RayP
12-11 02:31 AM
wow !! Good... so you too applied after your EAD had expired... and you continued to work on H1. That gives me a good feeling... thanks. Can you share your situation a little more (or I can give my email seperately). I was also wanting to know if you ae aware whether EAD can be applied from outside the US, just in case I had to do that...
rayen
05-19 05:01 PM
Hi,
1. I was been advised by my Lawyer to pick "PAR -Parolee" if we have used our AP. But if we have last entered using H1 B then we have to pick "H1 B"
2. We have to provide the following in this field
485 receipt number - xxxxxxx
140 receipt number - xxxxxxx (This is optional)
I would put the first line with the 485 receipt number
Lalith,
Thanks for the promt update.
Thanks again.
1. I was been advised by my Lawyer to pick "PAR -Parolee" if we have used our AP. But if we have last entered using H1 B then we have to pick "H1 B"
2. We have to provide the following in this field
485 receipt number - xxxxxxx
140 receipt number - xxxxxxx (This is optional)
I would put the first line with the 485 receipt number
Lalith,
Thanks for the promt update.
Thanks again.
glus
02-27 09:09 AM
I have received my GC on January 28th. My company filled the following with USCIS:
I140 was filled on Nov. 21 2007 and Approved on Jan 24th 2008
I485 was filled on Nov. 21 2007 and Approved on Jan 20th 2008
Now... some people say to me to wait 180 days to quit my current job (which is paying me half of what I should be earning as a GC holder), some people say it is okay to leave at anytime....
So, I don't know what to do, I pretend to become a citzen in 5 years also, and not sure if this will count bad towards that.
I have some reasons to leave: sallary is low (they will not negociate more), wife is pregnant and I am getting a mortgage.
Please advice.
Ok, since your GC has been approved, it is not true you need to wait 180 days. There is nothing in the law that says that. What is true is something different. When you received your GC through your employer, the presumption is that you will remain with this employer for a long time to come as it was a permanent job offer position. Of course, under some circumstances, it is possible you can't work for the same employer any longer; for instance, the company is closing etc. But, if you receive a GC and you voluntarily leave your employer immediately or after a few months, you MAY have issues during naturalization. At that time your application can be scrutinized whether or not you really was going to work for the employer who sponsored you. I've seen this happening several times. If you left voluntarily after a short period of time, the USCIS may say it was fraud and you never intended to work for your sponsor. So, in general, it is advisable to remain with the original sponsor for some time. Some attorneys say 1 year is enough, some say 2 years is enough and some say 6 months is enough. It is up to you. The law does not specify what the period is, but be logical and careful about this. You can hold 5 jobs, but I would suggest to stay with your current employer for as long as possible. Think forward, and not backward.
Hope this makes sense.
I140 was filled on Nov. 21 2007 and Approved on Jan 24th 2008
I485 was filled on Nov. 21 2007 and Approved on Jan 20th 2008
Now... some people say to me to wait 180 days to quit my current job (which is paying me half of what I should be earning as a GC holder), some people say it is okay to leave at anytime....
So, I don't know what to do, I pretend to become a citzen in 5 years also, and not sure if this will count bad towards that.
I have some reasons to leave: sallary is low (they will not negociate more), wife is pregnant and I am getting a mortgage.
Please advice.
Ok, since your GC has been approved, it is not true you need to wait 180 days. There is nothing in the law that says that. What is true is something different. When you received your GC through your employer, the presumption is that you will remain with this employer for a long time to come as it was a permanent job offer position. Of course, under some circumstances, it is possible you can't work for the same employer any longer; for instance, the company is closing etc. But, if you receive a GC and you voluntarily leave your employer immediately or after a few months, you MAY have issues during naturalization. At that time your application can be scrutinized whether or not you really was going to work for the employer who sponsored you. I've seen this happening several times. If you left voluntarily after a short period of time, the USCIS may say it was fraud and you never intended to work for your sponsor. So, in general, it is advisable to remain with the original sponsor for some time. Some attorneys say 1 year is enough, some say 2 years is enough and some say 6 months is enough. It is up to you. The law does not specify what the period is, but be logical and careful about this. You can hold 5 jobs, but I would suggest to stay with your current employer for as long as possible. Think forward, and not backward.
Hope this makes sense.
belmontboy
11-17 02:19 AM
[source: http://www.jackson-hertogs.com/misc/permdesc.htm]
The PERM form includes an attestation that asks whether the employer has laid off any employees in the occupation, or in a related occupation, within the past six months. If the employer has laid off workers in the occupation within the past six months, the employer must attest whether it contacted and considered these workers for the job on the AEC application [this step is called "Notice and Consider"]. For some employers, a layoff may mean that a PERM application cannot be filed until six months after the date of the layoff.
The PERM form includes an attestation that asks whether the employer has laid off any employees in the occupation, or in a related occupation, within the past six months. If the employer has laid off workers in the occupation within the past six months, the employer must attest whether it contacted and considered these workers for the job on the AEC application [this step is called "Notice and Consider"]. For some employers, a layoff may mean that a PERM application cannot be filed until six months after the date of the layoff.
more...
