Mike Tyson Tattoos

Hello All,

First and foremost, i must thank everyone from IV, who is working tirelessly to resolve the issues of retrogression in the GC process. As an affected individual I am very grateful that leaders of IV are ready to contribute so much effort for its goals. And even though I do not actively work for the IV agenda, I have contributed money to some IV action items.

I have a question/suggestion regarding the IV agenda. On IV's about page, pt number 2 asserts amongst other things,
The Discriminatory Per-Country Rationing of Green Cards That Exacerbates the Delays.

and further in the same point

We do not allow employers to discriminate hiring based on their nationality or country of origin. Therefore, the employment-based immigration, which is a derivative benefit of employment, should also be free from rationing based on nationality or country of birth.

I am curious to know what is the "legal" strength of these assertions is. Are they just "moral" statements or can the validity of these statements be tested in the legal framework of this country? In other words, my question is what is the constitutionality of the "Per Country Caps" in Employment / Family Based Immrigration procedures.
A lot of Laws and Statutes have been challenged in the Judicial System of USA. And many more are challenged every year. And if the laws are not constitutional then they can be repealed.

I am sure the leaders of IV must have thought about this argument however a quick search of the forums with 'constitutionality' as the search term did not return any results.

IV's efforts to utilize Lobbying to bring about change to alleviate/eliminate retrogression are certainly beneficial. However, if IV has not already considered and eliminated this legal argument, then it should explore whether there is any substance to this approach.

Hence this post. Below are some of the links that might be relevant.

wikipedia article on constitutionality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutionality)
wikipedia category on US immigration case law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:United_States_immigration_and_naturalizat ion_case_law)

thanks and sincerely,

--soljabhai

Is it accurate to say that new way of allocating spill over visas effectively acheive same effect as eliminiating country limits?

this is not correct. ROW continues to get preference.
what has changed is that for a while USCIS chose to interpret the law in a way that gave EB2 GC numbers (the law mandated 28.6%) to EB3 ROW rather than spill them over the EB2 I/C. now they have corrected that and EB2 numbers (which include any spillover from EB1) are first used in EB2 ie category numbers are given priority.

so the bonus advantage that EB3 ROW got for 1-2 years has been withdrawn. however with EB3 retrogressed and with EB2 I/C retrogressed, EB3 ROW continues to get all EB3 numbers except the 7% each for the retrogressed nation states.

i would also like to know where the 20K number is coming from if anyone has a source please share it.

Good idea. But I am going to TSC.

This is what I'm doing. I'm flying to Nebraska service center friday night. Will put my shelter in front on PO box and will remain there until Monday morning. Once the USCIS guy comes up to pick up the mails, I'm just going to hand deliver my paper before he even opens his mail box.

Want to join me ;)

I did my Candian PR through this firm

http://www.canadavisa.com/

Very professional. Timely communication.

-TrueFacts have atleast four diffrent ID's.
I have got 4 red dots from his avatars.
I have my GC on my wallet, so I don't care about any other GREENS.

And right on.... Never expected such a behaviour from a noted Senior member.....

Personally I do not care if I get "Reds" or "Greens" as it is not going to give me GC for what I'm here for.....

I have

EB3 140 approved for June 2004
and
EB2 140 approved for May 2006

My lawyer said that they will file a petiton to apply my EB2 status to my EB3 dates as soon as dates for EB2 cross June 2004

But now, In this August VB , My EB2 became current .
What I did not anticipate was the huge 2 year+ jump in EB2 dates


My 485 was filed in July 2007 and shows the status pending since then.

I asked my lawyer which 140 did he use to apply my 485 and he says "Both"

I am confused with a couple of things

1. Is it possible to file 485 by sending in both 140s. I asked the lawyer and he said that NOW since the date has jumped more than 2 years it is not advisable to file petiton to move dates .

2. If I call USCIS , will they be able to tell me which 140 was used to file my 485

vdlrao, Thanks for the great analysis.
I am using DOS visa statistics and I arrived at EB quota numbers for 2008 as 162,707. There were 22,707 unused FB visa's in 2007 based on the DOS visa statistics @ http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/statistics/statistics_1476.html
Typically the actual EB quota for the FY is revised in the September bulletin. I am not sure if DOS has already taken into account the new EB quota number for the Aug bulletin. If they hadn't taken into account the new quota number then we should see some forward movement in the Sep bulletin.

However the 28,795 AC-21 recaptured visa's U are talking about has already been used in 2002, please take a look at the below mentioned link for details regarding the usage of those visa's.

http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY2003%20AppD.pdf

All the AC-21 recaptured visa's has been used by now.

mpadapa, I am getting 31,100 unused Family Based Visas for 2007 fiscal year from
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/publications/LPR_FR_2007.pdf
.
DHS bulletin is not updated correctly like Employment Based AC21 VISAS? Please let me know.

