Mike Tyson Tattoos

The visa numbers reported as used for FY 2009 is 141,020 from http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09...ort_TableV.pdf

This was the response i got from Ron Gotcher.

"The employment based category is entitled to use the "unused" family based numbers from the previous year. Last year, the quota for EB was the base of 140,000, plus another 13,000 shifted over from FB. Unfortunately, the CIS failed once again to approve enough cases to use up the entire available quota."


If this is true, we have lost a lot of visas last year.

Now with aprox. 10,000 visas shifted from FB, we should hope they use about 150,000 (140,000 + 10,000) this year.

Is there a way to confirm this? We got to do something to resolve this problem

There is a huge backlog in FB category. How come there are 13,000 unused visas in FB. If any immigration business shop is so confident about their assertion, why do they not file a lawsuit on CIS. Why are they posting these messages on different forums? Do they just want to gain visibility? It seems that its better business practice is to write random statements like 'CIS failed again' without having the willingness to do something about CIS failure. Aren't there clients with pending 485 of this immigration shop. As their lawyer and with fiduciary duty towards his clients, if he is so confident of CIS failure, why is he not filing a lawsuit on CIS to guard the interest of his clients.

My labor is filed in EB3 , and i am awaiting Certification.
My PD is Nov 2007.

I dont feel that i am gonna get even EAD in the next 10 years, with the current delays,unless something major changes.

Any hopes??

Guys,

I heard on NPR yesterday evening,DHS has decided to conduct Security Checks through FBI for over 400,000 Port and Dock Employees in the US of A.
President BUSH wants the initial Phase of Name Checks to be done before Summer is over.If the move proceeds as per the plan(I see no reason not to, considering the sensitive nature for which it is being carried out)its going to be even more pain for people who have been waiting to get their Name Check done.

Regards.

Well, I do have a vested interest in maintaining status quo, at least with regard to the per country caps.
But, working in one of the Valley companies, I see a lot of people from India and China who just don't mix with rest of the people, say, from Poland or Germany or France or Iran. US (the whole government, including USCIS) likes the idea of 'Melting pot' when it comes to immigration. When you melt a lot of metals with each other, you don't end up with a fragmented alloy, since you've capped the amount of each metal in your pot. That is how you get 'Little Italy's and 'China Town's and the latest one in San Jose, CA: 'Saigon Business district'

:mad:
Well, US government thinks otherwise about my (or USCIS') logic. If you think it is unfair, you can sue them. I won't stop you.

Also conversations will affect this because people converting from EB3 to EB2 will make sure that they port their priority dates and hence if say all the EB3 people from 2003 convert to EB2 and successfully port their dates it will definitely push the dates south of 2003. Did I make sense???

You are correct. EB3 to EB2 conversions can impact the movement of dates - but there are a few factors working against that. Refiling labor and I-140 is an expensive affair and not everyone may be ready to shell out nearly $10k. Besides the time taken nowadays for labor and I-140 approval means that the conversion can happen only in about 12 to 18 months or so. The third variable is also the close scrutniy (read audit) that DOL is doing of EB2 labor applications. If people started conversions last year they should be good. But if someone plans to start it now, then I think it is a shot in the dark - however from an EB3 perspective, a shot in the dark may be better than no shot at all.

All , this subject has been raised very often and every time new members join in they start a thread and start questioning it.

- IV has indepth explored and studied this option and have found that this change is not possible administratively.
- we have not just met a lawyer. we have met few lawyers. we also have communicated with USCIS in the past.
- In the past some administrative changes have been done by USCIS, but this change cannot be done by them. All, we already had this idea long long ago and we also thought that why dont we do it if it so simple and then we dont have to go through all the legislative hurdles. But NO it cannot be done by USCIS.
- Faxing USCIS will not work. USCIS does not take policy decisions. We need to approach policy makers to get it done and that is what we are doing. By coming up with ideas, endlessly discussing despite explaination by IV and not working with IV action items we will all go in divergent directions and lose focus on the main action items we want each every member should focus. If you really feel for some idea and want to help, instead of asking IV to give explanation to every question on the forum, contact any of the active IV core members on the forum and bounce ideas. We need people with ideas and also same people willing to work on them too.
- If it was possible to get it done administratively, then in the current Skil bill push we would have/ and lawmakers would also have just asked USCIS to implement it.

Hope this explains this topic. Thanks


Thanks Pappu for explaination. Look like this door is already close. Well let me know if I can do anything to help.

Re-sent to CA senators

I was one of the first few folks who moved on, immediately after the yates memo. I am a lot better now and making 2 times what I used to make and also switched to ebb2 as oppossed to eb3 in my old company where situations have never been good.

Correct me if I am wrong, but you've had unexpired H1B while you were out of work. This is not considered unlawful presence. On top of that, violation of status determination can be done only by the USCIS (IO). If they did not inform you that you violated status, you are good to go.

It seems several persons are already discrediting the lawsuit and from the comments I have seen, it is apparent that some have not read the entire complaint.

