rb_248
12-13 11:39 AM
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 And if the laws are not constitutional then they can be repealed.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
This is a good point. But, in its current state, will not fly. This can only be used as a supporting evidence for our cause. Lawmakers will never remove country cap. We can use this point in pushing any of our other agendas.
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
This is a good point. But, in its current state, will not fly. This can only be used as a supporting evidence for our cause. Lawmakers will never remove country cap. We can use this point in pushing any of our other agendas.
wallpaper Fast Furious Five Cars 4
mbartosik
12-13 11:45 AM
There may or may not be constitution grounds to challenge the law, I've thought about this too, however from a pragmatic point of view....
1) The money needed to pay the lawyers would likely be more than for lobbying. Importantly money for legal costs is best to be on hand -- i.e. good cash flow, otherwise you risk missing legal deadlines. It would mean diverting money from lobbying. If we were flush with cash e.g. every member paid just $100 per year this would work.
2) Even among members of congress that are behind us, several have reservations about removing country cap (although they are willing to raise it).
3) EB3 ROW is retrogressed anyway. India EB3 is about May 2001, and ROW EB3 Oct 2002. The effect of only removing country quota would be put EB3 generally at about Oct 2001.
The way to move forward for all is to increase total through put, e.g. raise caps, remove dependents from caps, recapture unused quota, tie caps to multiple of H1B quota. For ROW it would move steadily forward, and India move and then would jump forward every 4th quarter with massive spill over from ROW.
As I said I'm not against the idea in principle, just being pragmatic.
1) The money needed to pay the lawyers would likely be more than for lobbying. Importantly money for legal costs is best to be on hand -- i.e. good cash flow, otherwise you risk missing legal deadlines. It would mean diverting money from lobbying. If we were flush with cash e.g. every member paid just $100 per year this would work.
2) Even among members of congress that are behind us, several have reservations about removing country cap (although they are willing to raise it).
3) EB3 ROW is retrogressed anyway. India EB3 is about May 2001, and ROW EB3 Oct 2002. The effect of only removing country quota would be put EB3 generally at about Oct 2001.
The way to move forward for all is to increase total through put, e.g. raise caps, remove dependents from caps, recapture unused quota, tie caps to multiple of H1B quota. For ROW it would move steadily forward, and India move and then would jump forward every 4th quarter with massive spill over from ROW.
As I said I'm not against the idea in principle, just being pragmatic.
venky321
01-13 05:42 PM
Interesting. I think there would probably be around maybe half a million or so H1Bs currently in the US, probably more , working in the IT industry. Many if not most would work for these consulting companies; ranging from the large one's like Accenture or TCS to the grocery store offices in NJ. All of them have the potential to be affected if this memo is strictly enforced.
While I would be glad if all the shady consultancy firms that have wrecked the H1B program to be put out of business; there might be serious disruptions in the IT industry if hundreds of thousands of workers are going to be forced out; even if in a phased manner; i.e. letting folks stay till their current visas expire.
While I would be glad if all the shady consultancy firms that have wrecked the H1B program to be put out of business; there might be serious disruptions in the IT industry if hundreds of thousands of workers are going to be forced out; even if in a phased manner; i.e. letting folks stay till their current visas expire.
2011 Fast Five: The Cars
satishku_2000
01-23 04:58 PM
I appreciate that, I dont want IV to be dragged into any unnecessary controversy ..
more...
vpadman
02-13 10:17 AM
Somebody suggested earlier that we should all contact our lawyers , and ask why they have not filed lawsuits yet.
I think the reason for this is quite simple. Lawyers are happy with the current system, so that they can continue to charge money, consulting fees etc.
Do you guys really think lawyers care about it? They are happy charging $200 for a 15 minutes consultation.
I have nothing against the lawyers, they are running a business and need to maximize profit.
I think the reason for this is quite simple. Lawyers are happy with the current system, so that they can continue to charge money, consulting fees etc.
Do you guys really think lawyers care about it? They are happy charging $200 for a 15 minutes consultation.
I have nothing against the lawyers, they are running a business and need to maximize profit.
