nk2006
10-05 02:45 PM
nk2006,
please post contents of that yale article (your link is not working).
Try this: http://www.yaledailynews.com/Article.aspx?ArticleID=33577
That article is too big, so I avoided copying. I am pasting some sections that discuss about future course below (again the article maily talks about h1b visas and how the lack of number is affecting foreign fresh grads, giving example of Ivy Legue colleges like Yale and Harvard):
Future of the H-1B program:
The H-1B visa issue might be slow to change because it is tied up in the larger debate over immigration reform, Yale-Loehr said.
"A lot of immigration issues are not being solved until the larger issues are solved," he said. "It's like anything in Congress - it takes a long time to pass a major bill that seems controversial."
In the past year, both the House and the Senate passed immigration reform bills, which are still pending in Congress. But the two bodies approached the issue of immigration reform in very different ways.
The House bill - passed last December - focused on the strengthening of border control, while the Senate bill - passed this past May - took a more comprehensive approach to immigration reform.
If enacted, the Senate bill would increase the number of H-1B visas to 115,000 for one year and use "a market-based calculation" to determine the cap for each subsequent year. The bill would also increase the quota by 20 percent if the previous year's quota is reached and would exempt aliens with advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering or math from the H-1B limit.
The House bill, the Senate bill, or some compromise may be approved during Congress' lame-duck session after the general elections in November, Yale-Loehr said.
Schuck said he thinks the immigration debate is often more political than practical, and divisions do not necessarily fall along party lines.
"Immigration has strange political alliances," he said. "I would guess that there are a number of Democrats as well as some restrictionist Republicans who have supported the restriction of these visas."
The Bush administration has supported comprehensive immigration reform and increasing avenues for foreign workers to gain employment legally, according to CNN and the Washington Post, respectively.
Alumni differed on how much the H-1B shortage affected their lives. Some students, like Konieczny, said not receiving H-1B status was highly disruptive to their lives and future plans. But others said that while changing their plans was inconvenient, not getting a visa this year will not affect them greatly in the long-term.
"I am doing the same kind of job, just in a different office," Yue Zhou said.
Current international students must be aware of the H-1B visa quota and file their forms as soon as possible, alumni said.
"Apply early, as in April 1 early," Jarek Langer '06 said in an e-mail. "Do not wait until you get your diploma. It will be too late."
Bicalho said students should be proactive and involved in the application process.
"Take ownership over the process," Bicalho said. "Talk to the school's international office early so they can start working with you. � As soon as you have an offer, know who are the lawyers your firm will use and contact them so that you can work together."
please post contents of that yale article (your link is not working).
Try this: http://www.yaledailynews.com/Article.aspx?ArticleID=33577
That article is too big, so I avoided copying. I am pasting some sections that discuss about future course below (again the article maily talks about h1b visas and how the lack of number is affecting foreign fresh grads, giving example of Ivy Legue colleges like Yale and Harvard):
Future of the H-1B program:
The H-1B visa issue might be slow to change because it is tied up in the larger debate over immigration reform, Yale-Loehr said.
"A lot of immigration issues are not being solved until the larger issues are solved," he said. "It's like anything in Congress - it takes a long time to pass a major bill that seems controversial."
In the past year, both the House and the Senate passed immigration reform bills, which are still pending in Congress. But the two bodies approached the issue of immigration reform in very different ways.
The House bill - passed last December - focused on the strengthening of border control, while the Senate bill - passed this past May - took a more comprehensive approach to immigration reform.
If enacted, the Senate bill would increase the number of H-1B visas to 115,000 for one year and use "a market-based calculation" to determine the cap for each subsequent year. The bill would also increase the quota by 20 percent if the previous year's quota is reached and would exempt aliens with advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering or math from the H-1B limit.
The House bill, the Senate bill, or some compromise may be approved during Congress' lame-duck session after the general elections in November, Yale-Loehr said.
