virginia_desi
02-22 08:55 AM
I had a very smooth H1 stamping experience at US consulate in New Delhi on February 19. Everyone around us (atleast 4-5 people) had "PIMS Found" written on their D-156. We were sent to the premium processing line as I was revalidating the visa through the same employer. I was just asked how long I have worked for my current employer. I received my passport within 2 business days.
I hope this helps!!
I hope this helps!!
wallpaper Tattoo Designs of Japan by
tempy
09-09 08:46 AM
Just enjoy your green...
I think I should ... It was a looooooong 11 year journey.
I think I should ... It was a looooooong 11 year journey.
eb_retrogession
02-01 03:44 PM
Bush deems guest workers key for economy
By Joseph Curl and Stephen Dinan
The Washington Times, February 1, 2006
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20060201-120444-3544r.htm
President Bush last night called for 'stronger immigration enforcement and border protection' even as he told Congress to move forward with his plan to create a guest-worker program to fill jobs that no Americans want.
He also seemed to challenge those in his party who oppose a guest-worker program, saying the nation needs immigrants.
'We hear claims that immigrants are somehow bad for the economy -- even though this economy could not function without them,' Mr. Bush said in his State of the Union address.
The only way to keep the United States competitive is to create an immigration system that 'upholds our laws, reflects our values and serves the interests of our economy,' he said.
'Our nation needs orderly and secure borders. To meet this goal, we must have stronger immigration enforcement and border protection,' Mr. Bush said. 'And we must have a rational, humane guest-worker program that rejects amnesty, allows temporary jobs for people who seek them legally and reduces smuggling and crime at the border.'
The president pushed for his guest-worker plan in his past two State of the Union addresses as a way to help employers, but this year his focus on border security and immigration enforcement was much clearer.
'There has been continual movement on his part because he recognizes the Congress and the American people aren't with him, and we're going to fight him,' said Rep. Tom Tancredo, Colorado Republican.
He and other Republicans took issue with Mr. Bush for not differentiating between legal immigrants and illegal aliens when he said the economy could not work without immigrants.
Rep. Lamar Smith, Texas Republican, said U.S. workers would be hurt by a guest-worker program.
'Studies show that competition from cheap foreign labor depresses wages and takes jobs away from American citizens and legal immigrants alike,' Mr. Smith said.
He also said Mr. Bush's plan is unenforceable, because those here illegally cannot be expected to return to their home countries voluntarily.
In the official Democratic response to the State of the Union, Virginia Gov. Timothy M. Kaine said Mr. Bush does not have a rational immigration policy and that the result is a 'confusing patchwork' for states and localities to handle.
He shied away from a specific call for a path to citizenship for illegal aliens, even though most party leaders in Washington have endorsed that.
'We should welcome those who seek to lawfully join and contribute to our American family,' Mr. Kaine said. 'At the same time, we must ensure that our homeland-defense efforts begin with consistent federal action to protect our borders.'
In the Spanish-language Democratic response, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa specifically called for 'comprehensive immigration reform' and for giving 'hardworking people who play by the rules a greater opportunity to realize the American dream.'
Sen. John Cornyn, Texas Republican, said Mr. Bush was right to call for action on the border and for his guest-worker plan.
'The bill I've introduced strengthens our border enforcement and comprehensively reforms our immigration system,' Mr. Cornyn said. 'We need both stronger enforcement and reasonable reform of our immigration laws.'
By Joseph Curl and Stephen Dinan
The Washington Times, February 1, 2006
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20060201-120444-3544r.htm
President Bush last night called for 'stronger immigration enforcement and border protection' even as he told Congress to move forward with his plan to create a guest-worker program to fill jobs that no Americans want.
He also seemed to challenge those in his party who oppose a guest-worker program, saying the nation needs immigrants.
'We hear claims that immigrants are somehow bad for the economy -- even though this economy could not function without them,' Mr. Bush said in his State of the Union address.
The only way to keep the United States competitive is to create an immigration system that 'upholds our laws, reflects our values and serves the interests of our economy,' he said.
'Our nation needs orderly and secure borders. To meet this goal, we must have stronger immigration enforcement and border protection,' Mr. Bush said. 'And we must have a rational, humane guest-worker program that rejects amnesty, allows temporary jobs for people who seek them legally and reduces smuggling and crime at the border.'
The president pushed for his guest-worker plan in his past two State of the Union addresses as a way to help employers, but this year his focus on border security and immigration enforcement was much clearer.
'There has been continual movement on his part because he recognizes the Congress and the American people aren't with him, and we're going to fight him,' said Rep. Tom Tancredo, Colorado Republican.
He and other Republicans took issue with Mr. Bush for not differentiating between legal immigrants and illegal aliens when he said the economy could not work without immigrants.
Rep. Lamar Smith, Texas Republican, said U.S. workers would be hurt by a guest-worker program.
'Studies show that competition from cheap foreign labor depresses wages and takes jobs away from American citizens and legal immigrants alike,' Mr. Smith said.
He also said Mr. Bush's plan is unenforceable, because those here illegally cannot be expected to return to their home countries voluntarily.
In the official Democratic response to the State of the Union, Virginia Gov. Timothy M. Kaine said Mr. Bush does not have a rational immigration policy and that the result is a 'confusing patchwork' for states and localities to handle.
He shied away from a specific call for a path to citizenship for illegal aliens, even though most party leaders in Washington have endorsed that.
'We should welcome those who seek to lawfully join and contribute to our American family,' Mr. Kaine said. 'At the same time, we must ensure that our homeland-defense efforts begin with consistent federal action to protect our borders.'
In the Spanish-language Democratic response, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa specifically called for 'comprehensive immigration reform' and for giving 'hardworking people who play by the rules a greater opportunity to realize the American dream.'
Sen. John Cornyn, Texas Republican, said Mr. Bush was right to call for action on the border and for his guest-worker plan.
'The bill I've introduced strengthens our border enforcement and comprehensively reforms our immigration system,' Mr. Cornyn said. 'We need both stronger enforcement and reasonable reform of our immigration laws.'
2011 wallpaper Japanese Koi Fish
lotsofspace
01-26 08:51 PM
Its not true, plenty of non-white countries do not require a visa unlike India which has the worst visa policies in the world. Obviously most countries require a visa from Indians because India does the same needlessly. Its time the Indian govt revisited these primitive and ill conceived rules.