See this post by Nixstor:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=254275#post254275

If you ignore the VB predictions in the post, the key thing to note is that USCIS and DOS are in constant touch on a weekly basis after the July 07 fiasco. They know exactly the demand and usage rates.

This leads me to one of the following two conclusions:
Either USCIS has intimated to DOS that it can process only X number of cases in the next two months and visas remaining are more than that which is why DOS pushed the dates forward so that consular posts can also maximize usage OR

The numbers remaining are very large for a variety of reasons (category and FB spill over) and USCIS has agreed to process at least a majority if not all the cases within a certain priority date - probably Jun 2006. Based on that DOS agreed to move the PD to June 2006 after also factoring in the CP usage.

Obviously the latter is better for us - but it could be the former as well.

See my asumptions in this thread what i said about USCIS and DOS are working closelly.

First, please stop comparing companies in this thread at least because we are diverting from topic.

I am totally convinced with users like jetflyer, kondur_007 and others that �if it goes smooth then next will be EAD, then I-485 approvals�.

At least this is the time to think beyond boundaries (like EB-3, EB-2, working as FT, working with consulting company, states and countries), if not then don�t distract the efforts.

I agree. This is a bad step by USCIS but as someone mentioned AC21 was also a memo and was put into effect so I'm guessing this memo will do what it's meant to do - bad stuff:( for H1-Bs.

I agree
I hope we spend this much time in supporting or PLANNING WHAT WE DO NEXT. I still believe if we all of us make a combine effort we can get our backlog issue resolved

One basic note that Amway/Quixstar guys/preachers/creatures should understand is that "Not every business/job is for every one".

Few individuals can do only certain kinds of jobs. However, I notice that these Amway/Quixtar guys always project that, any dumbo can do this business (if followed rules). And also, they project that this is the only way earn money on this planet. If some one follows their own path (own ambitions), then they think that he/she is an idiot that they not joining them. For God's sake, Amway guys don't bug people. When some one said no means, Its NO. don't put pressure on strangers.

I will tell you my experience/observations with most of the Amway/Quixtar guys that I met.

1. They dream of early retirement, free money, free cruise trip, free vacations etc., where as in reality, they don't even buy good TV for them selves. I know few folks who purchased a 18 inches bathroom tv for $5.00. I am not against second hand a TV for less, but check the reality and see the difference between dreams and reality.

2. Forget about TV, it may not be an essential in life for everyone. I also noticed that they don't even purchase proper food/groceries. May be not are alike. I have see many in my past 15 years of life in US either in Bayarea or in Texas or in PA.

3. There was a Quixtar/Amway Summer conference few of years ago. I have seen 32 adult people stayed in a Single bedroom apartment (around 700 Sq Ft) for two nights. Yes, I literally counted people coming out of the door (right opposite to my apartment). I couldn't believe my eyes/brain initially but its truth.

I am not offending any one intentionally, but know the difference between reality and dreams.

These ppl just hang out at Walamart, Ikea, Malls and DMV and scour for desi ppl who are vulnerable and can be conned. The Amway guy I talked to spoke about retiring at 40 and making millions but was renting at 36 yrs himself and had a dingy old car. (I rent too but I don't plan to retire at 40 and make millions by conning ppl)

Suresh,

I just sent you a pm regarding a similar situation I'd faced...

Contact me if you need more information.


thecipher5

widower zardari will be marrying kumari mayawati just after election to unite subcontinent and bring peace to world.

:d

I posted this message on another thread and got slammed - :confused:. All the discussions here are just speculations.. no one really has access to real numbers.. so take it easy this time :p

As we do not have any real numbers my predictions are based on EB2 numbers from (assuming the data to be a true random sample)

Here are number of EB2-I I485 pending cases by year

2007-100
2006-150
2005-125
2004-200
2003-50 (250 have been approved)

USCIS has approved about 450 EB2-I cases last year. A conservative estimate of approval rate going forward would be 30 cases per month. Based on this the movement..
2003 cases will be approved by Sep '08
2004 cases by Apr '09
2005 cases by Sep '09
2006 cases by Dec '09

Good Luck !!!

I think you are one of the most sane Amway guy I have heard from. Thanks for all the explanation. Now I know I have a problem with BWW and their approach not Amway. Looks like they are good brainbleachers.

again, i am not with this business now but still think its a good model. it is based on word of mouth advertising, franchising, residual income - everything e-commerce (which is a subject taught at some universities). now add some short sighted people to do the teaching and BINGO.. screwed it up big time.

