gc_on_demand
12-10 04:38 PM
HOW IS THE PER-COUNTRY LIMIT CALCULATED?
Section 201 of the INA sets an annual minimum Family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000, while the worldwide annual level for Employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 202 sets the per-country limit for preference immigrants at 7% of the total annual Family-sponsored and Employment-based preference limits, i.e. a minimum of 25,620.
- The annual per-country limitation of 7% is a cap, meaning visa issuances to any single country may not exceed this figure. This limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled, however. The per-country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the visa numbers by applicants from only a few countries.
- INA Section 202(a)(5), added by the American Competitiveness Act in the 21st Century (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. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5)has occasionally allowed countries such as China-mainland born and India to utilize large amounts of Employment First and Second preference numbers which would have otherwise gone unused.
WHAT ARE THE PROJECTIONS FOR CUT-OFF DATE MOVEMENT IN THE FAMILY PREFERENCES?
Cut-off date movement in most categories continues to be greater than might ordinarily be expected, and this is anticipated to continue for at least the next few months. This is because fewer applicants are proceeding with final action on their cases at consular posts abroad, and the volume of CIS adjustment cases remains low. Once large numbers of applicants begin to have their cases brought to final action, cut-off date movements will necessarily slow or stop. Moreover, in some categories cut-off date retrogression is a possibility. Therefore, readers should be aware that the recent rate of cut-off date advances will not continue indefinitely, but it is not possible to say at present how soon they will end.
WHY DID MOST EMPLOYMENT CUT-OFFS REMAIN UNCHANGED IN RECENT MONTHS?
Many of the categories were "unavailable" at the end of FY which resulted in excessive demand being received during October and November. Coupled with the fact that CIS Offices have been doing an excellent job of processing cases, this has had an impact on cut-off date movements. Some forward movement has begun for January as we enter the second quarter of the fiscal year.
In my view CIS is not processing the applications fast enough to be using the benefits of INA Section 202(a)(5). We need to understand reasons behind this. Per the official bulletin, it is clear that if CIS can process them fast enough, we could see a movement of EB2 till end of the 2005. How many times should CIS pre-adjudicate before actually approving the EB AOS applications?
State made a good start to give an explanation for these dates. But they still didn't consider DOL application volume and CIS processing bottlenecks in processing AOS cases. IV needs to ask CIS on processing capacities of AOS applications. If they can't process them fast enough, They need to open up the AC-140 process for India (it is available only for Bombay) centers to get the cases approved by state department in a much faster way.
In Jan 2010 DOL will publish their data and that will make thing very clear. I think DOS is assuming around 10 -15 k Spill over visas that can be available to Eb2 India ( based on previous years ) and that is what it take them into Oct - Dec 2005 range. They don't factor in CIS processing time. But I think from pool of 40-50k pre adjudicated apps CIS can easily consume 10k visas. But if there are less labors and more spill over visas ( like 30 -40 k) then be ready for mini version of july fiasco.
Section 201 of the INA sets an annual minimum Family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000, while the worldwide annual level for Employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 202 sets the per-country limit for preference immigrants at 7% of the total annual Family-sponsored and Employment-based preference limits, i.e. a minimum of 25,620.
- The annual per-country limitation of 7% is a cap, meaning visa issuances to any single country may not exceed this figure. This limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled, however. The per-country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the visa numbers by applicants from only a few countries.
- INA Section 202(a)(5), added by the American Competitiveness Act in the 21st Century (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. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5)has occasionally allowed countries such as China-mainland born and India to utilize large amounts of Employment First and Second preference numbers which would have otherwise gone unused.
WHAT ARE THE PROJECTIONS FOR CUT-OFF DATE MOVEMENT IN THE FAMILY PREFERENCES?
Cut-off date movement in most categories continues to be greater than might ordinarily be expected, and this is anticipated to continue for at least the next few months. This is because fewer applicants are proceeding with final action on their cases at consular posts abroad, and the volume of CIS adjustment cases remains low. Once large numbers of applicants begin to have their cases brought to final action, cut-off date movements will necessarily slow or stop. Moreover, in some categories cut-off date retrogression is a possibility. Therefore, readers should be aware that the recent rate of cut-off date advances will not continue indefinitely, but it is not possible to say at present how soon they will end.
