senthil1
07-08 02:51 PM
It is not just IV. He does not give any other source where he is getting information. In IV some persons always try to find fault with others whether pro immigrants or Anti immigrants. IV is dealing with only very small part of immigration that is Green card for highly skilled persons. But other groups like AILA is trying to get benefit for all the section of immigration. Of course there is no surprise in seeing their welfare first before seeing others. Lawyers will give more importance to their profession than the common people
Given that (I believe) he regularly visits IV and gets information from here, but never wants to give IV the credit for it.
Given that (I believe) he regularly visits IV and gets information from here, but never wants to give IV the credit for it.
wallpaper hot shippuden sharingan naruto
alterego
05-09 07:54 PM
The Employer won`t be touching the I-140 or any other related GC apps.About the time frame for getting same or similar job...I am seriously keeping my fingers crossed!!!!
Thanks for all the detailed inputs alterego !!!
Best advise. Try your best to have an AC21 compatible job offer by Aug/Sept time frame. I doubt you'll see any issues emerging before then.
Your status is legal as long as your 485 is pending. A job will secure your status. Work hard finding a same or similar one.
Thanks for all the detailed inputs alterego !!!
Best advise. Try your best to have an AC21 compatible job offer by Aug/Sept time frame. I doubt you'll see any issues emerging before then.
Your status is legal as long as your 485 is pending. A job will secure your status. Work hard finding a same or similar one.
ebizash
11-10 04:39 PM
Finished the survey
2011 Naruto Shippuden Sharingan
anurakt
01-08 09:23 AM
Are you 100% sure that it's the stamped visa date which will be given on the arrival and not the extension date ?? I was under the impression other way round ?
Look at this thread
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2636&highlight=Atlanta
Look at this thread
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2636&highlight=Atlanta
more...
raj2007
06-17 02:32 AM
I am planning to apply for both Canadian Permanent Residency and US green card next month. Assuming that I get my Canadian Permanent Residency and US Greencard after two years, what options do I have to maintain the permanent resident status in both countries, so that I am eligible to apply for citizenship in both countries.
Some say that showing proof of residence in both countries, commuting between the countries for work (Windsor-Canada and Detroit-US) and paying taxes in both countries would suffice.
Please guide me on this.
How can you ride on 2 horses?:)
Canada needs 3yr PR for citizenship while US needs 5. I feel it wil be issue while border crossing. US is very strict and they may take GC away.Take canadian citizenship first and then apply here. Thay way you can have both.
Some say that showing proof of residence in both countries, commuting between the countries for work (Windsor-Canada and Detroit-US) and paying taxes in both countries would suffice.
Please guide me on this.
How can you ride on 2 horses?:)
Canada needs 3yr PR for citizenship while US needs 5. I feel it wil be issue while border crossing. US is very strict and they may take GC away.Take canadian citizenship first and then apply here. Thay way you can have both.
485Mbe4001
05-14 07:09 PM
Thanks guys for all the hard work and continuing efforts.
When i started jumping up and down, my lawyers gently reminded me that my PD will be current on June 1 and not as of today :p
When i started jumping up and down, my lawyers gently reminded me that my PD will be current on June 1 and not as of today :p
more...
nousername
04-07 01:48 PM
Thanks for a quick explanation.. So basically we are hosed if we leave our employer on a bad note and he decides to use our labor for someone else.
Follow up questions:
1. If I understand this correctly then simply revoking the labor won't kill the I-485 application but the employer needs to substitute the original application for another employee.
2. Also, by pre-July 2007 you mean people who filed their labor or I-485 before July 2007, or both?
3. Will this affect people who applied (and approved) for their labor before July'07 but filed their I-485 during / after July'07 fiasco i.e. majority of IV members.
4. If people in point # 3 are not affected then are they off the leash?
Thanks.
In very basic terms.
If you have left your employer after filing AC21(140 approved and 485 pending for 180 days), your employer then revoked your 140 and used the original labor to file 140 for another person(substitution). Another person has applied for 485.
Then original applicant's 485 will be denied.....because AAO is saying One Labor can be used only for one Green Card....
Mind you this is all relates to pre July 2007.
Follow up questions:
1. If I understand this correctly then simply revoking the labor won't kill the I-485 application but the employer needs to substitute the original application for another employee.
