that can show that USCIS was not interpreting the law correctly and in doing so caused harm and that the harm can be remedied through recapture.) -- if you want to see how a case like this will work read Mocanu and Galvez. This case will not be a dramatic movie-style civil rights case about slavery, it will involve the most tedious sort of nitty gritty discussion of admin misconduct.
OTOH, for most of us, all we've got is time -- I do not foresee my Jan 2003 EB-2 India PD becoming current any time soon. I'm prepared for a long legal battle. I'd rather do something constructive** that will likely change the process than sit and wait and mope.
**: Yes, I've sent off my letters too. I think of these two things as complementary projects.
wallpaper Golden Temple, Amritsar, India
gcpool
03-20 10:03 AM
I have heard that Job are not easily available there and the taxes are high.
Think about it. I know people who have filed and almost got it and have decided to stay. (Waste of time and money).
Hi, I am seriously planning to start Canadian immigration after wasting 7 years of my life in chasing GC. Can anybody suggest some good lawyers/attorneies/agencies who are not money suckers like US immigration attornies ? Also, somebody mentioned that one can apply Can immigration by himself. Is there any issue with that ?
Thanks
Think about it. I know people who have filed and almost got it and have decided to stay. (Waste of time and money).
Hi, I am seriously planning to start Canadian immigration after wasting 7 years of my life in chasing GC. Can anybody suggest some good lawyers/attorneies/agencies who are not money suckers like US immigration attornies ? Also, somebody mentioned that one can apply Can immigration by himself. Is there any issue with that ?
Thanks
immique
07-17 01:23 AM
I don't agree with your arguement. Spillover can happen in any quarter and you don't need to wait until the last quarter for it to happen. with EB1 and EB2 being current, the spillover into EB2 I and C will start from November/December of 2008 itself
Since no one knows how many of pre 2004 EB2/EB3 are pending for India or ROW, it is very difficult to predict where the PD would be at 2008 november. Whoever feels the numbers less suggests EB2 india PD would move forward, whoever feels the numbers are more suggests it will move slower.
But this is what my assumption is USCIS/DOS would start will less number of Visas for starting of year, let us say 900 for EB2(I) on november 08. There is a possibility that EB3 to EB2 conversion, Missed out old PD cases etc would result in getting EB2 going backwards...This would be the case for first 2 to 3 quarters, even if it moves it would in couple of months.Again based on EB3(ROW) demand next year end EB2(I) may or may not move forward fast.
One thing for sure spill over happens only during the last quarter, be it horizontal or vertical.
But this years move would make some people lucky to get GC even if their PD is in 2006. Again this is all my assumptions..
Since no one knows how many of pre 2004 EB2/EB3 are pending for India or ROW, it is very difficult to predict where the PD would be at 2008 november. Whoever feels the numbers less suggests EB2 india PD would move forward, whoever feels the numbers are more suggests it will move slower.
But this is what my assumption is USCIS/DOS would start will less number of Visas for starting of year, let us say 900 for EB2(I) on november 08. There is a possibility that EB3 to EB2 conversion, Missed out old PD cases etc would result in getting EB2 going backwards...This would be the case for first 2 to 3 quarters, even if it moves it would in couple of months.Again based on EB3(ROW) demand next year end EB2(I) may or may not move forward fast.
One thing for sure spill over happens only during the last quarter, be it horizontal or vertical.
But this years move would make some people lucky to get GC even if their PD is in 2006. Again this is all my assumptions..
2011 Re: Sri AMRITSAR - Sifti Da
andy007
07-03 10:25 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.wesh.com/money/13616272/detail.html
http://www.edmontonsun.com/News/Worl...08500-sun.html
http://www.kswo.com/Global/story.asp?S=6740337
http://www.onelocalnews.com/howellti...news&id=129492
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/...ow/2170349.cms
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007Jul...nCards,00.html
Thanks i am looking for CNN also ..
http://www.wesh.com/money/13616272/detail.html
http://www.edmontonsun.com/News/Worl...08500-sun.html
http://www.kswo.com/Global/story.asp?S=6740337
http://www.onelocalnews.com/howellti...news&id=129492
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/...ow/2170349.cms
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007Jul...nCards,00.html
Thanks i am looking for CNN also ..
more...
krishmunn
06-15 01:17 PM
What is your solution to remove retrogession. Recapture bill may fetch you gc but not for all persons and after 1 or 2 years again backlog will increase to similar level. Permanent solution will be increase annual gc numbers and restrict H1b and L1 based on requirement. You are not going to get unlimited GC numbers any time but L1 numbers are unlimited(about 80k in 2007) and H1b numbers were 125K in 2007. In this situation if there is annual cap retrogession is going to become worse if atleast 50% of H1bs apply for GC every year.