Do you think Russia and Japan have liberal visa requirements ?
Do you think Russia and Japan have liberal visa requirements ?
more...
beautifulMind
09-24 08:59 PM
Yes agree. The point is that for an example in September 2008 if you used AC21 then on that date you and your employer claimed that your skills are matching for "particular EB3 job classification" . Now if you go interfiling to USCIS in March 2009 then USCIS doubt as logically employer ca not establish the "natural skill progression" within 6 months.
One more thing - RFEs. Although people used AC21 in 2007 or start of 2008, just recently USCIS sent RFEs to many. All of them have just finished replying those RFEs in which hthey claimed that they are still working on a "same job" matching EB3 skill. My employer sent that RFE response in May 2009. So my clock starts again from May 2009. In December 2009 it is almost impossible for my employer to show that " I am fit for advanced skills". So this is the glitch that lot many lawyers are strongly hesitant to proceed on interfiling.
But I have already taken the promoton on Jan 2009 (raise and change in job requirements since I filed perm) and moved to the new eb2 position...I dd that after a year and half from eb3 485..... the job is same/similar but requirements and skills have changed
but as you mentioned
I should stll be ok and just make sure I interfile 485 after 3 years ?
One more thing - RFEs. Although people used AC21 in 2007 or start of 2008, just recently USCIS sent RFEs to many. All of them have just finished replying those RFEs in which hthey claimed that they are still working on a "same job" matching EB3 skill. My employer sent that RFE response in May 2009. So my clock starts again from May 2009. In December 2009 it is almost impossible for my employer to show that " I am fit for advanced skills". So this is the glitch that lot many lawyers are strongly hesitant to proceed on interfiling.
But I have already taken the promoton on Jan 2009 (raise and change in job requirements since I filed perm) and moved to the new eb2 position...I dd that after a year and half from eb3 485..... the job is same/similar but requirements and skills have changed
but as you mentioned
I should stll be ok and just make sure I interfile 485 after 3 years ?
l1fraud
06-15 09:02 AM
Get over with it bunch of whiny losers. Someone can can and is willing to do the job cheaper than you.
Think from your client's perspective:
1. Why should he pay you more if he can get someone for cheaper price?
2. Are you willing to do the same job for the salary that is offered by TCS, WIPRO?
3. If you screw up , who is responsible? What can you do to mitigate damage? TCS/WIPRO can replace the whole team at free of cost to make project successful.
4. YOU guys want to leave companies at will but the companies should not replace you at will?
If you were bringing in value to the client that they cant get from TCS/WIPRO then you will have the job. Get some more skills, be best in the business and be smart. Know what it takes for long term success. You have to be on your toes all the time.
STOP whining, you are just wasting time. All the best!
1. Why should he pay you more if he can get someone for cheaper price? - No Issues as long as its by following all the rules and regulations set by the authorities.
2. Are you willing to do the same job for the salary that is offered by TCS, WIPRO? - Nope, my salary is my personal choice. Tomorrow these companies may bring resources Illegally across border and offer 5$ per hour, would you accept that salary???
3. If you screw up , who is responsible? What can you do to mitigate damage? TCS/WIPRO can replace the whole team at free of cost to make project successful. - BS
4. YOU guys want to leave companies at will but the companies should not replace you at will? - Not at all, they can replace us anytime they want.. I don't know why this point ???
Here we are discussing about a violation by companies using L-1B visa resources and we think reporting this to the agencies (ICE/USCIS) and making awareness amoung clients doesn't harm anyone who does their business within the legal frame work.
Think from your client's perspective:
1. Why should he pay you more if he can get someone for cheaper price?
2. Are you willing to do the same job for the salary that is offered by TCS, WIPRO?
3. If you screw up , who is responsible? What can you do to mitigate damage? TCS/WIPRO can replace the whole team at free of cost to make project successful.
4. YOU guys want to leave companies at will but the companies should not replace you at will?
If you were bringing in value to the client that they cant get from TCS/WIPRO then you will have the job. Get some more skills, be best in the business and be smart. Know what it takes for long term success. You have to be on your toes all the time.
STOP whining, you are just wasting time. All the best!
1. Why should he pay you more if he can get someone for cheaper price? - No Issues as long as its by following all the rules and regulations set by the authorities.
2. Are you willing to do the same job for the salary that is offered by TCS, WIPRO? - Nope, my salary is my personal choice. Tomorrow these companies may bring resources Illegally across border and offer 5$ per hour, would you accept that salary???
3. If you screw up , who is responsible? What can you do to mitigate damage? TCS/WIPRO can replace the whole team at free of cost to make project successful. - BS
4. YOU guys want to leave companies at will but the companies should not replace you at will? - Not at all, they can replace us anytime they want.. I don't know why this point ???
Here we are discussing about a violation by companies using L-1B visa resources and we think reporting this to the agencies (ICE/USCIS) and making awareness amoung clients doesn't harm anyone who does their business within the legal frame work.
more...
smisachu
07-11 11:04 AM
I agree with immi2006. We set ourselves apart by the Flower campaign indicating that we are law abiding and peaceful.
If some one can come up with a format which shows the tax dollars we have paid so far and the social security we have contributed and we can extrapolate it to encompass the total estimated number of EB immigrants. That would be a sizable number and will wake everyone up. If we distribute this to all the Senators/Congressmen and media it could have a huge impact.
Maybe all IV members can send the two figures:
Lifetime tax paid- One figure
Contribution to SS- One figure
We can put this in a presentable format with a write up and publish it. More ideas and thoughts please.
Guys,
This should not boomrang on us, let us do it with caution. Food Delivery etc can look mean.
What we can think of is Sending your tax statements for 5 years to tell them how honest we have been and how much we contributed to economy..
Sending it to local senators ?.
What dou think ?
If some one can come up with a format which shows the tax dollars we have paid so far and the social security we have contributed and we can extrapolate it to encompass the total estimated number of EB immigrants. That would be a sizable number and will wake everyone up. If we distribute this to all the Senators/Congressmen and media it could have a huge impact.
Maybe all IV members can send the two figures:
Lifetime tax paid- One figure
Contribution to SS- One figure
We can put this in a presentable format with a write up and publish it. More ideas and thoughts please.