WHY DID MOST EMPLOYMENT CUT-OFFS REMAIN UNCHANGED IN RECENT MONTHS?
Many of the categories were "unavailable" at the end of FY which resulted in excessive demand being received during October and November. Coupled with the fact that CIS Offices have been doing an excellent job of processing cases, this has had an impact on cut-off date movements. Some forward movement has begun for January as we enter the second quarter of the fiscal year.
In my view CIS is not processing the applications fast enough to be using the benefits of INA Section 202(a)(5). We need to understand reasons behind this. Per the official bulletin, it is clear that if CIS can process them fast enough, we could see a movement of EB2 till end of the 2005. How many times should CIS pre-adjudicate before actually approving the EB AOS applications?
State made a good start to give an explanation for these dates. But they still didn't consider DOL application volume and CIS processing bottlenecks in processing AOS cases. IV needs to ask CIS on processing capacities of AOS applications. If they can't process them fast enough, They need to open up the AC-140 process for India (it is available only for Bombay) centers to get the cases approved by state department in a much faster way.
In Jan 2010 DOL will publish their data and that will make thing very clear. I think DOS is assuming around 10 -15 k Spill over visas that can be available to Eb2 India ( based on previous years ) and that is what it take them into Oct - Dec 2005 range. They don't factor in CIS processing time. But I think from pool of 40-50k pre adjudicated apps CIS can easily consume 10k visas. But if there are less labors and more spill over visas ( like 30 -40 k) then be ready for mini version of july fiasco.
wallpaper Bits of Black Wedding Dress 1
tikka
07-20 10:35 AM
Contributed $100. Will do again. Thanks to IV for the job well done.
your first post is a contribution.. cant wait for the second one :D
Thank you for the contribution...
your first post is a contribution.. cant wait for the second one :D
Thank you for the contribution...
Lacris
08-12 12:49 PM
BEC= Backlog Elimination Center, theywere for elimination of backlogs for LC's:o
Trust me, after waiting at PBEC for almost 2 years,I know what BEC is. I was just saying that a person who got LC certified in 2004 didn't have to go thru BEC. They started transferring cases at the beginning of 2005.
Trust me, after waiting at PBEC for almost 2 years,I know what BEC is. I was just saying that a person who got LC certified in 2004 didn't have to go thru BEC. They started transferring cases at the beginning of 2005.
2011 your dress must be white
Libra
09-12 07:35 AM
awesome!!! thank you Milind123. u da man.
more...
mrdelhiite
06-21 12:50 PM
search "Cohen & Grisby PERM " in youtube :(
-M
-M
Desi Unlucky
09-11 09:50 PM
Here is my contribution.
Google Order #171518030739621 ($100)
Keep up the good work.
Google Order #171518030739621 ($100)
Keep up the good work.
more...
kamdard
09-01 12:38 PM
Applied GC in MAY 2002 in EB3-I. Been with the same company, same job etc...
Labor cleared in MAY 2007.
Applied I140 and I485 in June 2007.
I140 approved in SEPT 2007. Since then am with AP and EAD.
Hope this helps.
Regards,
DK.
Labor cleared in MAY 2007.
Applied I140 and I485 in June 2007.
I140 approved in SEPT 2007. Since then am with AP and EAD.
Hope this helps.
Regards,
DK.
2010 Black and White Wedding Gown
Green.Tech
06-02 12:43 PM
...to stay on top!
more...
skillet
06-26 04:27 PM
Hello,
My labor got approved today
Category: EB2
PD : Feb 5th, 2007
Wish you all the best for everyone
My labor got approved today
Category: EB2
PD : Feb 5th, 2007
Wish you all the best for everyone
hair Black Wedding Dress With
desi485
11-14 06:09 PM
One of IV members 'lazycis' (he is a knowledgable & senior member) also mentioned this, which exactly matches with what RG said:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=301999&postcount=16
so I am sure there are some provisionsI hope 'lazycis' will provide some more info if he sees this post.