In order to understand how a civil lawsuit works one needs to understand that in a complaint, one makes no legal arguments, does not cite case or precedent law but only cites the simple facts. The other side can respond to the complaint and deny or accept the allegations in part or in whole. Many cases do not go to trial, they end up in settlements or are decided through summary judgement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_judgment) (for the plaintiff or the defendants) if the case has undisputable matters of facts and one of the parties petitions for it. Several processes also take place ie Discovery long before an actual trial. I recommend reading the following wikipedia entry to familiarize one at a high level with the processes and rules involved:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Rule_of_Civil_Procedure

To get to the core legal arguments behind the case, one needs to read the counts (they are only stated and not argued/expounded on starting pg 13). Namely those are:

COUNT I: VIOLATION OF THE FIFTH AMENDMENT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution) (constitutional rights issue)
COUNT II: VIOLATION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_Procedures_Act)
COUNT III: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ACT (http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title4/civ00036.htm)
COUNT IV: EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT (http://www.hhs.gov/dab/guidelines/eaja.html)
COUNT V: PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promissory_estoppel#Promissory_estoppel)

There are several laws cited above, its thus puzzling to see requests for one to cite the laws USCIS/DOS is accused of violating when its all there in the lawsuit. The plaintiff has the burden of proving the counts they have stated at the appropriate time and not in the complaint. One does not play all their cards in the initial complaint.

Even more puzzling is the persistent fear that there would be retributory action from USCIS. Judges do not take kindly to such behavior and USCIS would have no chance defending itself on charges of retaliatory actions.


Thank you for getting some sanity into the conversation....atleast some people are realising that actions, especially those perpetrated by Govt Agencies, are watched closely. They will be held accountable, whether one likes it or not . If the lawyers want to profit from all of this, let it be so, as long as the voice of a troubled community is heard in a court of law. That is just the first step....

All,

Disclaimer: I am not a ron's associate and he is not even my lawyer. just want to bring this under everyone's observations.

there is a very nice article on ron's site about how USCIS still waste visas. this is a real slavery where due to USCIS inefficiency - hard earning people like us suffer alot and the agony is that noone is there to even listen and stop USCIS from this practice. for details
go to:
Discussion thread for ImmInfo Blog article: DOS explanation of visa controls (http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/general-immigration-questions/9732-discussion-thread-for-imminfo-blog-article-dos-explanation-of-visa-controls.html)

some fine prints from the above discussion wanted to share:

Consider the fact that USCIS purport to have preapproved about 150,000 cases. All of those cases were reported to VO as ready for closure. VO's system automatically generates specific visa numbers for specific cases. If the CIS doesn't use them, they expire and are wasted. Based on the numbers provided so far, it appears that the CIS failed to close out enough EB3 cases and about 3,000 to 5,000 numbers were wasted.

If the CIS does not act on the assignment of individual visa numbers to pre-approved cases, then those numbers are wasted. That appears to be what happened last fiscal year.

by law "unused" visa numbers fall across within a fiscal quarter. So, for example, all of the unused Worldwide EB2 numbers for the first fiscal quarter (Oct - Dec) "fell across" and became available to applicants chargeable to single state limited countries - in this case China and India. If for any reason there were no unused visas in a particular quarter, then there would be no fall across for that quarter. They do not save them up and issue them at the end of the fiscal year.

Category: EB3 India
PD: Sep 2002
Filed 485 on 07/27/2007

You will have to wait for decades more, unless we all go to Washington and seize the change! Truth is on our side!!!! LET'S ALL GO!!!!! THIS IS THE TIME WE HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR SO LONG!!!

I don't think this bill would be of any consequence to the goal of IV unless they can maybe attach some GC-relief provisions to it.

In reality this bill will never ever make it to the full Senate floor. Corporate America will ensure that it dies the same kind of death as all the immigration related bills from last year.

No change for EB2..... India
EB3 moved about three months

Category India Most Other Countries
F1 8 July 2004 8 July 2004
FX 1 Jan 2005 1 Jan 2005
F2A 1 June 2006 1 June 2006
F2B 1 March 2002 1 March 2002
F3 22 May 2001 22 May 2001
F4 1 March 2000 1 March 2000
E1 Current Current
E2 1 February 2005 Current
E3 8 September 2001 1 February 2003
EW 1 June 2001 1 June 2001
E4 Current Current
E4-Religious Current Current

Source
Cut Off Dates- Consulate General of the United States Mumbai, India (http://mumbai.usconsulate.gov/cut_off_dates.html)
This should have been posted in DONOR's forum :)

I don\'t want to stand in line three times longer just because 60 percent of the applicants are natives of one country. Look what\'s going on with H-1B. There is no per-country quota and ROW is simply screwed.

How is ROW getting screwed?. Look at the situation as individuals applying irrespective of country of birth. Last Year, there were 120,000(approx) applicants and only 60,000(approx) H1-b1 visas. NOW: It just happens that a lot or 60%were natives of one country. But that does not mean anything... There could be more ROW applicants who could apply, no body is stopping them. There are just not enough ROW applicants that employers can find.
Also remember countries like India, China do not qualify for diversity visas. So an ROW applicant also has that advantage. Most people from small african countries and others qualify to apply there. China, India, Phillipines, Mexico are also backlogged in the family category. ROW has that advantage too.

