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).
wallpaper Posted in Weddings
tonyHK12
02-09 06:25 PM
thanks gujju, srinivas_o for your contributions and continued support. It is nice to see EB3 guys being proactive. Giving up or doing nothing is not an option. This is the best chance we have until 2013.
There are 100,000+ in the EB3 queue, and nearly 30,000 in the EB2 queue.
Amount raised = $1700.00
Contributions needed = $48,300.00
There are 100,000+ in the EB3 queue, and nearly 30,000 in the EB2 queue.
Amount raised = $1700.00
Contributions needed = $48,300.00
Libra
09-04 10:12 AM
congrats heathere3, and welcome to IV. there is a rally on sep 18th in DC if you dont know about it. please participate in rally and contribute in whatever way you can. thanks.
I received my receipts from the lawyer this morning. July 2nd applicaiton to NSC, transfered to TSC, labour approved TSC in Aug 2006.
Heather
EB-3 ROW
PD: Aug 2006
RD: July 2, 2007
ND: Aug. 24, 2007
EAD: ??
AP ??
I received my receipts from the lawyer this morning. July 2nd applicaiton to NSC, transfered to TSC, labour approved TSC in Aug 2006.
Heather
EB-3 ROW
PD: Aug 2006
RD: July 2, 2007
ND: Aug. 24, 2007
EAD: ??
AP ??
2011 themed wedding cake toppers
gc4sk
06-22 04:39 PM
My situation is not any better. I am working for a GA based company since 2001 got stuck in the backlog center with Priority Date Oct 2003 (labor apporved in Nov 2006 I-140 applied in May). After calling the company HR for 30-40 times in last one week I was able to talk to HR guy, he said the ceo will allow only those who have approved I-140 to apply for I-485. He also said then once priority date retogressed again I will be able to get 3 years H1B ext. that will be good for me.:mad: I think these desi blood sucking compnies will be obsolete in couple of years. If USCIS make the rules better.
I was thinking of disclosing my employers name but then I will never be able to file I-485
I was thinking of disclosing my employers name but then I will never be able to file I-485
more...
BharatPremi
09-27 10:38 PM
My signature speaks the updates.
diptam
08-18 03:53 PM
Hi SunnySurya,
Good to know that you are still working on that lawsuit ( as a covert operation rather than arguing with other IV ians) but that makes everyone of us feel shaky in joining hands with you in this issue as well.
The moment (not the day) your interests will get done you will leave hands in this coalition...... Or are you just trying to exploit/leverage someone's 'English writing Skill' or may be use the "IV platform" to use it in own advantage ??
Look - i've nothing personal with you or against you but i do NOT want to join hands with someone who harbors/nurtures "Divisive Thoughts" in small technical matters like EB2 and EB3 ...
Thanks and Good Luck !
Just want to let you know that I am still VERY MUCH against porting. But neither that is the issue we are handling here nor the other issue is as urgent as this one.
Good to know that you are still working on that lawsuit ( as a covert operation rather than arguing with other IV ians) but that makes everyone of us feel shaky in joining hands with you in this issue as well.
The moment (not the day) your interests will get done you will leave hands in this coalition...... Or are you just trying to exploit/leverage someone's 'English writing Skill' or may be use the "IV platform" to use it in own advantage ??
Look - i've nothing personal with you or against you but i do NOT want to join hands with someone who harbors/nurtures "Divisive Thoughts" in small technical matters like EB2 and EB3 ...
Thanks and Good Luck !
Just want to let you know that I am still VERY MUCH against porting. But neither that is the issue we are handling here nor the other issue is as urgent as this one.
more...
vij
06-14 02:56 PM
Mine was filed on 06/01. No receipt so far.
Are you checks cashed?
Are you checks cashed?
2010 Pin-up bangs.
qasleuth
03-09 11:11 PM
Suri,
Here you go...Answer to your question is in the below thread. Please come forward and also ask your friends to contribute.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=24184&referrerid=15623
You did raise some good points on how to sell the concept in terms of what 'tangible' benefits can we see in the near future and we now seem to have the opportunity.
Akhil,
I could convince 3 of my colleagues who are READY RIGHT NOW to contribute $1000.00 each. I can do $500.00.