Edit: Chandu - please click this link to read on RG's forums. (http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6461)
Chandu, also see this link about cancellation of employment authorisation.
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=a3791be48df2a5191102c84123773141&rgn=div8&view=text&node=8:1.0.1.2.54.2.1.3&idno=8
� 274a.14 Termination of employment authorization.
(a) Automatic termination of employment authorization. (1) Employment authorization granted under �274a.12(c) of this chapter shall automatically terminate upon the occurrence of one of the following events:
(i) The expiration date specified by the Service on the employment authorization document is reached;
(ii) Exclusion or deportation proceedings are instituted (however, this shall not preclude the authorization of employment pursuant to �274a.12(c) of this part where appropriate); or
(iii) The alien is granted voluntary departure.
(2) Termination of employment authorization pursuant to this paragraph does not require the service of a notice of intent to revoke; employment authorization terminates upon the occurrence of any event enumerated in paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
However, automatic revocation under this section does not preclude reapplication for employment authorization under �274.12(c) of this part.
(b) Revocation of employment authorization —(1) Basis for revocation of employment authorization. Employment authorization granted under �274a.12(c) of this chapter may be revoked by the district director:
(i) Prior to the expiration date, when it appears that any condition upon which it was granted has not been met or no longer exists, or for good cause shown; or
(ii) Upon a showing that the information contained in the application is not true and correct.
(2) Notice of intent to revoke employment authorization. When a district director determines that employment authorization should be revoked prior to the expiration date specified by the Service, he or she shall serve written notice of intent to revoke the employment authorization. The notice will cite the reasons indicating that revocation is warranted. The alien will be granted a period of fifteen days from the date of service of the notice within which to submit countervailing evidence. The decision by the district director shall be final and no appeal shall lie from the decision to revoke the authorization.
(c) Automatic termination of temporary employment authorization granted prior to June 1, 1987. (1) Temporary employment authorization granted prior to June 1, 1987, pursuant to 8 CFR 274a.12(c) (�109.1(b) contained in the 8 CFR edition revised as of January 1, 1987), shall automatically terminate on the date specified by the Service on the document issued to the alien, or on December 31, 1996, whichever is earlier. Automatic termination of temporary employment authorization does not preclude a subsequent application for temporary employment authorization.
(2) A document issued by the Service prior to June 1, 1987, that authorized temporary employment authorization for any period beyond December 31, 1996, is null and void pursuant to paragraph (c)(1) of this section. The alien shall be issued a new employment authorization document upon application to the Service if the alien is eligible for temporary employment authorization pursuant to 274A.12(c).
(3) No notice of intent to revoke is necessary for the automatic termination of temporary employment authorization pursuant to this part.
[52 FR 16221, May 1, 1987, as amended at 53 FR 8614, Mar. 16, 1988; 53 FR 20087, June 1, 1988; 61 FR 46537, Sept. 4, 1996]
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=301999&postcount=16
so I am sure there are some provisionsI hope 'lazycis' will provide some more info if he sees this post.
Edit: Chandu - please click this link to read on RG's forums. (http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6461)
Chandu, also see this link about cancellation of employment authorisation.
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=a3791be48df2a5191102c84123773141&rgn=div8&view=text&node=8:1.0.1.2.54.2.1.3&idno=8
� 274a.14 Termination of employment authorization.
(a) Automatic termination of employment authorization. (1) Employment authorization granted under �274a.12(c) of this chapter shall automatically terminate upon the occurrence of one of the following events:
(i) The expiration date specified by the Service on the employment authorization document is reached;
(ii) Exclusion or deportation proceedings are instituted (however, this shall not preclude the authorization of employment pursuant to �274a.12(c) of this part where appropriate); or
(iii) The alien is granted voluntary departure.
(2) Termination of employment authorization pursuant to this paragraph does not require the service of a notice of intent to revoke; employment authorization terminates upon the occurrence of any event enumerated in paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
However, automatic revocation under this section does not preclude reapplication for employment authorization under �274.12(c) of this part.