Widget
02-18 03:35 PM
I fully agree with you. the point is that we are not powerful (EB peopel) in order to force the gov to do something about it. The farmers, illegals, helathcare EB peopel are in much better situation than us (regular EB peopel).
My children are doing very well in schools and they are much better than any average student in the class and I can not take them back to my home country after they have achived good grades. My wife ca not work because she is an H4 holder, I can not take buy a house because I am not sure if I am going to have a job for more than 2 years.
it is a very difficult situation and I have to think about a back up plan after beeing in this situation since 2003. By the way, I an ROW H1 holder.
I have and approved I-140 (PD 01/2004) and I can not file for I-485.
I can only give examples from personal life. My personal examples lead me to believe that a lot of people, though aware of retrogression, are unaware of what it really means.
Six months ago, I thought that there was nobody opposing EB-based visa numbers. And I was pretty certain that my greencard would be handed to me in a few years.
Then I learnt about IV. And I learnt about the problems.
Then I tried to tell my friends about it at work. And the first reactions were 'Is the situation really that bad'?
So, there is definitely a huge group of people who don't know what retrogression really means, and how screwed they really are.
But again, these are personal examples. Maybe yours (people knowing about retrogression, and still not bothering about contributing/participating in IV) might have led you to a different conclusion.
My children are doing very well in schools and they are much better than any average student in the class and I can not take them back to my home country after they have achived good grades. My wife ca not work because she is an H4 holder, I can not take buy a house because I am not sure if I am going to have a job for more than 2 years.
it is a very difficult situation and I have to think about a back up plan after beeing in this situation since 2003. By the way, I an ROW H1 holder.
I have and approved I-140 (PD 01/2004) and I can not file for I-485.
I can only give examples from personal life. My personal examples lead me to believe that a lot of people, though aware of retrogression, are unaware of what it really means.
Six months ago, I thought that there was nobody opposing EB-based visa numbers. And I was pretty certain that my greencard would be handed to me in a few years.
Then I learnt about IV. And I learnt about the problems.
Then I tried to tell my friends about it at work. And the first reactions were 'Is the situation really that bad'?
So, there is definitely a huge group of people who don't know what retrogression really means, and how screwed they really are.
But again, these are personal examples. Maybe yours (people knowing about retrogression, and still not bothering about contributing/participating in IV) might have led you to a different conclusion.
more...
smuggymba
10-15 03:37 PM
logon ke muh mein ghee shakkar:)
2010 2010 Lexus Lfa Fast Five: 154
GCKaMaara
04-16 10:56 AM
GCKaMaara is right, different people operate at different IQ level.
When there is so much of repeated junk in this thread from the people who think they are political strategist, then what's wrong in posting a fun youtube video twice?
.
If you took an authentic IQ test, whats your IQ?
When there is so much of repeated junk in this thread from the people who think they are political strategist, then what's wrong in posting a fun youtube video twice?
.
If you took an authentic IQ test, whats your IQ?
more...
satishku_2000
07-03 09:41 PM
I am trying an outline for sending to media + lawmakers + ...
The following is a very rough draft without reading some of the letters posted in the thread. I will read the posts tomorrow and polish it by tomorrow evening. I will need everyone's input since I don't know all the issues.
Introduction
Retrogression in GC process.
What happened
USCIS announced at the time the forms were due.
Applicants started filling forms 2-3 weeks before July 2.
Applicants changed their schedules to submit forms.
Advantages of EAD + AP
Don't know all!
Travel without visa -> saves Embassy overhead.
Spouse can work.
Can switch job.
Why does it hurt
Medical will not be valid after 1 year.
Rejected June filers can not file.
June filers did not file because they thought they will file in July.
Fees more then doubling
Name checking (which can take 1+ year) done in parallel with waiting for GC #.
Load balancing for USCIS.
USCIS which is supported 90% by application fee needs to care for applicants.
Very little chance of legislative relief for a looong time.
age out situations for children too ....I think that affects lot of people too..I am single and dont have kids :D
The following is a very rough draft without reading some of the letters posted in the thread. I will read the posts tomorrow and polish it by tomorrow evening. I will need everyone's input since I don't know all the issues.
Introduction
Retrogression in GC process.
What happened
USCIS announced at the time the forms were due.