2. Also, by pre-July 2007 you mean people who filed their labor or I-485 before July 2007, or both?
3. Will this affect people who applied (and approved) for their labor before July'07 but filed their I-485 during / after July'07 fiasco i.e. majority of IV members.
4. If people in point # 3 are not affected then are they off the leash?
Thanks.
In very basic terms.
If you have left your employer after filing AC21(140 approved and 485 pending for 180 days), your employer then revoked your 140 and used the original labor to file 140 for another person(substitution). Another person has applied for 485.
Then original applicant's 485 will be denied.....because AAO is saying One Labor can be used only for one Green Card....
Mind you this is all relates to pre July 2007.
2010 naruto shippuden sharingan
ski_dude12
04-12 11:39 AM
I had got a similar enquiry from DOL couple of years back. They were explicit in asking about being paid while on bench. In my case I have had minimal bench time and hence answered accordingly. I am sure there must be other employees in my company (desi IT consulting) who are getting paid irregularly.
I do not think it will effect your new H1B decision. Bottom line is do not lie. If you don't want to tell the truth, don't reply to them.
I do not think it will effect your new H1B decision. Bottom line is do not lie. If you don't want to tell the truth, don't reply to them.
more...
akkakarla
08-16 12:03 PM
While it is good idea to move to UK there are similar protests going in UK due to job loss and lot of Work Permits going in favor of Indians. Recently I read an article which says that 18,000 Visas out of 30,000 Visa(High Tech) are granted to Indians.
UK based companies pulled out their operations from India stating the quality of work from Indian operations is very poor.
Adding fuel to fire Mr Mittal relentless aggression to acquire companies is all creating chaos in UK.
My 2 cents
UK based companies pulled out their operations from India stating the quality of work from Indian operations is very poor.
Adding fuel to fire Mr Mittal relentless aggression to acquire companies is all creating chaos in UK.
My 2 cents
hair Danzo Shippuden|Naruto
roseball
10-15 04:07 PM
I think the same. As my latest passport shows no visa except the AP entry stamp, they are confused how did I travel to India earlier. My wife explained them that I used AP, but they still believe that a visa page is missing in the supporting docs. So they have retained the passport and asked to submit 'current copy of husband's visa'. Now I am going to write a personal letter explaining the same and attaching the original I-797 which has my I-94.
Did you have your wife take copies of all pages from your passport. If not, I suggest you send them along with the letter. Also attach copy of your AP.
Did you have your wife take copies of all pages from your passport. If not, I suggest you send them along with the letter. Also attach copy of your AP.
more...
needhelp!
09-16 07:00 PM
Focus. CALL.. .. Let IV speak through me. NOW!
hot naruto-shippuden-sasuke-
sku
01-09 03:53 PM
Yes, I want to know too, I don't know anybody personally who lost the job.
more...
house Naruto: Shippuden Sharingan
mjULTRA
05-27 06:42 PM
i voted for golgi, cuz it had a theme, but festers site deserves an honorable mention.
tattoo Naruto Shippuden Wallpaper
optimystic
05-12 08:36 PM
There are certain things that money cannot buy [for everything else there is Master card :) ].
Seriously, If $2000 dollars would buy you a GC (guaranteed) then I think most (> 90%) of the people on this forum would have gone for that (or atleast convince their employers to part with that amount for a guaranteed ROI)
It would be good to get some kind of insight into the thought process of IV core/lead team and how they think they can put a million dollars to effective use?
I mean can we lobby/cultivate our own caucus (not cactus :D) from the ground up in the congress etc, who can work for our cause? What other such effective things can be done?
Any kind of roadmap/plan of action that would probably help generate an interest and convince atleast some people to start donating.
Just saw this on cnet .
http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9941962-7.html?tag=nefd.top
"The Hispanic Caucus sees it as a bargaining chip to get what they want, which is comprehensive immigration reform, amnesty for illegal immigrants, whatever you want to call it," Fishman said. "Until the Democratic leadership allows legislation (related to H-1Bs) to go to the floor on its own merits, that's the situation we have here."
Though this is only about H1-B, but I would guess, that caucus would be looking at even other legal immigration/GC related proposals, amendments that come thru and try their best to piggy back on them to further their own agenda. To be able to effectively push legal immigration related laws/changes on their own merit and not held back in one common basket, we might need an equally powerful legal immigration/H1B caucus out there.