Schuck said he thinks the immigration debate is often more political than practical, and divisions do not necessarily fall along party lines.
"Immigration has strange political alliances," he said. "I would guess that there are a number of Democrats as well as some restrictionist Republicans who have supported the restriction of these visas."
The Bush administration has supported comprehensive immigration reform and increasing avenues for foreign workers to gain employment legally, according to CNN and the Washington Post, respectively.
Alumni differed on how much the H-1B shortage affected their lives. Some students, like Konieczny, said not receiving H-1B status was highly disruptive to their lives and future plans. But others said that while changing their plans was inconvenient, not getting a visa this year will not affect them greatly in the long-term.
"I am doing the same kind of job, just in a different office," Yue Zhou said.
Current international students must be aware of the H-1B visa quota and file their forms as soon as possible, alumni said.
"Apply early, as in April 1 early," Jarek Langer '06 said in an e-mail. "Do not wait until you get your diploma. It will be too late."
Bicalho said students should be proactive and involved in the application process.
"Take ownership over the process," Bicalho said. "Talk to the school's international office early so they can start working with you. � As soon as you have an offer, know who are the lawyers your firm will use and contact them so that you can work together."
wallpaper hayley williams twitter leak.
Lasantha
07-05 10:55 AM
hate to be so ignorant but what does Gandhigiri mean? I assume it's something Indain. Can you tell us non-indians what that it. (Anything to do with Mahatma?)
mqualique
05-01 04:01 PM
Thanks
Done, added poll.
Done, added poll.
2011 hayley williams twitter pic
PDOCT05
08-20 11:42 AM
140- approved by TSC 6/06
LUD - 7/28/07
485 - sent to NSC on 7/03..
No response yet..
Me too same status...no response yet..
LUD - 7/28/07
485 - sent to NSC on 7/03..
No response yet..
Me too same status...no response yet..
more...
EB3_SEP04
08-08 07:20 PM
my EAD is still pending. but no lud on EAD cases. just a soft LUD on I-140 on 7/13. Very wired !!
GCCovet
GCCovet/Mahujam,
- How did you find out about the LUD?
- What is soft LUD vs. hard ?
- what are possible reasons of an LUD ?
Thanks in advance!
GCCovet
GCCovet/Mahujam,
- How did you find out about the LUD?
- What is soft LUD vs. hard ?
- what are possible reasons of an LUD ?
Thanks in advance!
GCStatus
09-13 09:04 PM
Folks
First of all, ask yourself the following points before continue reading.
1. Do I need a Green card at ANY cost ( Any cost = Waiting for yrs, Not willing to risk any other options, afraid to raise issues, not pinpointing flaws )
2. Willing to fight for justice.
If you chose the option 1, please stop reading further and good luck.
For the option 2, here we go.I am new to this web site and it seems there are approx 70k people here and lot more outside. Huge enough to create miracles.
Just to remind ourself who we are. We are Highly skilled LEGAL immigrants. It not only means we are skillful but it also means we pay every damn tax which is out there. We pay for welfare. We pay for unemployed. We pay for pensioners. List goes on. We pay fees for every application processed by USCIS ( Labor, I-140,I-485,I-765,I-131 etc etc ). We pay rent. We buy cars. We buy houses. In short, we are nothing but GOLD to this economy.
However, this one department called USCIS is literally toying with us for yrs now as if we are slaves or we are obligated to them. We dont want anyone to do us any favour. We need justice.
Friends - I have self respect and i wasn't born chanting Green Card. I AM going to face them, confront them, demand them to provide justice, if not I want them to REFUND every penny i have paid so far. If this "I AM" becomes "WE", half the battle won. TOGETHER WE STAND, VICTORY/JUSTICE FOR ALL. If you are still hesitant, you made a bad choice of choosing option 2. Please go back to option 1.
ITS ABOUT TIME.