Oh, you are just mean now!:p

I think there should be a big a** button on the top of this screen that says "donations for immigration causes" or whatever and those who feel they can afford to do it will do it, otherwise making paid membership a requirement will severely cut down on the number of people coming on here. Makes no difference to me, there is tons of forums like this online. This is my favorite so far though.

What difference does the membership of people make if they do not understand the agenda/motive of the organization? May be you are being mean in not understanding the agenda and needs of your favorite organization.

EB3 -July 2004 PD

FP done
EAD received
AP not yet received.

even if we could do population control, another thing we would need is a time machine to go back and implement the control with retroactive effect. is there anyone who has been working on a time machine? How is it coming? :D:D:D:D

I've a time machine. you want it?:D Its gonna cost you man:p

Guys..

I have been watching and participating in this drama for a long time....

We must go to court for the correct interpretation and enforcement of UNUSED VISA from ROW / undersubscribed catagories. THERE IS NO CASE FOR EVEN WAITING FOR ONE QUARTER. 20,000 VISA are available unused at a given time, they should ALL be immediately allocated to the guys in the Q.

This will benefit all EB 2 / EB 3

We really should not have any debate about loosing the case etc... Let us try and loose the case... At least , we will have the satisfaction of trying...

If your are with me please respond to this thread

We MUST take the advantage of low VISA usage in this recession and cut the line by tens of thousand

Seriously guys,
We worked on putting a draft letter to address quarterly spillover just yesterday. We even planned for a conference call. We ended up with just two of us. The draft letter is still out there in Donor forum:Quarterly spillover

There is more talk than people wanting to really do something. We cannot get people to attend a conference call. How can we expect to mobilize to go to court?

Here is the draft. See if some of you can use it to fight the cause.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Mr. Charles Oppenheim,
First of all we would like to congratulate the administration for taking the right steps by changing the USCIS website and making detailed information available to the applicants. We would like to also thank the administration for proactively working on I485 cases and pre-adjudicating them.
We are writing to get clarification regarding the law that control the unused VISA numbers falling across to other countries here after referred as �Spill-over� process. Looking at the VISA date movement over previous few years in last calendar quarter made us believe that Spill-over followed by USCIS is yearly and not quarterly.
The law being referred as defined in Immigration and Nationality Act: Section ACT 202 - Numerical Limitation to any single foreign state under Sec. 202. [8 U.S.C. 1152]
(3) Exception if additional visas available. - If because of the application of paragraph (2) with respect to one or more foreign states or dependent areas, the total number of visas available under both subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who otherwise may be issued such a visa, paragraph (2) shall not apply to visas made available to such states or areas during the remainder of such calendar quarter.
(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 shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
(B) LIMITING FALL ACROSS FOR CERTAIN COUNTRIES SUBJECT TO SUBSECTION (e)- In the case of a foreign state or dependent area to which subsection (e) applies, if the total number of visas issued under section 203(b) exceeds the maximum number of visas that may be made available to immigrants of the state or area under section 203(b)consistent with subsection (e) (determined without regard to this paragraph),in applying subsection (e) all visas shall be deemed to have been required for the classes of aliens specified in section 203(b).
Our interpretation of the Section 202(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act states that if total demand will be insufficient to use all available numbers in a particular Employment preference category in a *calendar quarter*, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual �per-country� limit. We feel that *quarterly Spill-over helps* both the administration as well as applicants.
Quarterly Spill-over will benefit administration by:
1) Steady VISA movement will increase visibility for the administration in turn will help administration to forecast forward movement of VISA dates.
2) Spill-over when issued quarterly, effectively reduces/minimizes chances of visas wastages as the burden is not pushed at the end of fiscal year.
3) Balanced workload for the immigration officers and card issue helping USCIS to better manage efficiently, as Spill-over is divided in 4 quarters, rather only in last quarter.
4) Spill-over when issued quarterly means saving administrative effort, time and money in processing EAD, Advance parole applications for the petitioners who may get GCs as much as 9 months earlier and who are near Approval dates.
5) Effective forward movement of VISA dates will give opportunity for potential applicants to file I-485 earlier, which in turn will bring steady new workload to administration.
Quarterly Spill-over will benefit Applicants by:
1) Existing applicants potentially will be able to get their permanent residencies 6-8 months in advance.
2) New petitioners will be able to file their I-485, EAD and AP sooner due to Forward movement in VISA dates.
3) Streamlined VISA movement helps retrogressed Applicants effectively estimate their approval dates to plan their future appropriately.
As explained above by following quarterly Spill-over process as defined by law will be WIN-WIN for administration and applicants. We would appreciate your kind clarification/action on implementation of this existing rule. Thanks,

aww, and I was thinking Subway restuarants :(