Guys,
This should not boomrang on us, let us do it with caution. Food Delivery etc can look mean.
What we can think of is Sending your tax statements for 5 years to tell them how honest we have been and how much we contributed to economy..
Sending it to local senators ?.
What dou think ?
2010 by GAKKIN TATTOO @ KYOTO
coolcat
05-16 05:03 PM
I was told I can't travel international after filling I-485.
I can travel international only after receive the receipt of I-1485.
Is this true?
I don't see an answer to vsoni's question. I don't know the answer either. Can someone answer vsoni's question and also mine, please?
Here is my question:
I'm currently on an H1 visa status. I'd be applying for 485, EAD, AP on June 1 (my PD becomes current then. :) ). Currently I don't have a H1B visa stamp in my passport. I'm planning to leave for India immediately after applying for 485, EAD and AP and apply for visa in India.
My question is if my H1B visa gets rejected, can I come to the US on AP (someone in the US will mail me the approved AP)?
I can travel international only after receive the receipt of I-1485.
Is this true?
I don't see an answer to vsoni's question. I don't know the answer either. Can someone answer vsoni's question and also mine, please?
Here is my question:
I'm currently on an H1 visa status. I'd be applying for 485, EAD, AP on June 1 (my PD becomes current then. :) ). Currently I don't have a H1B visa stamp in my passport. I'm planning to leave for India immediately after applying for 485, EAD and AP and apply for visa in India.
My question is if my H1B visa gets rejected, can I come to the US on AP (someone in the US will mail me the approved AP)?
more...
DallasBlue
08-12 02:44 PM
http://www.ailf.org/lac/clearinghouse_mandamus.shtml
Plaintiffs' Arguments
Plaintiffs have responded to USCIS with legal arguments summarized below. The case citations provide recent examples of cases where the courts have agreed with plaintiffs' arguments. For further discussion of the elements of a successful mandamus complaint, see AILF's Practice Advisory, "Mandamus Actions: Avoiding Dismissal and Proving the Case."
1) Plaintiffs have a clear right to have their adjustment applications and visa petitions adjudicated in a timely manner.
Plaintiffs maintain that the right to adjudication is derived from USCIS's mandatory duty to process the applications and the fact that plaintiffs are the intended beneficiaries of the applications. See 8 C.F.R. 245.2(a)(5)(i) (providing that the "applicant shall be notified of the decision of the director and, if the application is denied, the reasons for the denial"); Haidari v. Frazier, No. 06-3215, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89177, *10 (D. Minn. 2006) (holding that 8 C.F.R. � 209.2 creates a nondiscretionary duty to adjudicate adjustment applications).
The plaintiffs' right to a timely adjudication, though not explicit in the regulation, is present in section 555(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act, which requires that "with due regard for the convenience and necessity of the parties or their representatives and within a reasonable time, each agency shall proceed to conclude a matter presented to it." See Haidari, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89177 at *11. To determine if a delay is unreasonable, courts examine the reasons for delay. For example, they look to whether USCIS asked for the FBI name check in a timely manner and whether USCIS failed to timely process the applications before requesting the name check and after receiving the information from the FBI. See Haidari, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89177 at *16-17; Singh v. Still, No. 06-2458, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16334, *13-14 (N.D. Cal. 2007) (reasoning that respondents failed to explain why it took two-and-a-half years to initiate a security check with the FBI, why no action was taken to follow up with the FBI until the mandamus suit was filed, and why it took so long to process plaintiff's initial fingerprints); Aboushaban v. Mueller, No. 06-1280, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81076, *14 (N.D. Cal. 2006) ("[t]he FBI's delay in processing plaintiff's name check remains largely unexplained, and the remainder of defendants' arguments do not adequately excuse the delays plaintiff encountered.").
2) USCIS has a nondiscretionary duty to process applications and petitions.
USCIS has the discretion to grant or deny the application, but this does not bear on the nondiscretionary duty to make a decision on the application or petition. See Razaq v. Poulos, No. 06-2461, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 770, *9-10 (N.D. Cal. 2007) (reasoning that the fact that there is no specific deadline in the statute or regulation does not change the ministerial duty to process the application). In addition, INA � 242(a)(2)(B)(ii), 8 U.S.C. �1252(a)(2)(B)(ii), does not strip the court of jurisdiction to hear mandamus actions because no "decision or action" has taken place within the meaning of the statutory language. See Haidari, No. 06-3215, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89177 at *13-14 (D. Minn. 2006) (reasoning that because plaintiffs have neither been denied nor granted relief, � 242(a)(2)(B) does not bar jurisdiction); Li Duan v. Zamberry, No. 06-1351, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12697, *6-7 (W.D. Pa. 2007) (finding that INA � 242(a)(2)(B) does not apply because the pace of the adjudication of applications is not the type of discretionary "action" contemplated by the statute). For more information and earlier case law addressing discretionary decisions after the REAL ID Act please see AILF Practice Advisory, "Federal Court Jurisdiction Over Discretionary Decisions After REAL ID: Mandamus, Other Affirmative Suits and Petitions for Review."
3) There is no other remedy available to plaintiffs.
Plaintiffs also have argued that waiting for security checks to be completed is not an adequate remedy. The fact that plaintiffs are waiting is the exact harm plaintiffs are seeking to remedy. See Singh, No. 06-2458, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16334 at *23-24 (N.D. Cal. 2007) ("waiting for an agency to act cannot logically be an adequate alternative to an order compelling the agency to act. . .") (citations omitted); Haidari, No. 06-3215, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89177 at *15 (D. Minn. 2006) (reasoning that waiting is not an adequate remedy because the question is whether plaintiffs have an adequate alternative remedy to the waiting itself).
Plaintiffs' Arguments
Plaintiffs have responded to USCIS with legal arguments summarized below. The case citations provide recent examples of cases where the courts have agreed with plaintiffs' arguments. For further discussion of the elements of a successful mandamus complaint, see AILF's Practice Advisory, "Mandamus Actions: Avoiding Dismissal and Proving the Case."
1) Plaintiffs have a clear right to have their adjustment applications and visa petitions adjudicated in a timely manner.