This year numbers were much less due to recession,rfes and denials. But due to 195k H1bs issued upto 2003 Eb3 will not improve for another 2 years.
"H1B numbers were 125K in 2007"
Holly cow ! I always thought H1B cap is set to 65K (except for a few years in early 2000) :-)
The 125K which you mentioned is popularly used by anti-immigrant lobbys to push their argument. It includes all H1B transfers NOT only the fresh H1.
So, if X get his H1 in 2006 and change to a new company in 2007 , you will count X against 2006 as well as 2007 giving a false number. However, if X applies for a GC, it is not 2X applying for GC --- just X .
Recapture bill will help a lot in clearing the backlog. For future EB GC, if the dependents are not counted for immigrant visa, it will be much cleaner. Not all L1 and H1 apply for GC. Mostly the major Indian IT companies DO NOT sponsor GC (and as you know they are the major users of L1).
This year numbers were much less due to recession,rfes and denials. But due to 195k H1bs issued upto 2003 Eb3 will not improve for another 2 years.
"H1B numbers were 125K in 2007"
Holly cow ! I always thought H1B cap is set to 65K (except for a few years in early 2000) :-)
The 125K which you mentioned is popularly used by anti-immigrant lobbys to push their argument. It includes all H1B transfers NOT only the fresh H1.
So, if X get his H1 in 2006 and change to a new company in 2007 , you will count X against 2006 as well as 2007 giving a false number. However, if X applies for a GC, it is not 2X applying for GC --- just X .
Recapture bill will help a lot in clearing the backlog. For future EB GC, if the dependents are not counted for immigrant visa, it will be much cleaner. Not all L1 and H1 apply for GC. Mostly the major Indian IT companies DO NOT sponsor GC (and as you know they are the major users of L1).
eb3_nepa
06-26 12:21 PM
Yeah but USCIS CAN change its rules at ANY time without ANY notice!!
Remember the ONE day notice that I-140 premium processing is terminated for Labour substitution cases?
Remember the ONE day notice that I-140 premium processing is terminated for Labour substitution cases?
more...
GCHope2011
01-14 02:49 PM
My friend gcdream 2001 please read through the whole article and understand that there is some action which needs to take place before i even open my mouth about any ideas.
BTW the negentive count is now 3500.
Sorry lady - enough of your billowing hot air - you have wasted enough people's time (including mine). If you have anything worth sharing you are free to do so - but I am not holding my breath for it.
And of course, you can continue to be in your delusional world. You certainly have not demonstrated any credibility to be asking people to meet any "conditions" whatsoever.
BTW the negentive count is now 3500.
Sorry lady - enough of your billowing hot air - you have wasted enough people's time (including mine). If you have anything worth sharing you are free to do so - but I am not holding my breath for it.
And of course, you can continue to be in your delusional world. You certainly have not demonstrated any credibility to be asking people to meet any "conditions" whatsoever.
2010 amritsar-golden-temple
ocpmachine
09-15 10:43 AM
This thread is getting very interesting with all the logical calculations and predictions, thanks OP.
One aspect that was missed in the discussions so far is, during Aug-Sep'08 many folks with 2005/06 PD's got their GC, USCIS picked these cases on random and not sure how many with 2005/06 PD's were approved but it a sizeable number, so this reduces the pending numbers for 2005/06 PD cases as well. I am predicting by Sep'10 we should see all of 2006 PD's cleared up.
-Cheers
One aspect that was missed in the discussions so far is, during Aug-Sep'08 many folks with 2005/06 PD's got their GC, USCIS picked these cases on random and not sure how many with 2005/06 PD's were approved but it a sizeable number, so this reduces the pending numbers for 2005/06 PD cases as well. I am predicting by Sep'10 we should see all of 2006 PD's cleared up.
-Cheers
more...
cps060
04-04 08:39 AM
What are your options if the Canadian PR expires (go to CA get PR and come back to US) and you are still in the US ? OR say you are in your 4th/5th year of CA PR and then you then desire to go to CA, can you re-apply for the Canadian PR ? If you can, what is the procedure .... ?