(b) Revocation of employment authorization —(1) Basis for revocation of employment authorization. Employment authorization granted under �274a.12(c) of this chapter may be revoked by the district director:
(i) Prior to the expiration date, when it appears that any condition upon which it was granted has not been met or no longer exists, or for good cause shown; or
(ii) Upon a showing that the information contained in the application is not true and correct.
(2) Notice of intent to revoke employment authorization. When a district director determines that employment authorization should be revoked prior to the expiration date specified by the Service, he or she shall serve written notice of intent to revoke the employment authorization. The notice will cite the reasons indicating that revocation is warranted. The alien will be granted a period of fifteen days from the date of service of the notice within which to submit countervailing evidence. The decision by the district director shall be final and no appeal shall lie from the decision to revoke the authorization.
(c) Automatic termination of temporary employment authorization granted prior to June 1, 1987. (1) Temporary employment authorization granted prior to June 1, 1987, pursuant to 8 CFR 274a.12(c) (�109.1(b) contained in the 8 CFR edition revised as of January 1, 1987), shall automatically terminate on the date specified by the Service on the document issued to the alien, or on December 31, 1996, whichever is earlier. Automatic termination of temporary employment authorization does not preclude a subsequent application for temporary employment authorization.
(2) A document issued by the Service prior to June 1, 1987, that authorized temporary employment authorization for any period beyond December 31, 1996, is null and void pursuant to paragraph (c)(1) of this section. The alien shall be issued a new employment authorization document upon application to the Service if the alien is eligible for temporary employment authorization pursuant to 274A.12(c).
(3) No notice of intent to revoke is necessary for the automatic termination of temporary employment authorization pursuant to this part.
[52 FR 16221, May 1, 1987, as amended at 53 FR 8614, Mar. 16, 1988; 53 FR 20087, June 1, 1988; 61 FR 46537, Sept. 4, 1996]
more...
mpadapa
09-10 09:21 PM
HR 5882 has the answer for the FIFO problem.
USCIS is pretty good with approving cased based on PD for 3/4th of the year and in the last quarter they for the "Hail mary" play and DOS gives a wide PD range during the last quarter for USCIS to play. Apart from recapturing wasted visa's HR 5882 also has an automatic recapture provision to avoid any future visa wastage. If this provision is in place then UCSIS/DOS will not be in a position to playing the "some how use up visa by sep 31" card to approve random cases.
Rather than focusing on HR 5882 many are still pondering about LUD's and sill day dreaming. The demand for visa's is much higher than the supply of visa's, it doesn't matter what new spillover policy USCIS adopts, it can only provide incremental improvements. For a quantum improvment in the situation we need a legislation and HR 5882 is the best option we have now.
Can some gurus answer this...
Is there some wording in any laws/rules that says USCIS, no matter what, should not be approving cases out of PD order?
OR is PD just a *guidance* to maintain some sort of FIFO and there are enough loopholes in the law that allows USCIS to skirt around them and approve cases with later PDs by claiming that they are actually doing us a service by not wasting visa numbers by approving cases any which way they can?
If its the latter, then we can't do much other than appealing to their conscience and ask them to do a fairer job.
USCIS is pretty good with approving cased based on PD for 3/4th of the year and in the last quarter they for the "Hail mary" play and DOS gives a wide PD range during the last quarter for USCIS to play. Apart from recapturing wasted visa's HR 5882 also has an automatic recapture provision to avoid any future visa wastage. If this provision is in place then UCSIS/DOS will not be in a position to playing the "some how use up visa by sep 31" card to approve random cases.
Rather than focusing on HR 5882 many are still pondering about LUD's and sill day dreaming. The demand for visa's is much higher than the supply of visa's, it doesn't matter what new spillover policy USCIS adopts, it can only provide incremental improvements. For a quantum improvment in the situation we need a legislation and HR 5882 is the best option we have now.
Can some gurus answer this...
Is there some wording in any laws/rules that says USCIS, no matter what, should not be approving cases out of PD order?