Plaintiffs maintain that the right to adjudication is derived from USCIS's mandatory duty to process the applications and the fact that plaintiffs are the intended beneficiaries of the applications. See 8 C.F.R. 245.2(a)(5)(i) (providing that the "applicant shall be notified of the decision of the director and, if the application is denied, the reasons for the denial"); Haidari v. Frazier, No. 06-3215, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89177, *10 (D. Minn. 2006) (holding that 8 C.F.R. � 209.2 creates a nondiscretionary duty to adjudicate adjustment applications).
The plaintiffs' right to a timely adjudication, though not explicit in the regulation, is present in section 555(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act, which requires that "with due regard for the convenience and necessity of the parties or their representatives and within a reasonable time, each agency shall proceed to conclude a matter presented to it." See Haidari, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89177 at *11. To determine if a delay is unreasonable, courts examine the reasons for delay. For example, they look to whether USCIS asked for the FBI name check in a timely manner and whether USCIS failed to timely process the applications before requesting the name check and after receiving the information from the FBI. See Haidari, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89177 at *16-17; Singh v. Still, No. 06-2458, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16334, *13-14 (N.D. Cal. 2007) (reasoning that respondents failed to explain why it took two-and-a-half years to initiate a security check with the FBI, why no action was taken to follow up with the FBI until the mandamus suit was filed, and why it took so long to process plaintiff's initial fingerprints); Aboushaban v. Mueller, No. 06-1280, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81076, *14 (N.D. Cal. 2006) ("[t]he FBI's delay in processing plaintiff's name check remains largely unexplained, and the remainder of defendants' arguments do not adequately excuse the delays plaintiff encountered.").
2) USCIS has a nondiscretionary duty to process applications and petitions.
USCIS has the discretion to grant or deny the application, but this does not bear on the nondiscretionary duty to make a decision on the application or petition. See Razaq v. Poulos, No. 06-2461, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 770, *9-10 (N.D. Cal. 2007) (reasoning that the fact that there is no specific deadline in the statute or regulation does not change the ministerial duty to process the application). In addition, INA � 242(a)(2)(B)(ii), 8 U.S.C. �1252(a)(2)(B)(ii), does not strip the court of jurisdiction to hear mandamus actions because no "decision or action" has taken place within the meaning of the statutory language. See Haidari, No. 06-3215, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89177 at *13-14 (D. Minn. 2006) (reasoning that because plaintiffs have neither been denied nor granted relief, � 242(a)(2)(B) does not bar jurisdiction); Li Duan v. Zamberry, No. 06-1351, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12697, *6-7 (W.D. Pa. 2007) (finding that INA � 242(a)(2)(B) does not apply because the pace of the adjudication of applications is not the type of discretionary "action" contemplated by the statute). For more information and earlier case law addressing discretionary decisions after the REAL ID Act please see AILF Practice Advisory, "Federal Court Jurisdiction Over Discretionary Decisions After REAL ID: Mandamus, Other Affirmative Suits and Petitions for Review."
3) There is no other remedy available to plaintiffs.
Plaintiffs also have argued that waiting for security checks to be completed is not an adequate remedy. The fact that plaintiffs are waiting is the exact harm plaintiffs are seeking to remedy. See Singh, No. 06-2458, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16334 at *23-24 (N.D. Cal. 2007) ("waiting for an agency to act cannot logically be an adequate alternative to an order compelling the agency to act. . .") (citations omitted); Haidari, No. 06-3215, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89177 at *15 (D. Minn. 2006) (reasoning that waiting is not an adequate remedy because the question is whether plaintiffs have an adequate alternative remedy to the waiting itself).
hair of fish. koi fish tattoo
Techieforever
08-15 11:37 AM
hi Guys
Some one please tell me how to open an SR.. the number on the reciept is 800-375-5283
MY priority date is Feb 2005 (EB2 India) and Notice date is Sep, 04, 2007
The other day I took infopass but it was useless.. Any help in how to open an SR is highly appreciated guys
thanks
Some one please tell me how to open an SR.. the number on the reciept is 800-375-5283
MY priority date is Feb 2005 (EB2 India) and Notice date is Sep, 04, 2007
The other day I took infopass but it was useless.. Any help in how to open an SR is highly appreciated guys
thanks
more...
ajay
01-05 09:30 AM
This is really intriguing since nobody has even brought this up. I really welcome this idea and would support fully in all my abilities.
hot japanese koi ribcage tattoo
skynet2500
09-26 01:52 AM
Can someone post the link for the 485 data? the original link posted on this thread is not working for me any more. It worked for me yesterday, but doesn't work anymore.
Thanks
Thanks
more...
house tattoo goldfish tattoo.
l1fraud
06-14 07:55 PM
The OP is great. He has created a new id to discuss L1 fraud. Will he be creating one id per issue... recapture, H1B abuse, outsourcing, backlogs?? wow!!!
Not sure why he wants his/ her identity covered up. This shows how good some of us are in trying to make noises in the dark and not doing anything about issues in hand.
In all, I still don't understand why L1Bs cannot work at Client site. I am sure that the L1 petitions specifically ask for Client site / work location. If Client site address is mentioned, the USCIS does approve the petition. If it is against law, they will not approve the petition. I know this for a fact since some of my friends are on L1.
Regarding my identity cover up... I have mentioned couple of times abt the seriouness of the situation as the other party is a multi billion dollar organisation, second please add all the reasons why ICE/USCIS/DOL provides anonymity and whitsle bowler protection to people who brings these kind of violations to their notice.
Regarding working at client site... Yes they do get approved for working at client sites BUT with the condition that they would be working directly under the suprevision of their managers and NOT the client managers (they don't qualify for consulting assignments). Also these L-1B visas are approved for working on speciality skills NOT on common technical skills (like java/.net/DBs/Prod Support etc). Next time read your friends L-1B petition carefully and you could find all these details over there.. also verify the L1 reform act of 2004 (published in this thread).
Regarding retrogression... I agree that L-1B visas are not impacting the same much and also I think if someone in L-1A LEGALLY qualifies for EB-1 there is nothing wrong in getting the GC, If we think thats not appropriate then we should bring this upto the law makers and get it rectified BUT fake EB1s should be notified to authorities.
We are fighting against a fraudulant activity by which our jobs (and hence our GCs) are jeopardized and its not a fight against fellow immigrant BUT a fight against the greed of these corporates to make money even by committing such fraudulant activities.. hope this clears the doubt.