Anyone who know abt this, please respond.
Anyone who know abt this, please respond.
hair Golden Temple, Amritsar: Night
sledge_hammer
05-29 11:11 AM
1] To date there are 60K EB2I and another 60K EB3I I-485 applictaions pending.
2] 3.2K visas were available for EB2I for FY2009.
Assuming 3.2K visas are available every year from now on, it will take 60/3.2=18.75 years for all EB2I applicants upto today to be granted GC.
Unbelievable!
2] 3.2K visas were available for EB2I for FY2009.
Assuming 3.2K visas are available every year from now on, it will take 60/3.2=18.75 years for all EB2I applicants upto today to be granted GC.
Unbelievable!
more...
apnair2002
04-29 09:23 AM
04/29/2007: Elimination of Substitution of Aliens for the Certified Labor Certification Applications
As we stated earlier, the OMB had 90 days to make a decision on this DOL Final Rule. It was submitted on 01/26/2007 and the OMB cleared on 04/27/2007, just immediately prior to expiration of 90 days.
This final rule will not go into effect until it is published by the DOL in the federal register. Record reflects that this final rule will not be published in the federal register, Monday, 04/30/2007. We have yet to see what changes to the proposed version of the rule the DOL made in the final rule. However, it is certain that this rule will not go into effect on Monday, 04/30/2007, and there may still be some actions the employers can make before it is published in the federal register.
Pending Labor Certification Cases: PERM rule does not allow any amendments and no substitution of alien beneficiary available until the PERM application is certified. By the time PERM is approved, it may be too late to initiate the substitution. However, the cases which are pending at the BECs are different. The beneficiaries can be substituted inasmuch as the job order and the BEC supervised recruitment has yet to be initiated. At this time, the amendment of the BEC application does not require a paper request and e-mail or even phone call request followed by fax will work to substitute the alien. Under the final rule which will go into effect soon, the labor certification applications at the stage of DOL can survive only if the substitution has been approved at the time of release of the final rule. Accordingly, the employers can contact the BECs tomorrow, Monday, to amend the pending ETA 705 and alien beneficiary over the phone, via e-mail, followed by the phone calls and fax or straightforwardedly via fax. CAVEAT: If substitution is denied and original beneficiary ETA 750 is denied for the reason that there is no beneficiary, the employer can lose everything!!
Certified Labor Certification Cases: These cases will not be able to survive unless the I-140 petition is quickly filed on Monday substituting the alien beneficiary. The earliest filing date will be "Tuesday" since overnight delivery has to reach the Service Centers. Still worth trying. Once it is "filed," it will be safe. There remain a host of issues which will have to be resolved by the USCIS as to the consequences of the denial of these substitution I-140 petitions on issues other than alien beneficiaries qualifications such as the employer's financial ability to pay the proffered wage, etc. Obviously, the denial becomes a "final" action, the cases on appeal to the AAO will continue to remain outside the parameter of the elimination rule. Another question is the effect of motion to reopen of denial of substitution I-140 petitions. There is some chance that the USCIS may decide that once the motion is granted and I-140 petition is approved, the DOL's final rule of elimination of substitution will not affect the case. What if the employer refiles the substitution I-140 petitions? The chances of these cases will remail slim or nil. Since it will be considred a "new" filing of substitution I-140 petition, the USCIS may rule that such filing will be subject to the DOL's substitution elimination final rule. There will be other issues which fall under the jurisdiction of the USCIS rather than DOL as related to the interpretation of the substitution I-140 petitions. The USCIS is scheduled to initiate this rule making process sooner or later. Please stay tuned.
Impact on the Retention of Priority Date: The rule of retention of priority date is governed not by the DOL but by the USCIS. Under the USCIS rule, the priority date of the labor certification application is not retained until I-140 petition is "approved." Accordingly, if the decision of the denial of the substitution I-140 becomes final on appeal, the substituting alien will not be able to retain the priority. Neither the original beneficiary can retain the priority date unless the alien beneficiary substition I-140 petition was filed after the I-140 had been approved for the original beneficiary.
Impact on the 7th-Year H-1B Extension: Until the substitution I-140 is denied and becomes final on appeal, the substitutiing alien will be able to continuously extend the H-1B status in one-year increment, but the substituted alien will not be able to extend the 7th-year H-1B status based on the substituted labor certification application. Once the decision of denial becomes final, the substituting alien will not be able to extend the H-1B status after that time, but the validity of the approved 7th-year H-1B status will remain valid until the expiration date.