OR is PD just a *guidance* to maintain some sort of FIFO and there are enough loopholes in the law that allows USCIS to skirt around them and approve cases with later PDs by claiming that they are actually doing us a service by not wasting visa numbers by approving cases any which way they can?
If its the latter, then we can't do much other than appealing to their conscience and ask them to do a fairer job.
hot White And Black Wedding Dress
looneytunezez
05-19 07:49 PM
Congrats...
FINAL UPDATE
HURRAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
My I-485 case got reopened after being in denial status for three months............ My attorney got a letter from USCIS.
::::::::::::::::::To recap::::::::::::::
I went to the Congressional office on 05/14/2009 morning.
Congressional office made a call to Nebraska Service Center regarding the case on the same day afternoon (05/14/2009 afternoon)
USCIS sent letter to my attorney on Friday (05/15/2009).
My attorney received it this morning (05/19/2009).
Looks like magic........Whoever has been working on my case from the past three months made a huge reversal decision in just a few hours on 05/14/2009 afternoon with atmost attention........I like this sudden surge in commitment and care on my case.......
Here is the wording:
Quote""""""""""""""""""""""""
Reference is made to the Notice of Appeal or Motion (Form I-290B) filed on April 23, 2009. You are seeking reopen the decision rendered by USCIS on February 17, 2009, denying application filed by you.
The motion as submitted has been reviewed. It meets the requirements of Title 8, COde of Federal Regulations, $103.5 concerning the proper filing of a motion. Accordingly, the request to reopen the previous decision will be and is hereby granted.
The facts and issues in this matter were properly discussed in the decision, supra, and need not be repeated here as they are a matter of record.
After a complete review of the record of proceedings, including your motion, the grounds for denial have been overcome.
The application will be reopened and the processing continued. Once the processing is completed, you will receive a notice under separate cover.
Sincerely
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""Unquote
FINAL UPDATE
HURRAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
My I-485 case got reopened after being in denial status for three months............ My attorney got a letter from USCIS.
::::::::::::::::::To recap::::::::::::::
I went to the Congressional office on 05/14/2009 morning.
Congressional office made a call to Nebraska Service Center regarding the case on the same day afternoon (05/14/2009 afternoon)
USCIS sent letter to my attorney on Friday (05/15/2009).
My attorney received it this morning (05/19/2009).
Looks like magic........Whoever has been working on my case from the past three months made a huge reversal decision in just a few hours on 05/14/2009 afternoon with atmost attention........I like this sudden surge in commitment and care on my case.......
Here is the wording:
Quote""""""""""""""""""""""""
Reference is made to the Notice of Appeal or Motion (Form I-290B) filed on April 23, 2009. You are seeking reopen the decision rendered by USCIS on February 17, 2009, denying application filed by you.
The motion as submitted has been reviewed. It meets the requirements of Title 8, COde of Federal Regulations, $103.5 concerning the proper filing of a motion. Accordingly, the request to reopen the previous decision will be and is hereby granted.
The facts and issues in this matter were properly discussed in the decision, supra, and need not be repeated here as they are a matter of record.
After a complete review of the record of proceedings, including your motion, the grounds for denial have been overcome.
The application will be reopened and the processing continued. Once the processing is completed, you will receive a notice under separate cover.
Sincerely
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""Unquote
more...
house modest lack wedding dress
GCwaitforever
12-26 03:00 PM
Bad news unless they allow mass conversion of TR applications into non-RIR. Imagine they took two years to get rid of 220,000 easier applications (2005 and 2006). Now they are left with some of the old TR applications and they must be thinking of how to meet the September deadline. I would not be surprised if they ask for an extension, citing processing difficulties.
tattoo Black And White Wedding Dress
I_need_GC
02-28 02:01 PM
Heres the dates just as an fyi.
Filed AP: July 26,08
RD: Aug 16, 08
Took company emergency AP letter to IO by making infopass appointment. Feb 07. Got a letter Feb 12 dated feb 09 application accepted as emergency and will be expedited. Got first link update Feb 19, then Approval on Feb 20, Then another Link up date Feb 21. Attorney received 2 original copies of AP Feb 28. On the AP it has created date Feb 19.