Not sure why he wants his/ her identity covered up. This shows how good some of us are in trying to make noises in the dark and not doing anything about issues in hand.
In all, I still don't understand why L1Bs cannot work at Client site. I am sure that the L1 petitions specifically ask for Client site / work location. If Client site address is mentioned, the USCIS does approve the petition. If it is against law, they will not approve the petition. I know this for a fact since some of my friends are on L1.
Regarding my identity cover up... I have mentioned couple of times abt the seriouness of the situation as the other party is a multi billion dollar organisation, second please add all the reasons why ICE/USCIS/DOL provides anonymity and whitsle bowler protection to people who brings these kind of violations to their notice.
Regarding working at client site... Yes they do get approved for working at client sites BUT with the condition that they would be working directly under the suprevision of their managers and NOT the client managers (they don't qualify for consulting assignments). Also these L-1B visas are approved for working on speciality skills NOT on common technical skills (like java/.net/DBs/Prod Support etc). Next time read your friends L-1B petition carefully and you could find all these details over there.. also verify the L1 reform act of 2004 (published in this thread).
Regarding retrogression... I agree that L-1B visas are not impacting the same much and also I think if someone in L-1A LEGALLY qualifies for EB-1 there is nothing wrong in getting the GC, If we think thats not appropriate then we should bring this upto the law makers and get it rectified BUT fake EB1s should be notified to authorities.
We are fighting against a fraudulant activity by which our jobs (and hence our GCs) are jeopardized and its not a fight against fellow immigrant BUT a fight against the greed of these corporates to make money even by committing such fraudulant activities.. hope this clears the doubt.
tattoo girlfriend japanese goldfish
english_august
07-11 12:20 AM
I hate to be nitpicking but
The irony is, in this whole migration debate, our issues are probably easiest to solve," said Bajaj.
Bajaj its not migrationits immigration. bird migrate people immigrate
Phew! Even I hate for you to be nitpicking :eek:
The irony is, in this whole migration debate, our issues are probably easiest to solve," said Bajaj.
Bajaj its not migrationits immigration. bird migrate people immigrate
Phew! Even I hate for you to be nitpicking :eek:
more...
pictures japanese goldfish tattoo
jungalee43
10-29 04:54 PM
This is very very important for the entire community, particularly in this economic environment.
dresses girlfriend Japanese Koi Sleeve
Saralayar
04-22 04:50 PM
In response to Saralayar's idea, I strongly believe it is a great idea but I have some details I don't understand. Would Saralayar tell me more about that????????
From the quote "Core team and every one, please consider this and try to lobby for getting the citizenship without further wait if the persons satisfy the folowing conditions:
1. If they are legally here for 10 years (With approved I-140 and waiting for Adjustment of Status without current date).
2. If they have earned full 40 points in Social Security
3. If they have paid the tax continuously for 10 years
4. If they own a house and paying Mortgage (adding weightage to the Economy boost)
and
5. If they do not have any criminal records in these 10 years."
From the above quote in Saralayar's previous message, I wonder
1) whether citizenship is granted to people who have met all 5 conditions or any 2-3
conditions out of 5???????
2) I do believe the last 2 conditions can be met by most of the foreign students but for
#3) condition "if they have paid the tax continously for 10 years", I wonder how can this
happen unless the foreign student who has worked in US for 10 years. I heard H-1b
workers maximum have 6 years plus 1 year extra for extension total add up to 7 years.
So how can have 10 years tax paid????
3) For #1) condition," If they are legally here for 10 years (With approved I-140 and
waiting for Adjustment of Status without current date)",
I wonder whether only students with years of US working experience (which means
years in full time study plus years of working experience) up to 10 years is counted
towards this legal stay for 10 years.
So how about students who have years of working experience (which means years in full time study plus years of working experience up
to 10 years but
without GC waiting due to lack of employers' file for GC sponsorship due to some
unknown reasons??????
or some foreign students who have stayed in US for 10 years for full time study such
as 4-yr bachelor degree plus 6-yr Ph.D or two Master degree (MS & MBA) or other
degree combinations but they have both social security card and drivers' license as US
ID but without employers' sponsorship due to certain reasons?????
Would you please tell me more details about your idea????? Thanks a lot for your attention and help!!
Look around you will see.... not everybody is the same.
I personally know many who had been "working in H1B" for more than 14 years.
Not everybody gives more weightage for their "immigration plan" than some personal and career interests. If you are really truthful to USCIS about your intentions, and you keep doing what you want to do with your career and life, it is in-fact very possible that you will be found without a GC even after 10 years working in USA, if your are from India.
An approved I-140 doesnt make you "automatically" qualified for an I-485. You dont file 485, if you dont "intent" to continue with that specific employment, even after I-140 approval.
7Years???? No..... you can extend your H1 beyond 6 years as many times as you want if you meet some conditions as per AC21. So it is possible for you to be in H1B for 100 years.
10years tax payed???? Yes because of the other reasons I mentioned. Also I know many who are still in que after 14 years paying taxes.
abcabcla,
Morchu is correct. We are just putting the period as a decade (10 years), which is pretty decent part of the human life.
From the quote "Core team and every one, please consider this and try to lobby for getting the citizenship without further wait if the persons satisfy the folowing conditions:
1. If they are legally here for 10 years (With approved I-140 and waiting for Adjustment of Status without current date).
2. If they have earned full 40 points in Social Security
3. If they have paid the tax continuously for 10 years
4. If they own a house and paying Mortgage (adding weightage to the Economy boost)
and
5. If they do not have any criminal records in these 10 years."
From the above quote in Saralayar's previous message, I wonder
1) whether citizenship is granted to people who have met all 5 conditions or any 2-3
conditions out of 5???????
2) I do believe the last 2 conditions can be met by most of the foreign students but for
#3) condition "if they have paid the tax continously for 10 years", I wonder how can this
happen unless the foreign student who has worked in US for 10 years. I heard H-1b
workers maximum have 6 years plus 1 year extra for extension total add up to 7 years.
So how can have 10 years tax paid????
3) For #1) condition," If they are legally here for 10 years (With approved I-140 and
waiting for Adjustment of Status without current date)",
I wonder whether only students with years of US working experience (which means
years in full time study plus years of working experience) up to 10 years is counted
towards this legal stay for 10 years.