Impact on the 245(i) Benefits: Grandfathering of the 245(i) benefits cannot be transferred to other aliens and substituting aliens cannot take over the 245(i) benefits unless the substitution was filed before April 30, 2001. Once the grandfathering is attached, it remains valid unless "not approveable at the time of labor certification application filing" is found. Accordingly, the denial of substitution I-140 petition on behalf of the substituting alien will have no affect on the original beneficiary's retention of the 245(i) benefits.
Well, let's wait and see the text of the soon-to-be published final rule.
As we stated earlier, the OMB had 90 days to make a decision on this DOL Final Rule. It was submitted on 01/26/2007 and the OMB cleared on 04/27/2007, just immediately prior to expiration of 90 days.
This final rule will not go into effect until it is published by the DOL in the federal register. Record reflects that this final rule will not be published in the federal register, Monday, 04/30/2007. We have yet to see what changes to the proposed version of the rule the DOL made in the final rule. However, it is certain that this rule will not go into effect on Monday, 04/30/2007, and there may still be some actions the employers can make before it is published in the federal register.
Pending Labor Certification Cases: PERM rule does not allow any amendments and no substitution of alien beneficiary available until the PERM application is certified. By the time PERM is approved, it may be too late to initiate the substitution. However, the cases which are pending at the BECs are different. The beneficiaries can be substituted inasmuch as the job order and the BEC supervised recruitment has yet to be initiated. At this time, the amendment of the BEC application does not require a paper request and e-mail or even phone call request followed by fax will work to substitute the alien. Under the final rule which will go into effect soon, the labor certification applications at the stage of DOL can survive only if the substitution has been approved at the time of release of the final rule. Accordingly, the employers can contact the BECs tomorrow, Monday, to amend the pending ETA 705 and alien beneficiary over the phone, via e-mail, followed by the phone calls and fax or straightforwardedly via fax. CAVEAT: If substitution is denied and original beneficiary ETA 750 is denied for the reason that there is no beneficiary, the employer can lose everything!!
Certified Labor Certification Cases: These cases will not be able to survive unless the I-140 petition is quickly filed on Monday substituting the alien beneficiary. The earliest filing date will be "Tuesday" since overnight delivery has to reach the Service Centers. Still worth trying. Once it is "filed," it will be safe. There remain a host of issues which will have to be resolved by the USCIS as to the consequences of the denial of these substitution I-140 petitions on issues other than alien beneficiaries qualifications such as the employer's financial ability to pay the proffered wage, etc. Obviously, the denial becomes a "final" action, the cases on appeal to the AAO will continue to remain outside the parameter of the elimination rule. Another question is the effect of motion to reopen of denial of substitution I-140 petitions. There is some chance that the USCIS may decide that once the motion is granted and I-140 petition is approved, the DOL's final rule of elimination of substitution will not affect the case. What if the employer refiles the substitution I-140 petitions? The chances of these cases will remail slim or nil. Since it will be considred a "new" filing of substitution I-140 petition, the USCIS may rule that such filing will be subject to the DOL's substitution elimination final rule. There will be other issues which fall under the jurisdiction of the USCIS rather than DOL as related to the interpretation of the substitution I-140 petitions. The USCIS is scheduled to initiate this rule making process sooner or later. Please stay tuned.
Impact on the Retention of Priority Date: The rule of retention of priority date is governed not by the DOL but by the USCIS. Under the USCIS rule, the priority date of the labor certification application is not retained until I-140 petition is "approved." Accordingly, if the decision of the denial of the substitution I-140 becomes final on appeal, the substituting alien will not be able to retain the priority. Neither the original beneficiary can retain the priority date unless the alien beneficiary substition I-140 petition was filed after the I-140 had been approved for the original beneficiary.
Impact on the 7th-Year H-1B Extension: Until the substitution I-140 is denied and becomes final on appeal, the substitutiing alien will be able to continuously extend the H-1B status in one-year increment, but the substituted alien will not be able to extend the 7th-year H-1B status based on the substituted labor certification application. Once the decision of denial becomes final, the substituting alien will not be able to extend the H-1B status after that time, but the validity of the approved 7th-year H-1B status will remain valid until the expiration date.