But how to get there? Will million dollars help?
Thats the million dollar question currently on everyone's mind I guess :D
Seriously, If $2000 dollars would buy you a GC (guaranteed) then I think most (> 90%) of the people on this forum would have gone for that (or atleast convince their employers to part with that amount for a guaranteed ROI)
It would be good to get some kind of insight into the thought process of IV core/lead team and how they think they can put a million dollars to effective use?
I mean can we lobby/cultivate our own caucus (not cactus :D) from the ground up in the congress etc, who can work for our cause? What other such effective things can be done?
Any kind of roadmap/plan of action that would probably help generate an interest and convince atleast some people to start donating.
Just saw this on cnet .
http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9941962-7.html?tag=nefd.top
"The Hispanic Caucus sees it as a bargaining chip to get what they want, which is comprehensive immigration reform, amnesty for illegal immigrants, whatever you want to call it," Fishman said. "Until the Democratic leadership allows legislation (related to H-1Bs) to go to the floor on its own merits, that's the situation we have here."
Though this is only about H1-B, but I would guess, that caucus would be looking at even other legal immigration/GC related proposals, amendments that come thru and try their best to piggy back on them to further their own agenda. To be able to effectively push legal immigration related laws/changes on their own merit and not held back in one common basket, we might need an equally powerful legal immigration/H1B caucus out there.
But how to get there? Will million dollars help?
Thats the million dollar question currently on everyone's mind I guess :D
more...
pictures NARUTO SHARINGAN MOUSEPAD PAD
lkapildev
04-15 03:12 PM
Nothing will affect you. You are at the beinging stage of your GC. Donot get tensed or panic .. all will be smooth. I donot think there is any way to to inform DOL. Contact your attroney for any clarification.
dresses naruto shippuden sharingan.
pankajkakkar
03-01 06:46 PM
I'd like to join the conference call as well.
more...
makeup Naruto Shippuden: Itachi
lazycis
09-27 02:26 PM
Title 8 C.F.R. � 205.1(a) states, in pertinent part, that:
The approval of a petition or self-petition made under section 204 of the Act and in accordance with part 204 of this chapter is revoked as of the date of approval:
(3) If any of the following circumstances occur before the beneficiary’s or self-petitioner’s journey to the United States commences … (A) Upon written notice of withdrawal filed by the petitioner or self-petitioner with any officer of the Service who is authorized to grant or deny petitions.
You cannot port revoked petition, because it does not exist anymore.
The approval of a petition or self-petition made under section 204 of the Act and in accordance with part 204 of this chapter is revoked as of the date of approval:
(3) If any of the following circumstances occur before the beneficiary’s or self-petitioner’s journey to the United States commences … (A) Upon written notice of withdrawal filed by the petitioner or self-petitioner with any officer of the Service who is authorized to grant or deny petitions.
You cannot port revoked petition, because it does not exist anymore.
girlfriend Naruto Shippuden Sharingan
hebron
08-16 03:26 PM
I have all proofs timesheets and bankstatements and email conversations. But, i am worried because he is threatening me saying he will go to court and sue me for working at the same client. Do i have chance to win the case if i fight back.
It all depends if you have a written agreement that prohibits you from working with the current employer. If there is no contract, you are safe. It seems that there is no such contract that either you signed with your ex-employer or middle-men.
If your employer doesn't pay you the salary that he agreed to (in writing), then you can be sure that DOL will ask your employer to pay a fine and pay you the salary. I would suggest that if he does or does not sue you, you better complain to DOL that you weren't getting paid. This will no way this will affect you.
It all depends if you have a written agreement that prohibits you from working with the current employer. If there is no contract, you are safe. It seems that there is no such contract that either you signed with your ex-employer or middle-men.
If your employer doesn't pay you the salary that he agreed to (in writing), then you can be sure that DOL will ask your employer to pay a fine and pay you the salary. I would suggest that if he does or does not sue you, you better complain to DOL that you weren't getting paid. This will no way this will affect you.
hairstyles tous les sharingan
Madhuri
07-11 11:02 PM
If this is true it's really horrible and scary that this gov. agency is handling our applications.
This is beginning to look more and more like a organized and deliberate attempt to block people from filing for AOS.If the mysterious "knowledgeable official" quoted on the website can be summoned in court- that would be game over for the USCIS right there......
http://www.usimmlaw.com/current_information.htm
Copying the contents of the website below :
Visa numbers WERE available July 2nd!!