Applicants started filling forms 2-3 weeks before July 2.
Applicants changed their schedules to submit forms.
Advantages of EAD + AP
Don't know all!
Travel without visa -> saves Embassy overhead.
Spouse can work.
Can switch job.
Why does it hurt
Medical will not be valid after 1 year.
Rejected June filers can not file.
June filers did not file because they thought they will file in July.
Fees more then doubling
Name checking (which can take 1+ year) done in parallel with waiting for GC #.
Load balancing for USCIS.
USCIS which is supported 90% by application fee needs to care for applicants.
Very little chance of legislative relief for a looong time.
age out situations for children too ....I think that affects lot of people too..I am single and dont have kids :D
hair fast five cars used. fast five
sundevil
05-29 12:08 PM
I think as someone said this guy was randomly throwing numbers out there. How come his analysis does not account for remaining 36K EB1 and EB2 ROW applications. Is he suggesting that all EB1 and EB2 ROW are being used up also. Very hard to believe that for 2008 and 2009 with the way the economy is going. Lot of product companies where most of the ROW 485s would likely come from have stopped applying perm since last summer. There is a huge flaw in this analysis and its not as pessimistic as it seems.
BUT, then again we need legislation to wipe the slate clean and clear these 200K applications, so there is a new build up of visa demand and wait times are tolerable for current applicants and future applicants.
Yes it will, unless there are more EB1I visas which could spill over to EB2I, in which case EB2I will move ahead of EB3I. But that guy has also said that the spill over may not happen because of the demand for EB1I.
Its just unbelievable that EB2I and EB3I (i.e. the persons who have PD when the numbers were calculated) will have to wait for about 19 years to get their GCs. We HAVE to do something about this.
BUT, then again we need legislation to wipe the slate clean and clear these 200K applications, so there is a new build up of visa demand and wait times are tolerable for current applicants and future applicants.
Yes it will, unless there are more EB1I visas which could spill over to EB2I, in which case EB2I will move ahead of EB3I. But that guy has also said that the spill over may not happen because of the demand for EB1I.
Its just unbelievable that EB2I and EB3I (i.e. the persons who have PD when the numbers were calculated) will have to wait for about 19 years to get their GCs. We HAVE to do something about this.
more...
gcisadawg
03-28 12:54 AM
Love to see narendra modi as PM but I know that's far from happening. I would bet on LK for now.
Looks like Modi has given LS tickets to four criminals whom he put in jail during his first term in office.....
Looks like Modi has given LS tickets to four criminals whom he put in jail during his first term in office.....
hot Grand Sport Fast Five Cars
GCard_Dream
05-25 12:36 PM
Oh ya... you think the immigration fees in US are low. Wait till this bill takes effect and you have to pay 5000 dollars just to get a damn H1-B then you will know who charges more for immigration fees.
As it is the fee is 1500 hundred dollars which is not a joke for lot of people. We normally don't complain because employers pick up the tab. By the way this doesn't even include the lawyer's fee yet.
I mean how do people come up with things like these to say.
www.notcanada.com
Its blatant racism here. THe population is aging and the government makes a big chunk of money via immigration fees.
As it is the fee is 1500 hundred dollars which is not a joke for lot of people. We normally don't complain because employers pick up the tab. By the way this doesn't even include the lawyer's fee yet.
I mean how do people come up with things like these to say.
www.notcanada.com
Its blatant racism here. THe population is aging and the government makes a big chunk of money via immigration fees.
more...
house fast furious five cars images
Kushal
07-27 02:45 PM
So you think Murthy folks are wrong ? BTW, attorney Khanna also says the same.
You should first learn that there are different type of 1099. The one you get for Stocks and Investment include 1099-B, 1099-INT, 1099-DIV. Your Amway bosees will not inform you about these as they want your money.
If you lawyer has said that you are OK with this unauthorized business I suggest -- change your lawyer.
Yes it is 1099-INT. "Amway bosses will not inform you..?..anuthorized?"...why don't you check your own braincells. Nobody is boss of anyone. Every business owner receives a proper TAX form with all declarations every year. Neither Murthy/Khanna/ or any corporate law offices are wrong. You should talk to them explicitly before commenting.