So how about students who have years of working experience (which means years in full time study plus years of working experience up
to 10 years but
without GC waiting due to lack of employers' file for GC sponsorship due to some
unknown reasons??????
or some foreign students who have stayed in US for 10 years for full time study such
as 4-yr bachelor degree plus 6-yr Ph.D or two Master degree (MS & MBA) or other
degree combinations but they have both social security card and drivers' license as US
ID but without employers' sponsorship due to certain reasons?????
Would you please tell me more details about your idea????? Thanks a lot for your attention and help!!
Look around you will see.... not everybody is the same.
I personally know many who had been "working in H1B" for more than 14 years.
Not everybody gives more weightage for their "immigration plan" than some personal and career interests. If you are really truthful to USCIS about your intentions, and you keep doing what you want to do with your career and life, it is in-fact very possible that you will be found without a GC even after 10 years working in USA, if your are from India.
An approved I-140 doesnt make you "automatically" qualified for an I-485. You dont file 485, if you dont "intent" to continue with that specific employment, even after I-140 approval.
7Years???? No..... you can extend your H1 beyond 6 years as many times as you want if you meet some conditions as per AC21. So it is possible for you to be in H1B for 100 years.
10years tax payed???? Yes because of the other reasons I mentioned. Also I know many who are still in que after 14 years paying taxes.
abcabcla,
Morchu is correct. We are just putting the period as a decade (10 years), which is pretty decent part of the human life.
more...
makeup Gold fish? - Tattoo Forum
chanduv23
07-11 07:28 AM
http://samachar.com/showurl.php?rurl=http://sify.com/finance/fullstory.php?id=14490148
Green card seekers take to 'Gandhigiri' in US
Wednesday, 11 July , 2007, 11:13
Washington: In an eloquent display of Gandhigiri, unhappy Indian green card seekers sent hundreds of flowers to the US immigration agency to protest a last minute reversal in policy that would impede their way to permanent residency.
Inspired by the hit Hindi movie Lage Raho Munnabhai that extolled Gandhian ways of non-violent protest, the green card applicants plan to send around a thousand flower deliveries to US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Director Emilio Gonzalez in a three-day campaign that started on Tuesday.
The protest followed the abrupt reversal last week of a June announcement offering expedited processing of green card petitions for thousands of skilled foreign professionals working under H1-B visas - reserved for skilled workers in computing, engineering and other special professions.
Thousands of such visa holders scrambled and spent money on lawyers and medical exams to beat the July 1 deadline for green card applications. The abrupt change sent them back to the queue for 2008.
Besides India, skilled workers from China, Poland and many other countries will now have to spend more time and money to get the coveted green cards - a halfway house to US citizenship.
"The idea is to push them to honour their earlier notification," said Aman Kapoor, founder of Immigration Voice, a forum that inspired the unusual protest.
Indians are the worst hit by country quota caps for immigration visas, which treat a billion strong India, boasting a highly skilled workforce, on par with a country like Trinidad and Tobago of one million souls, he said.
On its part, the USCIS response was equally pacific. It plans to forward the flowers to Walter Reed Army Medical Centre and Bethesda Naval Hospital in Washington, the main facilities treating US soldiers wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan, said Gonzales in a statement on the agency website.
Green card seekers take to 'Gandhigiri' in US
Wednesday, 11 July , 2007, 11:13
Washington: In an eloquent display of Gandhigiri, unhappy Indian green card seekers sent hundreds of flowers to the US immigration agency to protest a last minute reversal in policy that would impede their way to permanent residency.
Inspired by the hit Hindi movie Lage Raho Munnabhai that extolled Gandhian ways of non-violent protest, the green card applicants plan to send around a thousand flower deliveries to US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Director Emilio Gonzalez in a three-day campaign that started on Tuesday.
The protest followed the abrupt reversal last week of a June announcement offering expedited processing of green card petitions for thousands of skilled foreign professionals working under H1-B visas - reserved for skilled workers in computing, engineering and other special professions.
Thousands of such visa holders scrambled and spent money on lawyers and medical exams to beat the July 1 deadline for green card applications. The abrupt change sent them back to the queue for 2008.
Besides India, skilled workers from China, Poland and many other countries will now have to spend more time and money to get the coveted green cards - a halfway house to US citizenship.
"The idea is to push them to honour their earlier notification," said Aman Kapoor, founder of Immigration Voice, a forum that inspired the unusual protest.
Indians are the worst hit by country quota caps for immigration visas, which treat a billion strong India, boasting a highly skilled workforce, on par with a country like Trinidad and Tobago of one million souls, he said.
On its part, the USCIS response was equally pacific. It plans to forward the flowers to Walter Reed Army Medical Centre and Bethesda Naval Hospital in Washington, the main facilities treating US soldiers wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan, said Gonzales in a statement on the agency website.
girlfriend goldfish tattoo design. koi
Hunter
05-09 05:30 AM
I guess the genuine companies will move the H1/L1 staff abroad along with positions to meet this requirements if at all this becomes law. What that means is more job loss in US. (Whether US has 50% of total "high skilled" work force necessary to run the operations of all the companies is another important question... I do not think so, may be the senators are considering highschool dropouts to handle the "high skilled" jobs :), I read somewhere about a recent survey and only 27% of 25-45 age group of population has a college degree in all discipline. I will try to find the link)
Over all, I see this move by senators as short sited and will prove disastrus to America in long run given the fact that no other country in the world is as dependent on technology / research and development as US.
I also saw a quote from one of the Indian offshoring company CEOs that only 25% of Indian engineers are employable. May be highschool dropouts in US may not be that bad when contrasted against that statistics, after all Bill Gates was also a dropout. Also the dime-a-dozen so-called "engineering colleges" in India that feed Indian offshoring companies are known for QUANTITY and not QUALITY. Indian students go for (or their parents pay for) those courses offered in those colleges precisely because they offer a better future - i.e. they feel they get a good ROI on their investment, even if they don't have the interest or aptitude for Computer Science or engineering. These days, these facts are known to a lot of americans working in IT.