If your AP is still pending call customer service and do open a SR. My case was handled by the Nebraska Center.
Filed AP: July 26,08
RD: Aug 16, 08
Took company emergency AP letter to IO by making infopass appointment. Feb 07. Got a letter Feb 12 dated feb 09 application accepted as emergency and will be expedited. Got first link update Feb 19, then Approval on Feb 20, Then another Link up date Feb 21. Attorney received 2 original copies of AP Feb 28. On the AP it has created date Feb 19.
If your AP is still pending call customer service and do open a SR. My case was handled by the Nebraska Center.
more...
pictures Best Quality lack and white
go_guy123
07-06 01:35 AM
Not Volunteer but Leaders...
Volunteer is a person who takes responsibility and does a task. Here the question was raised to have new leaders who can take a flight to Washington DC on Monday morning, change the law by noon to issue GC to every EB category, have a lunch at Olive Garden, come back monday evening.
Most leaders are actually volunteers in IV. They have a regular full time job.
What you are saying: "who can take a flight to Washington DC on Monday morning, change the law by noon to issue GC to every EB category, have a lunch at Olive Garden, come back monday evening" :
For this you need to hire full time lobbyist which costs a lot
of money. IV budget is nowhere close to that the Hispanic lobby group:
National council of La Raza whose budget is
$40 million or $1.3 billion including its “affiliates” network.
IV is a tiny organization in front of La Raza. Thats....a BILLION with which they hire full time lobbyist.
I strongly suggest you listen to the audio interview to understand how big the hispanic
lobby is and get some reality check of how things work in US politics.
Raul Yzaguirre on Past and Future of La Raza : NPR (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4229605)
Even with such power also they cant pass CIR. But at least they ensure that no
EB or illegal immigration reform will pass unless there is something for illegals.
Volunteer is a person who takes responsibility and does a task. Here the question was raised to have new leaders who can take a flight to Washington DC on Monday morning, change the law by noon to issue GC to every EB category, have a lunch at Olive Garden, come back monday evening.
Most leaders are actually volunteers in IV. They have a regular full time job.
What you are saying: "who can take a flight to Washington DC on Monday morning, change the law by noon to issue GC to every EB category, have a lunch at Olive Garden, come back monday evening" :
For this you need to hire full time lobbyist which costs a lot
of money. IV budget is nowhere close to that the Hispanic lobby group:
National council of La Raza whose budget is
$40 million or $1.3 billion including its “affiliates” network.
IV is a tiny organization in front of La Raza. Thats....a BILLION with which they hire full time lobbyist.
I strongly suggest you listen to the audio interview to understand how big the hispanic
lobby is and get some reality check of how things work in US politics.
Raul Yzaguirre on Past and Future of La Raza : NPR (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4229605)
Even with such power also they cant pass CIR. But at least they ensure that no
EB or illegal immigration reform will pass unless there is something for illegals.
dresses white wedding dress with
rajpatelemail
02-07 11:27 PM
i am going to marry my sister's daughter.. Sweet girl
All the girls are not like that. ;)
anyway my comments are about the crazy, career oriented, tradition less girls. And most of teh US girls are like that. Ofcourse not 100%, there may be few jewels..
All the girls are not like that. ;)
anyway my comments are about the crazy, career oriented, tradition less girls. And most of teh US girls are like that. Ofcourse not 100%, there may be few jewels..
more...
makeup white house lack market
Milind123
09-14 09:27 PM
After reading the thread, couldn't wait to start. Just made my first contribution of $100
Order Details - Sep 14, 2007 9:26 PM EDT
Google Order #259932445197419
Let's go to DC..Chak De
Thank you karan. It was getting lonely here. Should I assume this is your first contribution?
Order Details - Sep 14, 2007 9:26 PM EDT
Google Order #259932445197419
Let's go to DC..Chak De
Thank you karan. It was getting lonely here. Should I assume this is your first contribution?
girlfriend Black and White Wedding Dress
ravi.shah
08-24 09:37 AM
No point in bashing each other guys....