Your sorry ass has lot of excuses. Don't open your mouth on things you don't know.
You should first learn that there are different type of 1099. The one you get for Stocks and Investment include 1099-B, 1099-INT, 1099-DIV. Your Amway bosees will not inform you about these as they want your money.
If you lawyer has said that you are OK with this unauthorized business I suggest -- change your lawyer.
Yes it is 1099-INT. "Amway bosses will not inform you..?..anuthorized?"...why don't you check your own braincells. Nobody is boss of anyone. Every business owner receives a proper TAX form with all declarations every year. Neither Murthy/Khanna/ or any corporate law offices are wrong. You should talk to them explicitly before commenting.
Your sorry ass has lot of excuses. Don't open your mouth on things you don't know.
tattoo The Latest Fast Five Cars List
alisa
06-28 07:41 PM
There is nothing we can do.
So relax.
If your AOS is meant to be filed in July, then it will be filed in July.
If not, then it won't. And things will be similar to the way things have been for such a long time.
So relax.
If your AOS is meant to be filed in July, then it will be filed in July.
If not, then it won't. And things will be similar to the way things have been for such a long time.
more...
pictures Fast Five Cars
badluck
06-28 12:50 PM
it is fine to fedex on saturday or not..Please let me know. I have to call my lawyer.
dresses fast five poster 2011. fast
logiclife
12-14 04:58 PM
I know what I am about to say will trigger a lot of reaction and some resentment, but it has to be said on behalf of those who are not Indian. I think the per country limit is to ensure that people of all nationalities and races have an equal opportunity to obtain a green card and to ensure that no one nationality, group, or even sector (i.e. IT) monopolizes the so few visas that are available. In fact, in the visa lottery, countries become excluded when the number of immigrants from them reach a certain point, so we are lucky they do not do that in the Employment-based system!
I think that by wanting to remove the per country limit so more Indians can avail of the green card quota is both asking for "special treatment" and a slap in the face for all the non-Indian IV members. The more I read the threads on this site, the more I feel that this organization is geared just to one ethnic group. I am sure that Indians probably make up the majority of members, but the founders of IV (I hope) did not want this organization to become one-sided! Please be considerate of ALL members and try to come up with suggestions that would benefit ALL members!!!:mad:
Well, I agree with your argument when it comes to diversity lottery visas. Or Family based visas. Because those green cards are not given based on any merit, education or employability of an individual. They are just given away to anyone whose relatives sponsor (family based) or whose country doesnt send enough immigrants here in USA and add those country's citizens adds diversity.
However, in employment based immigration, 140,000 green cards are given each year because those 140,000 individuals have been sponsored by their employers for a job for which no US citizen is willing qualified and able to do and the employer finds it worth it to go thru hassles of dealing with immigration in order to retain this employee. The employers dont care whether the employee is Indian, Chinese, Brit or South African. The government too, is not giving this green card because someone is Indian or chinese. The employer wants individual to fill a position, the government agrees to it - up to 140,000 a year - and that's where it ends. Therefore, in such benefit, where the ONE AND ONLY REASON for green card is EMPLOYMENT, why should employee A born in India wait for 10 years but employee B born in South Afria wait for 2 years even though the reason for both employee A and employee B for getting the greencard is the same - EMPLOYMENT.
Are you saying , based on your theory that there should be 7% per country limits in hiring too - that all these corporations, when they hire non-citizens, should keep one country's immigrant workers capped at 7% ? Should Microsoft, Cisco and Oracle fill all jobs and sponsor all greencard at rate of 7 % per country? Are you also going to complain that there are too many Indians in Microsoft and large software corporations and Indians have "monopolized" that profession? Or that Vietnamese and chinese have monopolized the nail-salon and dry-cleaning business? Do you even know what a monopoly is?
By the way, if the congressional intent was the keep diversity intact even in employment based immigration, then how come there is no per-country ceiling on H1 and L1? On H1 there is no per-country ceiling. So its ok to be disproportionate when you bring people into the country from outside (using H1/L1), but when the same bunch of people apply for green cards, there are different queues for different countries and your wait time depends on where you were born? What kind of nonsense is that?