Impact on the 245(i) Benefits: Grandfathering of the 245(i) benefits cannot be transferred to other aliens and substituting aliens cannot take over the 245(i) benefits unless the substitution was filed before April 30, 2001. Once the grandfathering is attached, it remains valid unless "not approveable at the time of labor certification application filing" is found. Accordingly, the denial of substitution I-140 petition on behalf of the substituting alien will have no affect on the original beneficiary's retention of the 245(i) benefits.
Well, let's wait and see the text of the soon-to-be published final rule.
hot at Golden Temple by
acruix
07-13 04:07 PM
http://www.immigrantslist.org/page/petition/Chertoff
more...
house Amritsar - Golden Temple
villamonte6100
06-28 11:56 AM
This is what my very very high profile attorney wrote in her email to me today....
" We have heard that there will be a visa regression the first week of July "
And in immigration matters I trust her more than anybody in this whole country. So guys be ready and prepared. Do what u have to do. Be proactive.
My post is not to spread rumors or scare people but to help them to grab this golden opportunity.
I am ready to send papers for July 1st.
Does your attorney cost $400 to $800 an hour. I work with a law firm and our attorneys per hour rates are from $400 up. I don't understand your description of "very very high profile" attorney.
" We have heard that there will be a visa regression the first week of July "
And in immigration matters I trust her more than anybody in this whole country. So guys be ready and prepared. Do what u have to do. Be proactive.
My post is not to spread rumors or scare people but to help them to grab this golden opportunity.
I am ready to send papers for July 1st.
Does your attorney cost $400 to $800 an hour. I work with a law firm and our attorneys per hour rates are from $400 up. I don't understand your description of "very very high profile" attorney.
tattoo Katrina Kaif Golden Temple 2
django.stone
09-17 02:18 PM
Do you have any data to back your claim? I beleive there are more EB2 China numbers than India. I remember seeing some data a while back where Indian EB2 & Eb3 ratio was close to 50% where as China it was 80% EB2 to 20% EB3. Which makes me think there are more EB2 china than india.
You need to multiply ratio with total to get absolute EB2 numbers. If China total is 100, 80% of 100 is, 80 and if India total is 1000, 60% of 1000 is 600. I think people are saying here that in absolute terms India EB2 > China EB2.
You need to multiply ratio with total to get absolute EB2 numbers. If China total is 100, 80% of 100 is, 80 and if India total is 1000, 60% of 1000 is 600. I think people are saying here that in absolute terms India EB2 > China EB2.
more...
pictures The Golden Temple in Amritsar
Jerrome
09-24 10:24 AM
When can I get my gc based on these uscis data for sept 2005 eb-2.Please suggest me.
100% by this time next year.
100% by this time next year.
dresses Golden Temple - Amritsar
vdlrao
07-16 10:25 PM
Does anybody know how many EB2-I and EB2-ROW PERMs were processed for 2006, 2007 and 2008? Once we know these numbers it will be easy to predict EB2-I movement as all of the spillover numbers will be used primarily by EB2 India.
http://www.immigration.com/newsletter1/attregusimmsuppo.pdf
http://www.immigration.com/newsletter1/permstatsjune08.pdf
Total Labors approved in year 2007 --> 85,112
Total Labors for India in year 2007 --> 24,573.
Total Labors for China in Year 2007 --> 6,846
Total labors approved from Mar 2005 to till May 2008 --> 209,393
http://www.immigration.com/newsletter1/attregusimmsuppo.pdf
http://www.immigration.com/newsletter1/permstatsjune08.pdf
Total Labors approved in year 2007 --> 85,112
Total Labors for India in year 2007 --> 24,573.
Total Labors for China in Year 2007 --> 6,846
Total labors approved from Mar 2005 to till May 2008 --> 209,393
more...
makeup The Golden Temple in Amritsar
dealsnet
09-04 11:32 AM
-TrueFactsis an IV insider. Otherwise how he know the real name of the person.
quote:( "-TrueFacts) Jayapaul Reddy Vadicherla" This is to warn you on any personal disturbing mesgs"
So people suspect it is CHANDV23. He have second highest rating after PAPPU.
So people suspect he got all ratings from his multiple ID'S.
Sudddenly -TrueFacts become green after so many reds.
DON'T MAKE US FOOLS.