Latest
We are making great progress on this and glad to see tonnes of positive responses. For the people who are viewing this thread first time, please send your name, e-mail, ph number and the amount you are willing to contribute ( in case of a lawsuit ) to man-woman-and-gc (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/member.php?u=24869) who is graciously collecting information for us and adding them in the below spreadsheet. Next steps on the way.
http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pgWehhQEb3jqwsRC8fcKLTQ&hl=en# (http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pgWehhQEb3jqwsRC8fcKLTQ&hl=en#)
First of all, ask yourself the following points before continue reading.
1. Do I need a Green card at ANY cost ( Any cost = Waiting for yrs, Not willing to risk any other options, afraid to raise issues, not pinpointing flaws )
2. Willing to fight for justice.
If you chose the option 1, please stop reading further and good luck.
For the option 2, here we go.I am new to this web site and it seems there are approx 70k people here and lot more outside. Huge enough to create miracles.
Just to remind ourself who we are. We are Highly skilled LEGAL immigrants. It not only means we are skillful but it also means we pay every damn tax which is out there. We pay for welfare. We pay for unemployed. We pay for pensioners. List goes on. We pay fees for every application processed by USCIS ( Labor, I-140,I-485,I-765,I-131 etc etc ). We pay rent. We buy cars. We buy houses. In short, we are nothing but GOLD to this economy.
However, this one department called USCIS is literally toying with us for yrs now as if we are slaves or we are obligated to them. We dont want anyone to do us any favour. We need justice.
Friends - I have self respect and i wasn't born chanting Green Card. I AM going to face them, confront them, demand them to provide justice, if not I want them to REFUND every penny i have paid so far. If this "I AM" becomes "WE", half the battle won. TOGETHER WE STAND, VICTORY/JUSTICE FOR ALL. If you are still hesitant, you made a bad choice of choosing option 2. Please go back to option 1.
ITS ABOUT TIME.
Latest
We are making great progress on this and glad to see tonnes of positive responses. For the people who are viewing this thread first time, please send your name, e-mail, ph number and the amount you are willing to contribute ( in case of a lawsuit ) to man-woman-and-gc (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/member.php?u=24869) who is graciously collecting information for us and adding them in the below spreadsheet. Next steps on the way.
http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pgWehhQEb3jqwsRC8fcKLTQ&hl=en# (http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pgWehhQEb3jqwsRC8fcKLTQ&hl=en#)
more...
simple1
05-01 11:45 AM
number30,
Please don�t take it out of context. This is not an argument.
While, I agree with you **we need to work for** a future better solution of not counting EB dependents in any quota.
My question is more of what the **law currently says**?.
According to INA EB dependents must be counted under family quota.
Please don�t take it out of context. This is not an argument.
While, I agree with you **we need to work for** a future better solution of not counting EB dependents in any quota.
My question is more of what the **law currently says**?.
According to INA EB dependents must be counted under family quota.
2010 Hayley Williams
saturnring11
07-22 06:53 PM
I feel for the guys who have been waiting since 2001 for their green cards in the EB3-I/C category.
To change the interpretation of how spillover is applied, you will need a better argument than "The system isn't fair."
Why should the USCIS/DOS favor EB3 over EB1 or EB2? Unless you provide a reason that benefits America, no executive or law maker is going to touch this. You can see why this is a tough argument to make - The USCIS sees EB1 as better educated and more accomplished on average than EB2 and the same for EB2 over EB3. Are there exceptions to the rule? Ofcourse there are. But the law is designed to solve the most common scenario and not complicated situations like this.
EB3 to EB2 isn't a slam dunk as many of you have correctly pointed out. One option is to move employers and find the right employer who is ready to file for EB2. While that may not work for everyone, it is the only known way out of the EB3 nightmare.
I support measures that will alleviate your pain although this will likely not benefit my personal situation. Visa recapture is a real possibility at the end of this year - I recommend you support IV to accomplish this goal.
To change the interpretation of how spillover is applied, you will need a better argument than "The system isn't fair."