All due respect, your argument is baseless and stems from the fact that you love the idea that you are personally benefitting by being in ROW.
There are plenty of ROW members who have supported the idea of removal of per-country ceilings, who have walked with me to congressional offices asking for parity and who have marched in DC.
I think that by wanting to remove the per country limit so more Indians can avail of the green card quota is both asking for "special treatment" and a slap in the face for all the non-Indian IV members. The more I read the threads on this site, the more I feel that this organization is geared just to one ethnic group. I am sure that Indians probably make up the majority of members, but the founders of IV (I hope) did not want this organization to become one-sided! Please be considerate of ALL members and try to come up with suggestions that would benefit ALL members!!!:mad:
Well, I agree with your argument when it comes to diversity lottery visas. Or Family based visas. Because those green cards are not given based on any merit, education or employability of an individual. They are just given away to anyone whose relatives sponsor (family based) or whose country doesnt send enough immigrants here in USA and add those country's citizens adds diversity.
However, in employment based immigration, 140,000 green cards are given each year because those 140,000 individuals have been sponsored by their employers for a job for which no US citizen is willing qualified and able to do and the employer finds it worth it to go thru hassles of dealing with immigration in order to retain this employee. The employers dont care whether the employee is Indian, Chinese, Brit or South African. The government too, is not giving this green card because someone is Indian or chinese. The employer wants individual to fill a position, the government agrees to it - up to 140,000 a year - and that's where it ends. Therefore, in such benefit, where the ONE AND ONLY REASON for green card is EMPLOYMENT, why should employee A born in India wait for 10 years but employee B born in South Afria wait for 2 years even though the reason for both employee A and employee B for getting the greencard is the same - EMPLOYMENT.
Are you saying , based on your theory that there should be 7% per country limits in hiring too - that all these corporations, when they hire non-citizens, should keep one country's immigrant workers capped at 7% ? Should Microsoft, Cisco and Oracle fill all jobs and sponsor all greencard at rate of 7 % per country? Are you also going to complain that there are too many Indians in Microsoft and large software corporations and Indians have "monopolized" that profession? Or that Vietnamese and chinese have monopolized the nail-salon and dry-cleaning business? Do you even know what a monopoly is?
By the way, if the congressional intent was the keep diversity intact even in employment based immigration, then how come there is no per-country ceiling on H1 and L1? On H1 there is no per-country ceiling. So its ok to be disproportionate when you bring people into the country from outside (using H1/L1), but when the same bunch of people apply for green cards, there are different queues for different countries and your wait time depends on where you were born? What kind of nonsense is that?
All due respect, your argument is baseless and stems from the fact that you love the idea that you are personally benefitting by being in ROW.
There are plenty of ROW members who have supported the idea of removal of per-country ceilings, who have walked with me to congressional offices asking for parity and who have marched in DC.
more...
makeup Porsche Gt3 Rs Fast Five: 20
alisa
02-12 08:26 PM
Thats the million dollar question right now.
Everything that people have said here suggests that EB3-ROW should be leaping forward.
It had been moving forward at the rate of 2 months / month (in one month, the date would move ahead by two months.) Then it slowed down to a month/month. And then in December, it just stopped.
The black hole called USCIS, from which no data can escape, says there is high demand of visa numbers even in the EB-3 ROW.
Maybe all this demand is coming from those other black holes, the backlog elimination centers.
After reading through the forums, I understand the EB3-World needs to become current for any others to move forward.
But now I notice that EB3-World itself has stopped moving after jumping for some months. Any reasons? (The 245i is already cleared and now it is in Aug 02)
Is there any other 245is preventing it????
Everything that people have said here suggests that EB3-ROW should be leaping forward.
It had been moving forward at the rate of 2 months / month (in one month, the date would move ahead by two months.) Then it slowed down to a month/month. And then in December, it just stopped.
The black hole called USCIS, from which no data can escape, says there is high demand of visa numbers even in the EB-3 ROW.
Maybe all this demand is coming from those other black holes, the backlog elimination centers.
After reading through the forums, I understand the EB3-World needs to become current for any others to move forward.