IV MUST BAN BOTH OF THEM, BECAUSE -TrueFacts accepts his ID is duplicate only to create to post this thread.
Mr. CHANDV23.....You should have been aware that when you are logged in with your alias(aka _TrueFacts) it turns "Green dot" beside your ID. Your other ID "CHANDUV23" turns blue if you do not use it...
Still making me laugh the hell lot trying to prove your point by hiding behind your real Identity. Why not accept that you are indeed "CHANDUV23" Hahaha...
I guess this is what is called "Wolf in Sheep clothes"
quote:( "-TrueFacts) Jayapaul Reddy Vadicherla" This is to warn you on any personal disturbing mesgs"
So people suspect it is CHANDV23. He have second highest rating after PAPPU.
So people suspect he got all ratings from his multiple ID'S.
Sudddenly -TrueFacts become green after so many reds.
DON'T MAKE US FOOLS.
IV MUST BAN BOTH OF THEM, BECAUSE -TrueFacts accepts his ID is duplicate only to create to post this thread.
Mr. CHANDV23.....You should have been aware that when you are logged in with your alias(aka _TrueFacts) it turns "Green dot" beside your ID. Your other ID "CHANDUV23" turns blue if you do not use it...
Still making me laugh the hell lot trying to prove your point by hiding behind your real Identity. Why not accept that you are indeed "CHANDUV23" Hahaha...
I guess this is what is called "Wolf in Sheep clothes"
girlfriend Golden Temple (Harmandir)
okuzmin
04-09 12:14 PM
WFGC2006, to my knowledge, in order to be able to apply for Canadian citizenship, you must stay in the country for 3 out of the last 4 years cumulatively, not consecutively.
hairstyles Golden Temple of Amritsar
test101
07-04 11:31 AM
I tried xls, and txt. it wont upload.i have total 655 contacts. The file size is small but still it wont upload on the iV site.
someone pls tell me how to upload , i have now an .xls file of media contacts, about 931k in size.
someone pls tell me how to upload , i have now an .xls file of media contacts, about 931k in size.
svr_76
05-11 10:54 AM
And you have moved to the US. Participating in IV forums to see when/how the visa bulleting can be changed so your date becomes current and you get a GC and are free to hop and try to get a job of your dream. Why do you care about these things? Just wait for your card man...enjoy the wait in the line..rest of the stuff is not of your worry (unless offcourse you get laid off and then all of a sudden your patriotism wakens up...and u get all firedup to proove your mettle in your own land.?
Leave this pseudo-patriotism in your apartment dude as u are in the land of dreams that you dreamt about. Just worry about the time it takes for u to get GC and then wait 5 years to get citizenship.
Leave this pseudo-patriotism in your apartment dude as u are in the land of dreams that you dreamt about. Just worry about the time it takes for u to get GC and then wait 5 years to get citizenship.
copsmart
09-24 08:10 AM
This is not fair and good idea. what about people waiting in line for years and invested their money elsewhere because of this green card delays or those who do not have enough money and job in this market situation. All of the sudden you are brining this idea. This is not fair. This is kind of buying green card. There is a investment based green card category available for that. I request you to go through that channel if you are rich. Not all employment based green card seekers are rich. Please keep that in mind.
thanks,
aps
You are not buying Green Card, you are buying home which you will eventually buy at some point down the road.
I agree with Nixstor�s idea and I fully support it.
Even if the proposal doesn�t work, it would at least give some awareness to the lawmakers that expediting EB green cards would pump lot of money into this country�s economy. Plus, it�s a great selling point for representatives like Lofgren, who is trying to help us by defending 100s of amendments from anti-immigrants like King and Smith.
Not all EB GC seekers are rich, but they are rich enough to afford for a home.
So please refrain from posting negative comments.
BTW, feel free to give me red or call me jacka## like some other coward did.
thanks,
aps
You are not buying Green Card, you are buying home which you will eventually buy at some point down the road.
I agree with Nixstor�s idea and I fully support it.
Even if the proposal doesn�t work, it would at least give some awareness to the lawmakers that expediting EB green cards would pump lot of money into this country�s economy. Plus, it�s a great selling point for representatives like Lofgren, who is trying to help us by defending 100s of amendments from anti-immigrants like King and Smith.
Not all EB GC seekers are rich, but they are rich enough to afford for a home.
So please refrain from posting negative comments.
BTW, feel free to give me red or call me jacka## like some other coward did.