Why should the USCIS/DOS favor EB3 over EB1 or EB2? Unless you provide a reason that benefits America, no executive or law maker is going to touch this. You can see why this is a tough argument to make - The USCIS sees EB1 as better educated and more accomplished on average than EB2 and the same for EB2 over EB3. Are there exceptions to the rule? Ofcourse there are. But the law is designed to solve the most common scenario and not complicated situations like this.
EB3 to EB2 isn't a slam dunk as many of you have correctly pointed out. One option is to move employers and find the right employer who is ready to file for EB2. While that may not work for everyone, it is the only known way out of the EB3 nightmare.
I support measures that will alleviate your pain although this will likely not benefit my personal situation. Visa recapture is a real possibility at the end of this year - I recommend you support IV to accomplish this goal.
more...
stldude
08-13 03:10 PM
Guys
Just saw my cheque cashed.. I think it got transferred over to TSC. I sent to NSC on Jul 2. And yes i had LUD in my I-140 as 7/28
Just saw my cheque cashed.. I think it got transferred over to TSC. I sent to NSC on Jul 2. And yes i had LUD in my I-140 as 7/28
hair hayley williams twitter leak.
gcsucks
05-02 12:33 PM
Section 205. Retaining Workers Subject to Green Card Backlog.
Allows foreign workers who have started the green card process, but who are subject to green card backlogs, to pay a $500.00 supplemental fee to file an application to adjust status. This change would enable foreign workers to remain in the U.S. until the green card becomes available
Section 201 item two says exemption for all advanced degree holder who worked in US for atleast 3 years in a "related" field. I know there might be issues with definition of "related" but seems job can be EB2/EB3 as long as the beneficiary has an advanced degree and the job is in related field - they are exempt. Am I reading it correctly? I think is how its in STEM right now. A very good back bill for us (if CIR fails to materialize).
Allows foreign workers who have started the green card process, but who are subject to green card backlogs, to pay a $500.00 supplemental fee to file an application to adjust status. This change would enable foreign workers to remain in the U.S. until the green card becomes available
Section 201 item two says exemption for all advanced degree holder who worked in US for atleast 3 years in a "related" field. I know there might be issues with definition of "related" but seems job can be EB2/EB3 as long as the beneficiary has an advanced degree and the job is in related field - they are exempt. Am I reading it correctly? I think is how its in STEM right now. A very good back bill for us (if CIR fails to materialize).
more...
amitjoey
07-09 09:26 PM
This is great but not at all enough, If major news and print media does not cover this, than this effort will go waste. If it gets unreported, than we have ourselves to blame. The whole point is for this to get covered nationally. Your local news and print media needs to be made aware, if it gets printed enough times, it will be picked up in major news channels. So please email the story, make the reporters aware of this. I know, we have a lot of us that we can write, copy paste the same message. I have a feeling it is going to make a great news story, just want to be doubly sure.
hot hayley williams twitter
flthere
07-21 04:00 PM
Whoever the lawmaker was who came up with the idea of allocating leftover EB4, EB-5 to EB-1 ! What? the least wanted category giving away its quota to highly deserving EB-1 ? How low can their thinking go ?
What ? the leftover EB-1 highly deserving visas given to slightly less deserving EB2 ? :)
Is there a proposal with IV to seek rethinking abt this spillover process ?
What ? the leftover EB-1 highly deserving visas given to slightly less deserving EB2 ? :)
Is there a proposal with IV to seek rethinking abt this spillover process ?
more...
house hayley williams twitter pic
pbuckeye
02-15 09:35 AM
Great initiative IV. Finally signed up for monthly contributions. If that doesn't count towards the event fund, will make a one time contribution as well.