Its not like, USCIS is reading these forums and are going to do something about it.
Just take it easy....
Its not like, USCIS is reading these forums and are going to do something about it.
Just take it easy....
hairstyles a Black amp; White Wedding
gc28262
03-11 01:49 PM
My application was finally approved yesterday after almost 7 years in queue. Here is the sequence of events right before the approval.
RFE email on 02/13/09
2nd Biometrics Notice received on 02/17/09
Lawyer receives RFE for EVL, EAD cards and Marriage Certificate on 02/24/09
Completed Code 3 Biometrics on 02/26/09
Soft LUD immediately after Biometrics on 02/26/09
USCIS receives RFE reply on 02/27/09, Hard LUD and email on the same day
Another soft LUD on 03/02/09
CPO email on 03/10/09
Welcome email on 03/10/09
My PD has been current for a long time, but my application had not been touched and then suddenly USCIS became a model of efficiency. I am sure they are opening applications and approving or RFE'ing all they can. Hang in there guys.
Congrats !
Happy to see another free bird flying off USCIS cage.
RFE email on 02/13/09
2nd Biometrics Notice received on 02/17/09
Lawyer receives RFE for EVL, EAD cards and Marriage Certificate on 02/24/09
Completed Code 3 Biometrics on 02/26/09
Soft LUD immediately after Biometrics on 02/26/09
USCIS receives RFE reply on 02/27/09, Hard LUD and email on the same day
Another soft LUD on 03/02/09
CPO email on 03/10/09
Welcome email on 03/10/09
My PD has been current for a long time, but my application had not been touched and then suddenly USCIS became a model of efficiency. I am sure they are opening applications and approving or RFE'ing all they can. Hang in there guys.
Congrats !
Happy to see another free bird flying off USCIS cage.
nlssubbu
07-24 06:42 PM
If they are such smart to calculate numbers like you said, which is theoritically possible, they would not be creating mess like this for years.
Yes, it is easy for them to know how many applications are filed and from which country and how many are in which category etc etc. Based on visa numbers availability, they could very well process the applications are request the visa numbers from DHS. When USCIS handles all the 485 processing, then how come DHS is responsible for moving the dates in VB. It is insane and ridiculous for DHS to have this functionality when they do not have any idea on 485 apps with USCIS. They are scewing up immigrants deliberately without transparency between them.
As I already stated, it is proven beyond the point that DOL and USCIS has only the ability to count the numbers. They do not even know exactly how much labor is pending by country. The same is true for I140 as well.
There is confusion even about how the count works. When your name is struck at FBI name check, it is not counted as backlog itself by USCIS anymore :( [I vaguely remember someone posting this quoting some reference from USCIS memo regarding reduction of processing times].
This is why in many cases you see the sudden forward movement in PD followed by heavy retrogression. Historically those who got approved when the PD is moved forward are always lucky.
Thanks
Yes, it is easy for them to know how many applications are filed and from which country and how many are in which category etc etc. Based on visa numbers availability, they could very well process the applications are request the visa numbers from DHS. When USCIS handles all the 485 processing, then how come DHS is responsible for moving the dates in VB. It is insane and ridiculous for DHS to have this functionality when they do not have any idea on 485 apps with USCIS. They are scewing up immigrants deliberately without transparency between them.
As I already stated, it is proven beyond the point that DOL and USCIS has only the ability to count the numbers. They do not even know exactly how much labor is pending by country. The same is true for I140 as well.
There is confusion even about how the count works. When your name is struck at FBI name check, it is not counted as backlog itself by USCIS anymore :( [I vaguely remember someone posting this quoting some reference from USCIS memo regarding reduction of processing times].
This is why in many cases you see the sudden forward movement in PD followed by heavy retrogression. Historically those who got approved when the PD is moved forward are always lucky.
Thanks
heywhat
10-08 01:15 AM
I got my I140 approved in just 3 months (filed in Jul'08 and approved in oct'08) .. My I140 was filed in EB2 at NSC...
No comments:
Post a Comment