We have confirmed with a knowledgeable official in the Department of State Visa Office that USCIS was requesting visa numbers on Sunday July 1st, and Monday morning July 2nd - and that visa numbers were still being issued as late as the morning of July 2nd!
In fact, close to 30,000 visa numbers were requested and issued in July - through the morning of July 2nd. And we believe that many - if not most - of the requests made in the first two days of July were for applicants whose priority dates were not current in June!
So how can USCIS refuse to accept I-485 filings received BEFORE the State Department issued its notice that all visa numbers had been used???? We have not yet confirmed the return of any I-485s filed in July. But we do know that applications were reaching the USCIS before the State Department announcement - and while the USCIS was frantically working to use up the entire year's allocation.
USCIS did not use all visa numbers before July 2nd.
Did USCIS actually use the visa numbers it requested????
Historically, the USCIS doesn't request a visa number from the Department of State until it is ready to grant the adjustment of status application. US Consuls overseas request visa numbers the month before they intend to issue the immigrant visa. This is the reason why consuls return about ten percent of the visa numbers requested - and why USCIS does not generally return any numbers.
In fact, in making allocations of visa numbers, the Department of State factors in an expected return rate for consuls - but not for the USCIS. And the USCIS - before this June - used about 85% of the total immigrant visa numbers available.
However, already this month, the USCIS has been returning visa numbers. This confirms our earlier suspicion that the only way the USCIS could request 68,000 visa numbers in a matter of weeks was to request them in advance of adjudicating cases.
We believe USCIS exhausted the visa numbers by simply requesting them - not by using them. If so, and for reasons we will post shortly, we believe that over 30,000 visa numbers requested by USCIS will go unused - and will be wasted this year!
This is beginning to look more and more like a organized and deliberate attempt to block people from filing for AOS.If the mysterious "knowledgeable official" quoted on the website can be summoned in court- that would be game over for the USCIS right there......
http://www.usimmlaw.com/current_information.htm
Copying the contents of the website below :
Visa numbers WERE available July 2nd!!
We have confirmed with a knowledgeable official in the Department of State Visa Office that USCIS was requesting visa numbers on Sunday July 1st, and Monday morning July 2nd - and that visa numbers were still being issued as late as the morning of July 2nd!
In fact, close to 30,000 visa numbers were requested and issued in July - through the morning of July 2nd. And we believe that many - if not most - of the requests made in the first two days of July were for applicants whose priority dates were not current in June!
So how can USCIS refuse to accept I-485 filings received BEFORE the State Department issued its notice that all visa numbers had been used???? We have not yet confirmed the return of any I-485s filed in July. But we do know that applications were reaching the USCIS before the State Department announcement - and while the USCIS was frantically working to use up the entire year's allocation.
USCIS did not use all visa numbers before July 2nd.
Did USCIS actually use the visa numbers it requested????
Historically, the USCIS doesn't request a visa number from the Department of State until it is ready to grant the adjustment of status application. US Consuls overseas request visa numbers the month before they intend to issue the immigrant visa. This is the reason why consuls return about ten percent of the visa numbers requested - and why USCIS does not generally return any numbers.
In fact, in making allocations of visa numbers, the Department of State factors in an expected return rate for consuls - but not for the USCIS. And the USCIS - before this June - used about 85% of the total immigrant visa numbers available.
However, already this month, the USCIS has been returning visa numbers. This confirms our earlier suspicion that the only way the USCIS could request 68,000 visa numbers in a matter of weeks was to request them in advance of adjudicating cases.
We believe USCIS exhausted the visa numbers by simply requesting them - not by using them. If so, and for reasons we will post shortly, we believe that over 30,000 visa numbers requested by USCIS will go unused - and will be wasted this year!
dontcareaboutGC
03-19 11:24 AM
Ignore this if this is a repost!
U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on the Judiciary
Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security,
and International Law
Hearing on Comprehensive Immigration Reform: Government Perspectives
on Immigration Statistics
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim
Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division
Visa Services Office
U.S. Department of State
June 6, 2007
2:00 p.m.