But they asked me just one question. What is the action plan that IV is collecting these monies from prospective immigrants who are already in pain due to this economy and all that. I did tell them about July 07, flower campaign, but they are not willing to listen. They said they did not contribute at that time due to some reasons, but they now want to contribute big way. They have a much bigger friend's circle than mine who are also doing good from top schools who may contribute too. They may also register in IV soon.
But their only question is "What is the action plan for FUTURE". Can you please help.
I am confused myself with the same question, no offense. Like me, they wouldnt wait and wait forever for things to happen. We Strongly believe in any action towards goals. Trust me, we need lots of money, but the way they responded made me feel uncomfortable.
Here you go...Answer to your question is in the below thread. Please come forward and also ask your friends to contribute.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=24184&referrerid=15623
You did raise some good points on how to sell the concept in terms of what 'tangible' benefits can we see in the near future and we now seem to have the opportunity.
Akhil,
I could convince 3 of my colleagues who are READY RIGHT NOW to contribute $1000.00 each. I can do $500.00.
But they asked me just one question. What is the action plan that IV is collecting these monies from prospective immigrants who are already in pain due to this economy and all that. I did tell them about July 07, flower campaign, but they are not willing to listen. They said they did not contribute at that time due to some reasons, but they now want to contribute big way. They have a much bigger friend's circle than mine who are also doing good from top schools who may contribute too. They may also register in IV soon.
But their only question is "What is the action plan for FUTURE". Can you please help.
I am confused myself with the same question, no offense. Like me, they wouldnt wait and wait forever for things to happen. We Strongly believe in any action towards goals. Trust me, we need lots of money, but the way they responded made me feel uncomfortable.
more...
Amma
02-24 08:07 AM
Thanks for your help the common cause.
Keep it up.
Keep it up.
hair how awesome are these pin-up
greenlight
08-27 08:31 PM
Please read my signature section below for the progression of my applications. I am relieved that USCIS actually has my applications and can rest assured that those documents will sit on someone's desk or shelf for God knows how long ;)
It took more or less 30 days to process my filing, and hopefully you will see that happening as well.
Supoort collective cause and the DC rally. I can't attend, but am contributing $ for someone else to fly to Washington, DC.
It took more or less 30 days to process my filing, and hopefully you will see that happening as well.
Supoort collective cause and the DC rally. I can't attend, but am contributing $ for someone else to fly to Washington, DC.
more...
akhilmahajan
07-21 10:22 AM
EAD RD: 29th May 2008
LUD: 5th June 2008
FP/Photo: 29th July 2008
Current EAD Exp Date: 24th September 2008
LUD: 5th June 2008
FP/Photo: 29th July 2008
Current EAD Exp Date: 24th September 2008
hot framed pinup photo really
Imigrait
01-30 03:37 PM
No.
It is customary to put one year expiration for I-94 for AP entry. It does not mean much.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
Thanks a lot.
It is customary to put one year expiration for I-94 for AP entry. It does not mean much.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
Thanks a lot.
more...
house Pam offers quot;day-of-weddingquot;
mrane1
12-16 03:30 AM
you will not get anything before it's time comes and if it is beyond your destiny/luck
I was never a fatalist but the GC process made me one... to a certain extent... Came to US in 96 as a student... First PD 1999... layoff in 2001... 2nd PD 2002... company shut down... 3rd PD 2003... PD cleared 7 days after 2005 retro! That was the worst period and I was so frustrated at the time!June 1st 07 filer... Was waiting for FP, EAD forever. Finally on sept 13th I had my FP and sept 17th my GC... just like that... no LUD, EAD, AP nothing... directly GC in the mail... I guess it was just my time! Looking back I think I am glad I concentrated on the positives that were going on in my life... thats pretty much the only thing one can do to aviod frustration... IV is a great organization and hopefully their efforts will bring fruits! Meanwhile good luck to u!
I was never a fatalist but the GC process made me one... to a certain extent... Came to US in 96 as a student... First PD 1999... layoff in 2001... 2nd PD 2002... company shut down... 3rd PD 2003... PD cleared 7 days after 2005 retro! That was the worst period and I was so frustrated at the time!June 1st 07 filer... Was waiting for FP, EAD forever. Finally on sept 13th I had my FP and sept 17th my GC... just like that... no LUD, EAD, AP nothing... directly GC in the mail... I guess it was just my time! Looking back I think I am glad I concentrated on the positives that were going on in my life... thats pretty much the only thing one can do to aviod frustration... IV is a great organization and hopefully their efforts will bring fruits! Meanwhile good luck to u!
tattoo theme which channels
morchu
05-04 09:54 PM
See the post of "vbkris77".