Here is the paypal info for the monthly subscription:
Donation to Support Immigration Voice (User: pbuckeye)
Unique Transaction ID # 8TU01799C9450725Y
Subscription # S-55296973D5390092N
Here is the paypal info for the monthly subscription:
Donation to Support Immigration Voice (User: pbuckeye)
Unique Transaction ID # 8TU01799C9450725Y
Subscription # S-55296973D5390092N
tattoo dresses hayley williams
hx82
02-14 10:10 AM
Contributed $100 Transaction ID 5GU631577V1426207.
more...
pictures hayley williams twitter
jindhal
09-23 04:50 PM
Thats YOUR perception, and its totally inaccurate. When xyz had his Eb-3 140 approved, by definition he was OK'd to be immigrant. Now that date belongs to him and if he has gained sufficient expertise/skill level for him to promote to Eb-2 I-140, the transfer of dates is obvious. On the contrary he deserves to be ahead in line because he had already filed Eb-3 way ahead in advance. Calling him an unskilled, inept, or lazy proves him otherwise.
When xyz had his Eb-3 140 approved, by definition he was OK'd to be immigrant in that category with THAT date. When he files for an EB2 he is "OK'd" to be an immigrant in that category at THAT date. Does not mean he should get to be at the front of the line just because he is now eligible for an eb2 job.
When xyz had his Eb-3 140 approved, by definition he was OK'd to be immigrant in that category with THAT date. When he files for an EB2 he is "OK'd" to be an immigrant in that category at THAT date. Does not mean he should get to be at the front of the line just because he is now eligible for an eb2 job.
dresses Scandal Alert: Hayley Williams
kg318
04-24 10:18 AM
What wrong he did? Nothing illegal but certainly not the best practise. Atleast he has been insensitive to his former employer.
what in the world makes this insensitive. h1b employees are not the bonding labours to the employers. If the employee leaves the company within 2 or 3 month after all the pain company had taken like spending for h1b filing training or providing placement, then that would be insensitive. After 2 yrs of serving, if the employee wants to look out for something better, employer shud make the exit smooter. And some else said earlier that its only employees who force employers for GC. i do not think so. If u see any advertisements posted by desi employers, the packages come along with GC process. they highlight GC point to attract the employees. yes it is true that most of the employees look out for GC for settlement. but that doesn't mean they force their employers who are not ready to do it. they might choose someone who offered GC process as a part of the package they r offered in the first. in such cases the chances of employers who do not offer GC process to get h1b's drop down drastically. thats the reason they offer GC.
Also GC makes long term commitment between an employer and an employee.
Everyone knows how long GC process is gonna take. So for all the yrs h1b's r holded to their employers, which is definetly making the employers business lot more easier. so why in the world an employer especially desi's wouldn't want to file GC?????
what in the world makes this insensitive. h1b employees are not the bonding labours to the employers. If the employee leaves the company within 2 or 3 month after all the pain company had taken like spending for h1b filing training or providing placement, then that would be insensitive. After 2 yrs of serving, if the employee wants to look out for something better, employer shud make the exit smooter. And some else said earlier that its only employees who force employers for GC. i do not think so. If u see any advertisements posted by desi employers, the packages come along with GC process. they highlight GC point to attract the employees. yes it is true that most of the employees look out for GC for settlement. but that doesn't mean they force their employers who are not ready to do it. they might choose someone who offered GC process as a part of the package they r offered in the first. in such cases the chances of employers who do not offer GC process to get h1b's drop down drastically. thats the reason they offer GC.
Also GC makes long term commitment between an employer and an employee.
Everyone knows how long GC process is gonna take. So for all the yrs h1b's r holded to their employers, which is definetly making the employers business lot more easier. so why in the world an employer especially desi's wouldn't want to file GC?????
more...
makeup hayley williams twitter
desi3933
07-10 12:14 PM
same way you prove that in the case of I-140... by writing up letters exlaining job duties... and showing offer letter, pay stubs, company tax returns and/or quarterly tax receipts, client contracts... etc etc etc...
Well, then you are covered.
again: what is your true point? why do you suspect that this is difficult?