2141 Rayburn House Office Building
Chairman Lofgren, Ranking Member King, and distinguished members of
the Committee, it is a pleasure to be here this afternoon to answer
your questions and provide an overview of our immigrant visa control
and reporting program operated by the U.S. Department of State. The
Department of State is responsible for administering the provisions of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) related to the numerical
limitations on immigrant visa issuances. At the beginning of each
month, the Visa Office (VO) receives a report from each consular post
listing totals of documentarily-qualified immigrant visa applicants in
categories subject to numerical limitation. Cases are grouped in three
different categories: 1) foreign state chargeability, 2) preference,
and 3) priority date.
Foreign state chargeability for visa purposes refers to the fact that
an immigrant is chargeable to the numerical limitation for the foreign
state or dependent area in which the immigrant's place of birth is
located. Exceptions are provided for a child (unmarried and under 21
years of age) or spouse accompanying or following to join a principal
to prevent the separation of family members, as well as for an
applicant born in the United States or in a foreign state of which
neither parent was a native or resident. Alternate chargeability is
desirable when the visa cut-off date for the foreign state of a parent
or spouse is more advantageous than that of the applicant's foreign
state.
As established by the Immigration and Nationality Act, preference is
the visa category that can be assigned based on relationships to U.S.
citizens or legal permanent residents. Family-based immigration falls
under two basic categories: unlimited and limited. Preferences
established by law for the limited category are:
Family First Preference (F1): Unmarried sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their minor children, if any.
Family Second Preference (F2): Spouses, minor children, and unmarried
sons and daughters of lawful permanent residents.
Family Third Preference (F3): Married sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their spouses and minor children.
Family Fourth Preference (F4): Brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens
and their spouses and minor children provided the U.S. citizen is at
least 21 years of age.
The Priority Date is normally the date on which the petition to accord
the applicant immigrant status was filed, generally with U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). VO subdivides the annual
preference and foreign state limitations specified by the INA into
monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily-qualified applicants
which have been reported to VO are compared each month with the
numbers available for the next regular allotment. The determination of
how many numbers are available requires consideration of several
variables, including: past number use; estimates of future number use
and return rates; and estimates of USCIS demand based on cut-off date
movements. Once this consideration is completed, the cutoff dates are
established and numbers are allocated to reported applicants in order
of their priority dates, the oldest dates first.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy
all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is
considered "Current." For example: If the monthly allocation target is
10,000, and we only have 5,000 applicants, the category can be
"Current.� Whenever the total of documentarily-qualified applicants in
a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for
the particular month, the category is considered to be
"oversubscribed" and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
The cut-off date is the priority date of the first
documentarily-qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a
visa number. For example, if the monthly target is 10,000 and we have
25,000 applicants, then we would need to establish a cut-off date so
that only 10,000 numbers would be allocated. In this case, the cut-off
would be the priority date of the 10,001st applicant.
Only persons with a priority date earlier than a cut-off date are
entitled to allotment of a visa number. The cut-off dates are the 1st,
8th, 15th, and 22nd of a month, since VO groups demand for numbers
under these dates. (Priority dates of the first through seventh of a
month are grouped under the 1st, the eighth through the 14th under the
8th, etc.) VO attempts to establish the cut-off dates for the
following month on or about the 8th of each month. The dates are
immediately transmitted to consular posts abroad and USCIS, and also
published in the Visa Bulletin and online at the website
www.travel.state.gov. Visa allotments for use during that month are
transmitted to consular posts. USCIS requests visa allotments for
adjustment of status cases only when all other case processing has
been completed. I am submitting the latest Visa Bulletin for the
record or you can click on: Visa Bulletin for June 2007.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE SYSTEM AND CLARIFICATION OF SOME
FREQUENTLY MISUNDERSTOOD POINTS:
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become documentarily qualified
at their own initiative and convenience. By no means has every
applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date
been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, visa allotments
are made only on the basis of the total applicants reported
�documentarily qualified� (or, theoretically ready for interview) each
month. Demand for visa numbers can fluctuate from one month to
another, with the inevitable impact on cut-off dates.
If an applicant is reported documentarily qualified but allocation of
a visa number is not possible because of a visa availability cut-off
date, the demand is recorded at VO and an allocation is made as soon
as the applicable cut-off date advances beyond the applicant's
priority date. There is no need for such applicant to be reported a
second time.