The specific regulation is at: 22CFR 42.32
(http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2007/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.32.pdf)
And it specifically states that the derivative is entitled to same "classification".
=======
(2) Entitlement to derivative status.
.......is entitled to a derivative status corresponding to the classification and priority date of the beneficiary of the petition.
=======
I spoke with our attorney
He said
INA Sec 203 talks only about the eligibility to apply the I-485. But the visa number is derived from a relationship to Principal applicant of green card. This is true for all categories Including investor, asylum, Employment categories. Please note that It is Dept of State that is responsible for this allocation not USCIS.
The specific regulation is at: 22CFR 42.32
(http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2007/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.32.pdf)
And it specifically states that the derivative is entitled to same "classification".
=======
(2) Entitlement to derivative status.
.......is entitled to a derivative status corresponding to the classification and priority date of the beneficiary of the petition.
=======
I spoke with our attorney
He said
INA Sec 203 talks only about the eligibility to apply the I-485. But the visa number is derived from a relationship to Principal applicant of green card. This is true for all categories Including investor, asylum, Employment categories. Please note that It is Dept of State that is responsible for this allocation not USCIS.
more...
pictures A Metallic Gold Wedding Theme
modvik
05-02 12:12 AM
If any of these do succeed to make it through the congress, does it mean that the retrogression problem be totally eliminated (at least for the short term)?
dresses cindy amp; tony#39;s pinup themed
fundo14
05-30 10:43 AM
I think it will be smooth. Landing by road is easier than by air. You need to do the following as soon as you have landed. I recommend you land early in the morning as gov. offices are closed at noon:
1. Locate an HR office and get your SIN number. This will take 30 min to an hour once you are there. You will need to show your Passport and COPR document as a proof.
2. Locate the medical insurance office and obtain your medical insurance card.
3. Go to the post office and obtain a PO box.
4. Open a bank account. Use the PO box address as mailing addres.
Good luck.
Marty,
Is it necessary to apply for SIN and Medical at this point since we are not settling in Canada for atleast few months?
1. Locate an HR office and get your SIN number. This will take 30 min to an hour once you are there. You will need to show your Passport and COPR document as a proof.
2. Locate the medical insurance office and obtain your medical insurance card.
3. Go to the post office and obtain a PO box.
4. Open a bank account. Use the PO box address as mailing addres.
Good luck.
Marty,
Is it necessary to apply for SIN and Medical at this point since we are not settling in Canada for atleast few months?
more...
makeup Custom wedding favor spice kits with vintage pin up girl theme personalized
viswanadh73
11-18 02:19 PM
I am wondering none of these senators who responded as of now understand our request for adding the provision of recapturing unused visas. Please read below response from IOWA senator and not even one word about our request.
I appreciate you taking the time to share with me your views regarding S. 729, the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act. The views of my fellow Iowans are an essential component of my decision making process as a Member of Congress.
As you may know, Senator Richard Durbin introduced S. 729 on March 26, 2009. This legislation would allow unlawful immigrants who entered the U.S. as minors to gain eligibility for higher education benefits based on state residence, unless a U.S. citizen is eligible for the same benefits. S. 729 has been referred to the Senate Committee on Judiciary. You will be interested to know that Congressman Howard Berman introduced H.R. 1751, the American Dream Act, on March 26, 2009, which would create a similar law. H.R. 1751 has been referred to the House Committee on Judiciary and the House Committee on Education and Labor. Please be assured that I will keep your views in mind should the full House consider this issue during the 111th Congress.
Our nation faces many challenges, and economic recovery is vital if we are to meet them. As a senior member of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, I will continue building upon the job creation opportunities that I have delivered to the 3rd District in order to expand commerce, spur business development, and provide economic opportunity to all. I periodically provide electronic updates on issues I think my constituents might be interested in. If you would like to receive the E-newsletter, please sign up at my Web Site at Congressman Leonard Boswell : Home (http://boswell.house.gov). As always, please feel free to contact me or my office if ever you think we may be of assistance.
Sincerely,
Leonard L. Boswell
Member of Congress
I appreciate you taking the time to share with me your views regarding S. 729, the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act. The views of my fellow Iowans are an essential component of my decision making process as a Member of Congress.