If H1/L1 visa is restricted, that will give an incentive for americans to acquire a degree in science/engineering, just like the indian students taking courses in india offering a better ROI, as they get the feeling that they won't be discriminated in a job and investing $$$ in education is not going to be wasted. This is what President Obama also emphasized today about the need for fundamental change in unemployment allowances helping to retrain the laid-off workers.
It will no doubt cut into the obscene profit margins of TCS/INFY etc., as they will be forced to play by the rules.
Over all, I see this move by senators as short sited and will prove disastrus to America in long run given the fact that no other country in the world is as dependent on technology / research and development as US.
I also saw a quote from one of the Indian offshoring company CEOs that only 25% of Indian engineers are employable. May be highschool dropouts in US may not be that bad when contrasted against that statistics, after all Bill Gates was also a dropout. Also the dime-a-dozen so-called "engineering colleges" in India that feed Indian offshoring companies are known for QUANTITY and not QUALITY. Indian students go for (or their parents pay for) those courses offered in those colleges precisely because they offer a better future - i.e. they feel they get a good ROI on their investment, even if they don't have the interest or aptitude for Computer Science or engineering. These days, these facts are known to a lot of americans working in IT.
If H1/L1 visa is restricted, that will give an incentive for americans to acquire a degree in science/engineering, just like the indian students taking courses in india offering a better ROI, as they get the feeling that they won't be discriminated in a job and investing $$$ in education is not going to be wasted. This is what President Obama also emphasized today about the need for fundamental change in unemployment allowances helping to retrain the laid-off workers.
It will no doubt cut into the obscene profit margins of TCS/INFY etc., as they will be forced to play by the rules.
hairstyles Japanese Koi Tattoo
gcwonder
11-02 07:55 PM
I have send all 4 letters.
CADude
09-21 01:17 PM
Please write to Congressmen, Senators and USCIS complain dept.. Anyway you guys are waiting.. It will cost you less than a dime!! Who knows any one look your plight and take some actions..
template you can get from page 4, if intrested.
my 2 cents.
template you can get from page 4, if intrested.
my 2 cents.
dskhabra
09-24 12:19 PM
28.6%/5 = 5.72% for EB3-India + Spillover from EB2 and EB1, not more than 10,000 of which to "Other Workers".
28.6%/5 = 5.72% for EB2-India + spillover from EB1
28.6%/5 = 5.72% for EB1-India + spillover from EB4 and EB5
Each category is 28.6% WW Quota.
WW Quota consists of 5 country specific sub-quotas 1)India 2)China 3) Mexico 4) Philipines 5)ROW.
Based on page 1, I do math as under for Philippines categories.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) Quota for EB4 -->7% x 140000/5=1960, Pending: 70 Quota to be spilled over to EB1= 1890
2) Quota for EB5 --> 7% x 140000 / 5 = 1960, Pending: 0 Quota to be spilled over to EB1 = 1960
3) Quota for EB1 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + EB4 spillover 1890 + EB5 spillover 1960 = 11858 - pending 74 = Total
11784 will go to EB2
4) Quota for EB2 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + 11784 =19792, Pending: 510, So total 19282 VISA numbers will be spilled
over to EB3.
5) Quota for EB3 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + 19282 spill over =27290 - 11563 Pending = 15727 VISA extra.
6) “Other Workers” – Pending: 264 TOTAL UNUSED VISAS = 15727-264 = 15463 UNUSED VISAS will go to the quota
of other countries.
Based on page 3, I do math as under for ROW categories.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) Quota for EB4 -->7% x 140000/5=1960, Pending: 1378 Quota to be spilled over to EB1= 582
2) Quota for EB5 --> 7% x 140000 / 5 = 1960, Pending: 40 Quota to be spilled over to EB1 = 1920
3) Quota for EB1 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + EB4 spillover 582 + EB5 spillover 1920 = 10510 - pending 2477 = Total
8033 will go to EB2
4) Quota for EB2 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + 8033 =16031, Pending: 7150, So total 8881 VISA numbers will be spilled
over to EB3.
5) Quota for EB3 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + 8881 spill over =16889. Pending: 62840 -16889 = 45951 applications will
still be pending and pushed to year 2011.
Based on page 4, I do math as under for China categories.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) Quota For EB4 --> 7% x 140000 / 5 = 1960, Pending: 384 Quota to be spilled over to EB1 = 1576
2) Quota For EB5 --> 7% x 140000 / 5 = 1960, Pending: 13 Quota to be spilled over to EB1 = 1947
3) Quota for EB1 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + EB4 spillover 1576 + EB5 spillover 1947 = 11531 - pending 607 =
Total 10924 will go to EB2
4) Quota for EB2 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + 10924 =18932, Pending: 19333, So total 401 applications will be pushed to
year 2011 with pending approval.
5) Quota for EB3 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + no spillover = 8008 – 6343 Pending = 1665 visas Extra.
6) “Other Workers” – Pending: 30 TOTAL UNUSED VISAS = 1665-30 = 1635 UNUSED VISAS will go to the quota
of other countries.
Based on page 5, I do math as under for India categories.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) Quota for EB4 -->7% x 140000/5=1960, Pending: 123 Quota to be spilled over to EB1= 1960-123 = 1837
2) Quota for EB5 --> 7% x 140000 / 5 = 1960, Pending: 13 Quota to be spilled over to EB1 = 1960-13 = 1947
3) Quota for EB1 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + EB4 spillover 1837 + EB5 spillover 1947 = 11792 - pending 418 = Total
11374 will go to EB2
4) Quota for EB2 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + 11374 =19382, Pending: 47728, So total 28346 applications will still be
pending for year 2011.
5) Quota for EB3 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008, no spill over. Pending: 62607 -8008 = 54599 applications will still be pending
and pushed to year 2011.
Based on page 6, I do math as under for Mexico categories.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) Quota For EB4 --> 7% x 140000 / 5 = 1960, Pending: 62 Quota to be spilled over to EB1 = 1960-62=1898
2) Quota For EB5 --> 7% x 140000 / 5 = 1960, Pending: 0 Quota to be spilled over to EB1 = 1960
3) Quota for EB1 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + EB4 spillover 1898 + EB5 spillover 1960 = 11866 - pending 174 =
Total 11692 will go to EB2
4) Quota for EB2 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + 11692 =19700, Pending: 211, So total 19489 applications will spill over to
EB3 category.