Visa numbers are always allotted for all documentarily-qualified
applicants with a priority date before the relevant cut-off date, as
long as the case had been reported to VO in time to be included in the
monthly calculation of visa availability. Failure of visa number
receipt by the overseas processing office could mean that the request
was not dispatched in time to reach VO for the monthly allocation
cycle, or that information on the request was incomplete or inaccurate
(e.g., incorrect priority date).
Allocations to Foreign Service posts outside the regular monthly cycle
are possible in emergency or exceptional cases, but only at the
request of the office processing the case. Note that, should
retrogression of a cut-off date be announced, VO can honor
extraordinary requests for additional numbers only if the applicant's
priority date is earlier than the retrogressed cut-off date. Not all
numbers allocated are actually used for visa issuance; some are
returned to VO and are reincorporated into the pool of numbers
available for later allocation during the fiscal year. The rate of
return of unused numbers may fluctuate from month to month, just as
demand may fluctuate. Lower returns mean fewer numbers available for
subsequent reallocation. Fluctuations can cause cut-off date movement
to slow, stop, or even retrogress. Retrogression is particularly
possible near the end of the fiscal year as visa issuance approaches
the annual limitations.
Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7 percent is a
cap, which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed.
Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The
country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the
annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This
limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled,
however. A portion of the numbers provided to the Family Second
preference category is exempt from this per-country cap. The American
Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act (AC21) removed the
per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant
demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of
such numbers available.
Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by
documentarily-qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds
the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation,
that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may
require the establishment of a cut-off date which is earlier than that
which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The
prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same
percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual
limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off
dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off
dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
The committee submitted several questions that fell outside of VO�s
area of work, therefore, I have provided in my written testimony today
the answers only to those questions that the Department of State can
answer. Thank you for this opportunity.
U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on the Judiciary
Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security,
and International Law
Hearing on Comprehensive Immigration Reform: Government Perspectives
on Immigration Statistics
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim
Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division
Visa Services Office
U.S. Department of State
June 6, 2007
2:00 p.m.
2141 Rayburn House Office Building
Chairman Lofgren, Ranking Member King, and distinguished members of
the Committee, it is a pleasure to be here this afternoon to answer
your questions and provide an overview of our immigrant visa control
and reporting program operated by the U.S. Department of State. The
Department of State is responsible for administering the provisions of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) related to the numerical
limitations on immigrant visa issuances. At the beginning of each
month, the Visa Office (VO) receives a report from each consular post
listing totals of documentarily-qualified immigrant visa applicants in
categories subject to numerical limitation. Cases are grouped in three
different categories: 1) foreign state chargeability, 2) preference,
and 3) priority date.
Foreign state chargeability for visa purposes refers to the fact that
an immigrant is chargeable to the numerical limitation for the foreign
state or dependent area in which the immigrant's place of birth is
located. Exceptions are provided for a child (unmarried and under 21
years of age) or spouse accompanying or following to join a principal
to prevent the separation of family members, as well as for an
applicant born in the United States or in a foreign state of which
neither parent was a native or resident. Alternate chargeability is
desirable when the visa cut-off date for the foreign state of a parent
or spouse is more advantageous than that of the applicant's foreign
state.
As established by the Immigration and Nationality Act, preference is
the visa category that can be assigned based on relationships to U.S.
citizens or legal permanent residents. Family-based immigration falls
under two basic categories: unlimited and limited. Preferences
established by law for the limited category are:
Family First Preference (F1): Unmarried sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their minor children, if any.
Family Second Preference (F2): Spouses, minor children, and unmarried
sons and daughters of lawful permanent residents.
Family Third Preference (F3): Married sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their spouses and minor children.
Family Fourth Preference (F4): Brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens
and their spouses and minor children provided the U.S. citizen is at
least 21 years of age.
The Priority Date is normally the date on which the petition to accord
the applicant immigrant status was filed, generally with U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). VO subdivides the annual
preference and foreign state limitations specified by the INA into
monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily-qualified applicants
which have been reported to VO are compared each month with the
numbers available for the next regular allotment. The determination of
how many numbers are available requires consideration of several
variables, including: past number use; estimates of future number use
and return rates; and estimates of USCIS demand based on cut-off date
movements. Once this consideration is completed, the cutoff dates are
established and numbers are allocated to reported applicants in order
of their priority dates, the oldest dates first.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy
all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is
considered "Current." For example: If the monthly allocation target is
10,000, and we only have 5,000 applicants, the category can be
"Current.� Whenever the total of documentarily-qualified applicants in
a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for
the particular month, the category is considered to be
"oversubscribed" and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
The cut-off date is the priority date of the first
documentarily-qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a
visa number. For example, if the monthly target is 10,000 and we have
25,000 applicants, then we would need to establish a cut-off date so
that only 10,000 numbers would be allocated. In this case, the cut-off
would be the priority date of the 10,001st applicant.