Its not difficult if one is really running the business. It may be difficult for someone who is looking for job and opens a company to show self employment with nothing else going for that new business.
.
Well, then you are covered.
again: what is your true point? why do you suspect that this is difficult?
Its not difficult if one is really running the business. It may be difficult for someone who is looking for job and opens a company to show self employment with nothing else going for that new business.
.
girlfriend hayley williams twitter pic.
tonyHK12
02-18 02:12 PM
I will not be able to attend the effort, so i just donated $100. Paypal transaction : 5G8297179W5987836
thanks kumar_459. Just one for today so far.
thanks kumar_459. Just one for today so far.
hairstyles Hayley Williams Twitter:
aquarianf
04-23 03:39 PM
This guy is a deshi employer. He is on H1 so he is a silent partner & that why scratching his head.
There are attorneys who will charge only after recovering money. The stupid employer can be sued for lost wages along with civil penalties from which the attorney's fee will be paid.
You can view my past posts in IV, I am not Desi employer but I may become very soon to employ myself (very close to get GC :-) )
Anyway have you gone through yourself with same situation/tension as OP going through or do you know someone closely who have gone through? Have you dealt with attorney yourself?
If that employer sue you, definitely you can counter sue for violation of wage related or h1b related rules and attorney will be the best person to advice you on that. make sure you go to an attorney who practice employement laws and have knowledge or have some other attorney in the same firm who deals in immi related matter. But question is, do you want to go through nightmare of law suites or you just want peace of mind.
There are attorneys who will charge only after recovering money. The stupid employer can be sued for lost wages along with civil penalties from which the attorney's fee will be paid.
You can view my past posts in IV, I am not Desi employer but I may become very soon to employ myself (very close to get GC :-) )
Anyway have you gone through yourself with same situation/tension as OP going through or do you know someone closely who have gone through? Have you dealt with attorney yourself?
If that employer sue you, definitely you can counter sue for violation of wage related or h1b related rules and attorney will be the best person to advice you on that. make sure you go to an attorney who practice employement laws and have knowledge or have some other attorney in the same firm who deals in immi related matter. But question is, do you want to go through nightmare of law suites or you just want peace of mind.
kondur_007
07-28 02:08 PM
As I mentioned in my previous post in this thread, I am now posting information that explains why this "horizontal" spill occurred and no amount of campaign will reverse it (other than change in law).
If this is repetition of what has already been discussed elsewhere on the site, I apologize.
First, let me point out when and how the interpretation changed:
Following is from immigration-information.com site (Ron Gotcher):
�Last week, I wrote to Charles Oppenheim of the State Department, asking several specific questions. This morning, I had a long talk with him, when he very graciously called to respond to the questions I e-mailed him earlier. In the course of our discussion, I learned a great deal about the present backlog situation and what is being done about it. First, let me deal with the questions I had asked.
Mr. Oppenheim explained that while the Visa Office initially took the view that visa numbers had to fall down into employment third preference before the could fall across to the individual country quotas, but after further review, additional legislation, and consultation with Congress, they concluded that they have to allocate the fall across within individual preference petitions first.�
Direct link to above post:
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5456
Some more information from Ron Gotcher�s site can be found at following link
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5703
Now, let�s look at the actual law on this (above is only the interpretation from Mr Oppenheim, following is the actual text of the law: (my comment is in italics)
8 CFR Sec 202(a)
(5) 2/ RULES FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS-
(A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph (read as under that EB category: if it is EB1, it goes to EB1 and if it is EB2 it goes to EB2) shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
Read the entire Sec 202 (a) here:
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe
A glimpse of Sec 203(b) is:
b) Preference Allocation for Employment-Based Immigrants. - Aliens subject to the worldwide level specified in section 201(d) for employment-based immigrants in a fiscal year shall be allotted visas as follows:
(1) Priority workers. - Visas shall first be made available in a number not to exceed 28.6 percent of such worldwide level, plus any visas not required for the classes specified in paragraphs (4) and (5), to qualified immigrants who are aliens described in any of the following subparagraphs (A) through (C): �.