Read in the middle of the page....

"Though the principal employment-based categories are current for July, future retrogression is possible later this fiscal year, particularly if demand for immigrant visas increases substantially. Visa numbers can retrogress in the middle of a month and become unavailable without prior notice. If there is a mid-month retrogression, USCIS could elect to stop accepting adjustment applications. While this is unlikely to occur in July 2007, it becomes more and more possible as the fiscal year progresse"

Hope this help

http://pubweb.fdbl.com/news1.nsf/9abe5d703b986cff86256e310080943a/8d3d061006d75c47852572ff00687697?OpenDocument

Ok, if the Fragomen page is the source of this rumor: can someone who is a Fragomen client ask their attorney about what's going on here. That might help clarify things a bit. (Given that they are the largest immigration law firm, there's bound to be many IV members for whom Fragomen is preparing documents.)

This MF doesn't even have minimum decency to just leave alone a Dead Man.


breddy2000,

Shame on you. thoo

In your love for YSR, you are behaving like him. Are you from Kadapa? Why unnecessarily picking on CHANDUV23. I got his profile id from Orkut.

orkut - (http://www.orkut.com/Main#FullProfile?rl=pcb&uid=16002627991370248382)

Please post good reliable estimate of cost for applying with ALL possible break ups. I know the following only!

Cost of applying = application fee ($795 ??) + Lawyer fee + others (= medical + pictures + ...)

Also, which parts are lost if we have to re-apply!

Great find!

I guess all the talk about suing USCIS will go down the toilet based on this excerpt from the article -

"Assuming that under the plenary power doctrine noncitizens possess few, if any, constitutional protections with respect to entering the country, the implications of racial and national origin exclusions on citizens must be considered. Because the Constitution unquestionably protects the rights of citizens, citizens claiming injury have a better chance at successfully challenging the immigration laws than noncitizens directly affected by their operation. Courts have recognized that citizens in certain circumstances may challenge the lawfulness of immigration laws because of the impact on their rights."

oguinan,

Paragraph 1 of Article 1 establishes the definition of racial discrimination for the purpose of the document. Paragraphs 2 and 3 limit the operation of the convention. As to why paragraphs 2 & 3 were included, perhaps they were required to get countries to sign on to the convention.

Here's a better link. Read under Modern Racial Exclusion, excerpts of which I have posted below.

http://academic.udayton.edu/race/02rights/immigr09.htm

...similarly situated persons (e.g., siblings and children of U.S. citizens) may face radically different waits for immigration depending on their country of origin, with accompanying racial impacts.

The law created a new immigrant visa program that effectively represents affirmative action for white immigrants, a group that benefitted from preferential treatment under the national origins quota system until 1965. Congress, in an ironic twist of political jargon, established the "diversity" visa program, which though facially neutral prefers immigrants from nations populated primarily by white people.

The link to the CERD report is here. The convention does not address the country limit directly as the convention expressly does not apply in that area, but it does show that there is awareness about the discrimination faced by immigrants. http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(Symbol)/6d8aee7e356e6498c1256d4e00557f3b?Opendocument

You can see that the UN panel is aware of the fact that racial discrimination manifests itself in disproportional representation (note the reference to the composition of the Supreme Court). It can be argued that the 7% country limit provides a pretext to discriminate against India/China/Mexico on the basis of ethnic or racial origin, and as such would run afoul of the convention.

Amit, noble thoughts. But that's not how majority of IV members think. We have members who think $50 contribution per month is too much. There is considerable opposition to making IV a paid forum (with even nominal fees of $10 or $20).

Do you think we can get 500 members ready to contribute $500 here? Create a poll on this and see, you'll be lucky if you get 20! Like Jefferson said "those who prefer convenience over freedom and liberty, deserve neither". We are bound to suffer since we aren't ready to act.


I think every body who wants to have a class action law suit should commit for $500 towards the expense. Only when we have commitment for $500 with person name and contact info, then we should move forward with the idea of Class action law suit. We need 500 people to commit for this otherwise there is no point in moving forward in this direction.

There might be some people who will be willing to pay money but not listed as participant, and visa-versa and we should have at least 500 people who are willing to pay.

Here is the response i see in Greg Siskind Blog
-----------------------------------------------------
Hi Ash - Hard to say. Clearly, the jump in EB-2 numbers this month was meant to try and ensure that the maximum visa numbers get used this fiscal year. If USCIS is still far off from using the numbers, then I could see the dates going current. Then, of course, you have new numbers available for October so the dates may move forward anyway.