But now I notice that EB3-World itself has stopped moving after jumping for some months. Any reasons? (The 245i is already cleared and now it is in Aug 02)
Is there any other 245is preventing it????
girlfriend fast five cars used.
H1B-GC
02-06 01:31 PM
I even read somewhere that once labor gets approved,Employer got to file I-140 within 60 days or so.
hairstyles Here are the 30 fast five cars
girishvar
07-16 10:38 PM
According to there are 15 pages X 50 Eb-2 India I-485 is pending with priority date before 6/1/2006. If we assume 5% of Eb-2 India is registered with , total visas to be issued in EB-2 for India would be 19000 just upto June 1, 2006. Between June 1, 2006 to July 2007 this number simply more than double. Probably 50% of this 19000 Eb-2's may be processed upto September 30, 2008 leaving another 9500 visas compete for next year. Again 60% of Eb-2 485 is pending with NSC and 40% is pending with TSC. Therefore TSC people's share of I-485 will be more till September compared to NSC Eb-2 India.
My prediction is EB-2 India will start in October 2008 with April 2004 and in April 2009 it can go back to June 2006.
Any Legislative relief from congress will make the situation lot better.
My prediction is EB-2 India will start in October 2008 with April 2004 and in April 2009 it can go back to June 2006.
Any Legislative relief from congress will make the situation lot better.
Googler
02-14 03:30 PM
Just wanted to chime in to say that filing a lawsuit will only aid any campaign for admin fixes. The NC changes were done administratively but anyone who tells me that the scathing rulings from the federal courts had nothing to do with current changes is living in denial -- the recent rulings essentially shredded the legal basis for the form of these NC checks and attendant delays.
There is absolutely no reason not to pursue both options. It would be totally delicious to have USCIS testify in court and explain exactly how they f&$@-ed up badly enough to pervert congressional intent and waste approx 120K EB greencards in 2003-2004.
Write your letters (what does it take 10 min of your day), you have nothing to lose and something to gain by that. I did. But don't forget suing is the American way of justice.
There is absolutely no reason not to pursue both options. It would be totally delicious to have USCIS testify in court and explain exactly how they f&$@-ed up badly enough to pervert congressional intent and waste approx 120K EB greencards in 2003-2004.
Write your letters (what does it take 10 min of your day), you have nothing to lose and something to gain by that. I did. But don't forget suing is the American way of justice.
vdlrao
07-31 05:58 PM
http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5766
posted 07-24 09:59 AM
Ron Gotcher has some thoughts on India E2 movement over the next two months.
More and more, I see people posting messages containing the unspoken assumption that since the Indian E2 cutoff date has moved forward, it is likely to move forward further in the coming months. This is a false hope.
Even with a cutoff date in early 2003, the CIS has sufficient inventory of Indian E2 adjustments on file to use up the remaining inventory of E2 visas for this fiscal year. The reason that the Visa Office advanced the priority date is to move it up to the point where overseas consular posts can take up the slack left by the CIS's inability to close out enough cases and avoid wasting visas this year.
The CIS inventory of pending cases is massive. If there were no quota at all - if everyone were suddenly "current" - and no new cases were filed after today, it would still take the CIS four to five years to close out all of the pending cases that they already have in their inventory.
Overseas consular posts maintain inventories of cases as well. When the priority date for a particular case starts to edge forward and it appears that the applicant may become "current' in the not too distant future, the applicant is told to submit all required supporting documents to the post or the NVC. When this is done, the applicant is reported to the Visa Office as being "documentarily qualified." This means that the case is in a position where an immigrant visa can be issued to the applicant as soon as a visa number becomes available.
The inventory of documentarily qualified cases with current priority dates at a consular post never exceeds that post's ability to process all such cases within sixty days. Consular posts have very high bandwidth processing capabilities. No matter how many cases become current, they are able to process all of them within sixty days.
The reason that the Indian E2 cutoff date has moved forward is that the Visa Office fears that the CIS will not be able to adjudicate enough adjustment of status applications to exhaust the annual quota. They have advanced the cutoff date in order to make more cases overseas eligible for final processing.
This means that overseas consular posts have exhausted their inventories of Indian E2 cases with priority dates earlier than 2006 and the Visa Office had to move the cutoff date forward in order to make more cases eligible to be closed out.