5) Quota for EB3 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + 19489 spillover = 27497 – 7878 Pending = 19619 visas Extra.
6) “Other Workers” – Pending: 8415 TOTAL UNUSED VISAS = 19619-8415 = 11204 UNUSED VISAS will go to the quota
of other countries.
TOTAL UNUSED VISAS = 15463 + 1635 + 11204 = 28302.
Assuming these unused visas from Philippines, China and Mexico will be used for India, ROW equally India will benefit additional 14151 VISAS this year. Assuming all of these go to EB2 India Pushed down figure for EB2-India for the year 2011 will be 28346 – 14151 = 14195 pending EB2-I applications ready to go to year 2011.
One point, as we are seeing horizontal spill over for the last couple of years...so numbers unused in EB2 ROW will go to EB2 I and EB2 C not to EB3 ROW
So in your calculation ALL EB2 ROW/Philippines/Mexico unused VISA numbers should be spilled over to EB2I and EB2C not to EB3 ROW/Philippines/Mexico.
28.6%/5 = 5.72% for EB2-India + spillover from EB1
28.6%/5 = 5.72% for EB1-India + spillover from EB4 and EB5
Each category is 28.6% WW Quota.
WW Quota consists of 5 country specific sub-quotas 1)India 2)China 3) Mexico 4) Philipines 5)ROW.
Based on page 1, I do math as under for Philippines categories.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) Quota for EB4 -->7% x 140000/5=1960, Pending: 70 Quota to be spilled over to EB1= 1890
2) Quota for EB5 --> 7% x 140000 / 5 = 1960, Pending: 0 Quota to be spilled over to EB1 = 1960
3) Quota for EB1 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + EB4 spillover 1890 + EB5 spillover 1960 = 11858 - pending 74 = Total
11784 will go to EB2
4) Quota for EB2 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + 11784 =19792, Pending: 510, So total 19282 VISA numbers will be spilled
over to EB3.
5) Quota for EB3 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + 19282 spill over =27290 - 11563 Pending = 15727 VISA extra.
6) “Other Workers” – Pending: 264 TOTAL UNUSED VISAS = 15727-264 = 15463 UNUSED VISAS will go to the quota
of other countries.
Based on page 3, I do math as under for ROW categories.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) Quota for EB4 -->7% x 140000/5=1960, Pending: 1378 Quota to be spilled over to EB1= 582
2) Quota for EB5 --> 7% x 140000 / 5 = 1960, Pending: 40 Quota to be spilled over to EB1 = 1920
3) Quota for EB1 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + EB4 spillover 582 + EB5 spillover 1920 = 10510 - pending 2477 = Total
8033 will go to EB2
4) Quota for EB2 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + 8033 =16031, Pending: 7150, So total 8881 VISA numbers will be spilled
over to EB3.
5) Quota for EB3 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + 8881 spill over =16889. Pending: 62840 -16889 = 45951 applications will
still be pending and pushed to year 2011.
Based on page 4, I do math as under for China categories.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) Quota For EB4 --> 7% x 140000 / 5 = 1960, Pending: 384 Quota to be spilled over to EB1 = 1576
2) Quota For EB5 --> 7% x 140000 / 5 = 1960, Pending: 13 Quota to be spilled over to EB1 = 1947
3) Quota for EB1 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + EB4 spillover 1576 + EB5 spillover 1947 = 11531 - pending 607 =
Total 10924 will go to EB2
4) Quota for EB2 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + 10924 =18932, Pending: 19333, So total 401 applications will be pushed to
year 2011 with pending approval.
5) Quota for EB3 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + no spillover = 8008 – 6343 Pending = 1665 visas Extra.
6) “Other Workers” – Pending: 30 TOTAL UNUSED VISAS = 1665-30 = 1635 UNUSED VISAS will go to the quota
of other countries.
Based on page 5, I do math as under for India categories.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) Quota for EB4 -->7% x 140000/5=1960, Pending: 123 Quota to be spilled over to EB1= 1960-123 = 1837
2) Quota for EB5 --> 7% x 140000 / 5 = 1960, Pending: 13 Quota to be spilled over to EB1 = 1960-13 = 1947
3) Quota for EB1 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + EB4 spillover 1837 + EB5 spillover 1947 = 11792 - pending 418 = Total
11374 will go to EB2
4) Quota for EB2 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + 11374 =19382, Pending: 47728, So total 28346 applications will still be
pending for year 2011.
5) Quota for EB3 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008, no spill over. Pending: 62607 -8008 = 54599 applications will still be pending
and pushed to year 2011.
Based on page 6, I do math as under for Mexico categories.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) Quota For EB4 --> 7% x 140000 / 5 = 1960, Pending: 62 Quota to be spilled over to EB1 = 1960-62=1898
2) Quota For EB5 --> 7% x 140000 / 5 = 1960, Pending: 0 Quota to be spilled over to EB1 = 1960
3) Quota for EB1 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + EB4 spillover 1898 + EB5 spillover 1960 = 11866 - pending 174 =
Total 11692 will go to EB2
4) Quota for EB2 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + 11692 =19700, Pending: 211, So total 19489 applications will spill over to
EB3 category.
5) Quota for EB3 --> 5.72% x 140000 = 8008 + 19489 spillover = 27497 – 7878 Pending = 19619 visas Extra.
6) “Other Workers” – Pending: 8415 TOTAL UNUSED VISAS = 19619-8415 = 11204 UNUSED VISAS will go to the quota
of other countries.
TOTAL UNUSED VISAS = 15463 + 1635 + 11204 = 28302.
Assuming these unused visas from Philippines, China and Mexico will be used for India, ROW equally India will benefit additional 14151 VISAS this year. Assuming all of these go to EB2 India Pushed down figure for EB2-India for the year 2011 will be 28346 – 14151 = 14195 pending EB2-I applications ready to go to year 2011.
One point, as we are seeing horizontal spill over for the last couple of years...so numbers unused in EB2 ROW will go to EB2 I and EB2 C not to EB3 ROW
So in your calculation ALL EB2 ROW/Philippines/Mexico unused VISA numbers should be spilled over to EB2I and EB2C not to EB3 ROW/Philippines/Mexico.