As you may know, Senator Richard Durbin introduced S. 729 on March 26, 2009. This legislation would allow unlawful immigrants who entered the U.S. as minors to gain eligibility for higher education benefits based on state residence, unless a U.S. citizen is eligible for the same benefits. S. 729 has been referred to the Senate Committee on Judiciary. You will be interested to know that Congressman Howard Berman introduced H.R. 1751, the American Dream Act, on March 26, 2009, which would create a similar law. H.R. 1751 has been referred to the House Committee on Judiciary and the House Committee on Education and Labor. Please be assured that I will keep your views in mind should the full House consider this issue during the 111th Congress.
Our nation faces many challenges, and economic recovery is vital if we are to meet them. As a senior member of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, I will continue building upon the job creation opportunities that I have delivered to the 3rd District in order to expand commerce, spur business development, and provide economic opportunity to all. I periodically provide electronic updates on issues I think my constituents might be interested in. If you would like to receive the E-newsletter, please sign up at my Web Site at Congressman Leonard Boswell : Home (http://boswell.house.gov). As always, please feel free to contact me or my office if ever you think we may be of assistance.
Sincerely,
Leonard L. Boswell
Member of Congress
girlfriend A Roaring 20#39;s theme can add
sanhari
08-24 02:27 PM
Anybody have any update or heard anything on the visa recapture bill HR5658(111th congress)?
hairstyles Pin Up Girl spice kit.
dpp
07-28 07:21 AM
Even if USCIS reverts the decision back to use Vertical spill overs, it won't change the EB3-I PD position a dime. As it didn't change with that way in the past. So, there is no use in asking USCIS to change it back to Vertical from Horizontal spill over.
As somebody mentioned earlier, they were all taken by EB3 other workers all these years, it is better to ask USCIS to give preference to EB3-I and EB3-C before giving it to EB3 Other works so that they can get better share to complement for the lost happened all these years. I can understand the EB3-I frustration. We need to analyze who got the major share all these years and ask USCIS to give them to others lost in retrogression (EB3-I, EB3-C, EB2-I, EB2-C).
Otherwise, only way to get a common ground is, recapture and dependent exception bills. We should all work for these two common bills.
It may not directly harm visa recapture or any other official IV campaigns - at least for now! But don't you think if EB3-I campaign to revert to the old way of handling the overflow succeeds at all their will be an immediate follow up, counter campaign to re-revert the decision by EB2s? I don't see an end to this fight and I don't see any winners in the long term.
Again, I'm not saying you shouldn't run your campaign. You have every right to do so. But please accept this for what it is. It will cause a split in IV members and that can not be avoided.
As somebody mentioned earlier, they were all taken by EB3 other workers all these years, it is better to ask USCIS to give preference to EB3-I and EB3-C before giving it to EB3 Other works so that they can get better share to complement for the lost happened all these years. I can understand the EB3-I frustration. We need to analyze who got the major share all these years and ask USCIS to give them to others lost in retrogression (EB3-I, EB3-C, EB2-I, EB2-C).
Otherwise, only way to get a common ground is, recapture and dependent exception bills. We should all work for these two common bills.
It may not directly harm visa recapture or any other official IV campaigns - at least for now! But don't you think if EB3-I campaign to revert to the old way of handling the overflow succeeds at all their will be an immediate follow up, counter campaign to re-revert the decision by EB2s? I don't see an end to this fight and I don't see any winners in the long term.
Again, I'm not saying you shouldn't run your campaign. You have every right to do so. But please accept this for what it is. It will cause a split in IV members and that can not be avoided.
SunnySurya
08-18 02:57 PM
No with love and logic... By the way check your PM. Let me know if I am guessing it right about who u are?
you manage people with a stick ?? :)
you manage people with a stick ?? :)
hindu_king
03-06 04:38 PM
You are seeing it from a complete 180 degrees than I see it. It's not us who's discriminating, it is the laws which are discriminating. I am asking them to treat us all equal, I entered the country on an H1B which was an employement based application it did not hav any country quota, then why should green cards for EB have country quota. Why should a person from India wait for 10 year and a person from Romania get it in 1 year....I think your ROW friends shold understand our position.
We are not asking for discriminating ROW. All we are asking is to end discriminating Indians.
We are not asking for discriminating ROW. All we are asking is to end discriminating Indians.
No comments:
Post a Comment