This does not mean that the CIS has closed out all of the pre-2006 cases pending in their inventory. Far from it. When the new fiscal year starts, Indian E2 is likely to retrogress back to late 2002 or early 2003. This is roughly the point reached by the CIS in processing their inventory of pending cases.
Please understand that this is a temporary phenomenon and due entirely to the difference in the processing capabilities of the CIS and the overseas consular posts.
I hope this clarifies matters.
Ron Gotcher
I dont agree with his post except that "EB2 will retrogress in the coming months". EB2 may retrogress in the coming bulletins as part of the adjustment of demand VS available visa numbers. But the retrogression will be very mild and it would be there very short span of time. After that the cut off date will run like to catch up the current. In Ron's post he has no where mentioned about the horizontal spill overs. May be he might have been talking with DOS officials once in a while. But he is not predicting the EB2 movement properly on a whole.
And besides that our core team has started a call campaign on HR5882 bill. Please participate in that. We have a dedicated IV core team for our Immigration Issues. If this bill passes it will give a great relief for our EB3 friends who are already waiting for years. Hope this bill will pass.
posted 07-24 09:59 AM
Ron Gotcher has some thoughts on India E2 movement over the next two months.
More and more, I see people posting messages containing the unspoken assumption that since the Indian E2 cutoff date has moved forward, it is likely to move forward further in the coming months. This is a false hope.
Even with a cutoff date in early 2003, the CIS has sufficient inventory of Indian E2 adjustments on file to use up the remaining inventory of E2 visas for this fiscal year. The reason that the Visa Office advanced the priority date is to move it up to the point where overseas consular posts can take up the slack left by the CIS's inability to close out enough cases and avoid wasting visas this year.
The CIS inventory of pending cases is massive. If there were no quota at all - if everyone were suddenly "current" - and no new cases were filed after today, it would still take the CIS four to five years to close out all of the pending cases that they already have in their inventory.
Overseas consular posts maintain inventories of cases as well. When the priority date for a particular case starts to edge forward and it appears that the applicant may become "current' in the not too distant future, the applicant is told to submit all required supporting documents to the post or the NVC. When this is done, the applicant is reported to the Visa Office as being "documentarily qualified." This means that the case is in a position where an immigrant visa can be issued to the applicant as soon as a visa number becomes available.
The inventory of documentarily qualified cases with current priority dates at a consular post never exceeds that post's ability to process all such cases within sixty days. Consular posts have very high bandwidth processing capabilities. No matter how many cases become current, they are able to process all of them within sixty days.
The reason that the Indian E2 cutoff date has moved forward is that the Visa Office fears that the CIS will not be able to adjudicate enough adjustment of status applications to exhaust the annual quota. They have advanced the cutoff date in order to make more cases overseas eligible for final processing.
This means that overseas consular posts have exhausted their inventories of Indian E2 cases with priority dates earlier than 2006 and the Visa Office had to move the cutoff date forward in order to make more cases eligible to be closed out.
This does not mean that the CIS has closed out all of the pre-2006 cases pending in their inventory. Far from it. When the new fiscal year starts, Indian E2 is likely to retrogress back to late 2002 or early 2003. This is roughly the point reached by the CIS in processing their inventory of pending cases.
Please understand that this is a temporary phenomenon and due entirely to the difference in the processing capabilities of the CIS and the overseas consular posts.
I hope this clarifies matters.
Ron Gotcher
I dont agree with his post except that "EB2 will retrogress in the coming months". EB2 may retrogress in the coming bulletins as part of the adjustment of demand VS available visa numbers. But the retrogression will be very mild and it would be there very short span of time. After that the cut off date will run like to catch up the current. In Ron's post he has no where mentioned about the horizontal spill overs. May be he might have been talking with DOS officials once in a while. But he is not predicting the EB2 movement properly on a whole.
And besides that our core team has started a call campaign on HR5882 bill. Please participate in that. We have a dedicated IV core team for our Immigration Issues. If this bill passes it will give a great relief for our EB3 friends who are already waiting for years. Hope this bill will pass.
No comments:
Post a Comment