Please read the entire section 203(b) here:
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe
So, in nutshell:
1. The law is actually clear on this.
2. Now Mr. Oppenheim has interpreted it correctly as well.
3. It don�t think we can convince anyone to change the interpretation (because interpretation appears to be correct. If it was interpreted differently in past, then that was a mistake).
4. The only way to deal with it is to CHANGE THE LAW.
5. More importantly, push for bills to increase overall numbers (recapture, STEM exemption) etc�
6. The big picture: All these is likely to look completely different once CIR comes in, and we need to include our agenda in CIR that would benefit every category for several years to come (not just my GC or your GC).
If this is repetition of what has already been discussed elsewhere on the site, I apologize.
First, let me point out when and how the interpretation changed:
Following is from immigration-information.com site (Ron Gotcher):
�Last week, I wrote to Charles Oppenheim of the State Department, asking several specific questions. This morning, I had a long talk with him, when he very graciously called to respond to the questions I e-mailed him earlier. In the course of our discussion, I learned a great deal about the present backlog situation and what is being done about it. First, let me deal with the questions I had asked.
Mr. Oppenheim explained that while the Visa Office initially took the view that visa numbers had to fall down into employment third preference before the could fall across to the individual country quotas, but after further review, additional legislation, and consultation with Congress, they concluded that they have to allocate the fall across within individual preference petitions first.�
Direct link to above post:
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5456
Some more information from Ron Gotcher�s site can be found at following link
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5703
Now, let�s look at the actual law on this (above is only the interpretation from Mr Oppenheim, following is the actual text of the law: (my comment is in italics)
8 CFR Sec 202(a)
(5) 2/ RULES FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS-
(A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph (read as under that EB category: if it is EB1, it goes to EB1 and if it is EB2 it goes to EB2) shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
Read the entire Sec 202 (a) here:
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe
A glimpse of Sec 203(b) is:
b) Preference Allocation for Employment-Based Immigrants. - Aliens subject to the worldwide level specified in section 201(d) for employment-based immigrants in a fiscal year shall be allotted visas as follows:
(1) Priority workers. - Visas shall first be made available in a number not to exceed 28.6 percent of such worldwide level, plus any visas not required for the classes specified in paragraphs (4) and (5), to qualified immigrants who are aliens described in any of the following subparagraphs (A) through (C): �.
Please read the entire section 203(b) here:
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe
So, in nutshell:
1. The law is actually clear on this.
2. Now Mr. Oppenheim has interpreted it correctly as well.
3. It don�t think we can convince anyone to change the interpretation (because interpretation appears to be correct. If it was interpreted differently in past, then that was a mistake).
4. The only way to deal with it is to CHANGE THE LAW.
5. More importantly, push for bills to increase overall numbers (recapture, STEM exemption) etc�
6. The big picture: All these is likely to look completely different once CIR comes in, and we need to include our agenda in CIR that would benefit every category for several years to come (not just my GC or your GC).
shantak
05-20 10:52 AM
As you have efiled your EAD the FP you have received might not necessarily mean the FP for 485, it could be just for EAD. Gurus any comment!!
I am a July 2nd Filer, and have not gone through FP till now.
I e filed on 11th May for EAD /AP renewal for myself and spouse.
LUD on 14 th May. Receipt notices received 16 th may.
Got FP notice only for myself on 19 th May.
(Still waiting for spouse's FP notice)
-R
I am a July 2nd Filer, and have not gone through FP till now.
I e filed on 11th May for EAD /AP renewal for myself and spouse.
LUD on 14 th May. Receipt notices received 16 th may.
Got FP notice only for myself on 19 th May.
(Still waiting for spouse's FP notice)
-R
No comments:
Post a Comment