Only persons with a priority date earlier than a cut-off date are
entitled to allotment of a visa number. The cut-off dates are the 1st,
8th, 15th, and 22nd of a month, since VO groups demand for numbers
under these dates. (Priority dates of the first through seventh of a
month are grouped under the 1st, the eighth through the 14th under the
8th, etc.) VO attempts to establish the cut-off dates for the
following month on or about the 8th of each month. The dates are
immediately transmitted to consular posts abroad and USCIS, and also
published in the Visa Bulletin and online at the website
www.travel.state.gov. Visa allotments for use during that month are
transmitted to consular posts. USCIS requests visa allotments for
adjustment of status cases only when all other case processing has
been completed. I am submitting the latest Visa Bulletin for the
record or you can click on: Visa Bulletin for June 2007.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE SYSTEM AND CLARIFICATION OF SOME
FREQUENTLY MISUNDERSTOOD POINTS:
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become documentarily qualified
at their own initiative and convenience. By no means has every
applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date
been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, visa allotments
are made only on the basis of the total applicants reported
�documentarily qualified� (or, theoretically ready for interview) each
month. Demand for visa numbers can fluctuate from one month to
another, with the inevitable impact on cut-off dates.
If an applicant is reported documentarily qualified but allocation of
a visa number is not possible because of a visa availability cut-off
date, the demand is recorded at VO and an allocation is made as soon
as the applicable cut-off date advances beyond the applicant's
priority date. There is no need for such applicant to be reported a
second time.
Visa numbers are always allotted for all documentarily-qualified
applicants with a priority date before the relevant cut-off date, as
long as the case had been reported to VO in time to be included in the
monthly calculation of visa availability. Failure of visa number
receipt by the overseas processing office could mean that the request
was not dispatched in time to reach VO for the monthly allocation
cycle, or that information on the request was incomplete or inaccurate
(e.g., incorrect priority date).
Allocations to Foreign Service posts outside the regular monthly cycle
are possible in emergency or exceptional cases, but only at the
request of the office processing the case. Note that, should
retrogression of a cut-off date be announced, VO can honor
extraordinary requests for additional numbers only if the applicant's
priority date is earlier than the retrogressed cut-off date. Not all
numbers allocated are actually used for visa issuance; some are
returned to VO and are reincorporated into the pool of numbers
available for later allocation during the fiscal year. The rate of
return of unused numbers may fluctuate from month to month, just as
demand may fluctuate. Lower returns mean fewer numbers available for
subsequent reallocation. Fluctuations can cause cut-off date movement
to slow, stop, or even retrogress. Retrogression is particularly
possible near the end of the fiscal year as visa issuance approaches
the annual limitations.
Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7 percent is a
cap, which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed.
Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The
country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the
annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This
limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled,
however. A portion of the numbers provided to the Family Second
preference category is exempt from this per-country cap. The American
Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act (AC21) removed the
per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant
demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of
such numbers available.
Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by
documentarily-qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds
the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation,
that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may
require the establishment of a cut-off date which is earlier than that
which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The
prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same
percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual
limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off
dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off
dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
The committee submitted several questions that fell outside of VO�s
area of work, therefore, I have provided in my written testimony today
the answers only to those questions that the Department of State can
answer. Thank you for this opportunity.
vamsi_poondla
02-18 06:04 PM
You may want to know the pros and cons. If you want your baby to deliver in US, you can try visitor visa route I guess,,,not sure if it allows dependent child to stay with you more than 1 year.
Or best - wait for baby and deliver him after getting citizenship :-)
Or check with Angie Jolie/ Bradd Pitt couple..they must have tried all the above and more alternatives ;-)
Or best - wait for baby and deliver him after getting citizenship :-)
Or check with Angie Jolie/ Bradd Pitt couple..they must have tried all the above and more alternatives ;-)
No comments:
Post a Comment