WaitingForMyGC
06-25 11:18 AM
Thanks guys for all your replies & suggestions. Just to let you know, that I am paying for my whole GC process and I have been with this company since last 3 years. I have already completed one 2 year contract term with them and still they are asking me to sign new contract. To me, this is total blackmailing.
la_guy
01-29 03:22 PM
does he have the source of this rumour? does vdlrao knows anything about this?
more...
h1vegas
06-24 05:28 PM
^^^^^
gc_maine2
05-24 08:36 AM
Good job Salil. Keep up the good work.
more...
reddy77
04-12 02:20 PM
Gurus, I just got an email about RFE on 485 application for both of us (myself and wife). My PD is Sep 2006, EB2, not sure why the application got opened and whats the RFE about. I am still working on h1 (renewed based on approved 140) and still has 1.5 years left. Is someone on the same boat, i mean RFE's on 485 though PD is not current??? If the RFE is about my employment, would my wife also get the RFE ?? I am with the same employer from almost 6 years.Do i get the copy of RFE too or just the attorney?? Thanks Guys, appreciate your help ....
ashkam
04-02 10:46 AM
you dont have to marry. just remain as illegal and they will GC sooner.
I know you're kidding, but I don't think Mr Sebastian knows that. It's kinda dangerous to tell him he'll get his GC by remaining illegal. Just my opinion.
I know you're kidding, but I don't think Mr Sebastian knows that. It's kinda dangerous to tell him he'll get his GC by remaining illegal. Just my opinion.
more...
petersebastian
04-01 05:58 PM
You already have the answer : It is 180 days after your I-94 expires, not the day of your arrival.
Yes, thank you, maybe I wasn't clear about it, but I wanted to make sure that the 3 year ban something I will be facing if I overstay the 180 days, not before. I want to stay here with my boyfriend, as I planned until the end on May, but I don't want to do something that will give me a ban...
Yes, thank you, maybe I wasn't clear about it, but I wanted to make sure that the 3 year ban something I will be facing if I overstay the 180 days, not before. I want to stay here with my boyfriend, as I planned until the end on May, but I don't want to do something that will give me a ban...
gc28262
08-27 08:08 PM
Did not know that you can use FOIA for obtaining a document that does not belong to you (or you dont own it)
Here are threads relating to that.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum80-visa-bulletin-status-tracker-processing-times/219826-use-foia-for-i-140-and-other-immigration-records.html
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum2-retrogression-priority-dates-and-visa-bulletins/1469-foia-to-get-copy-i-140-approval-notice.html
Here are threads relating to that.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum80-visa-bulletin-status-tracker-processing-times/219826-use-foia-for-i-140-and-other-immigration-records.html
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum2-retrogression-priority-dates-and-visa-bulletins/1469-foia-to-get-copy-i-140-approval-notice.html
more...
gcwait2007
05-16 03:25 PM
Unseenguy, Thank you for the good, satisfying answer.
I have few questions:
(1) Let me allow my present company to file I-140 as regular processing (mark as 'I-485 processing' in I-140 part IV) and change it later, using I-824 to convert from AOS case to Consular processing for using AC-140? This is faster and easier. Whether my understanding is correct?
(2) What documents one needs for filing Consular Processing? Is it the same set of documents for filing I-485?
(3) I hear that one needs to get police clearance certificates. Where does they come from?
I look forward for your reply,
Thank you
I have few questions:
(1) Let me allow my present company to file I-140 as regular processing (mark as 'I-485 processing' in I-140 part IV) and change it later, using I-824 to convert from AOS case to Consular processing for using AC-140? This is faster and easier. Whether my understanding is correct?
(2) What documents one needs for filing Consular Processing? Is it the same set of documents for filing I-485?
(3) I hear that one needs to get police clearance certificates. Where does they come from?
I look forward for your reply,
Thank you
chanduv23
03-14 12:07 PM
Charles Oppenheim, Chief of Immigrant Visa Control and Reporting Division at the U.S. Department of State (DOS) was a guest speaker at a February 28, 2007 Washington D.C. Chapter meeting of the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA). Mr. Oppenheim was kind enough to share his office�s visa number / Visa Bulletin expectations for 2007.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF RETROGRESSION
Mr. Oppenheim discussed the historical background that has led to the current retrogression situation. Retrogression is not something new or unfamiliar in immigration law, as long-time MurthyDotCom and MurthyBulletin readers may recall. For many, however, who may have become involved in the green card process since 2001, it is new and, of course, highly problematic. Employment-based (or EB) numbers were current from 2001 through 2005 due to a legislative "fix." This legislation authorized prior, unused immigrant visa numbers from several earlier years to be recaptured and put back into the immigration system. That quota of recaptured numbers was exhausted during Fiscal Year (FY) 2005. As a result, in FYs 2005, 2006 and 2007 we have witnessed severe backlogs in the EB3 categories for all countries and, starting in FY2006, in the EB2 categories for China and India.
PREDICTIONS FOR EB IMMIGRANT VISA NUMBERS
Employment-Based First Preference / EB1
Mr. Oppenheim stated that the employment-based first preference (EB1) category is expected to remain current for all countries of chargeability, including India and China. This is likely throughout the remainder of FY2007 (ending September 30, 2007).
Mr. Oppenheim explained what he referred to as the �trickling effect� of unused visa numbers between EB categories. This trickling effect has resulted in the EB1 category's having remained current. The numbers in the employment-based fourth preference (EB4) and employment-based fifth preference (EB5) categories that are unused are transferred up to the EB1 category. Without this trickling affect, the EB1 category would not remain current for India and China.
This also has an impact on EB2, as unused EB1 numbers trickle down to EB2. There are not enough numbers for India and China, however, to allow the EB2 for these two countries to become current. But it has helped to move EB2 forward for these two countries, to some extent.
Employment-Based Second Preference / EB2
The employment-based second preference (EB2) category is expected to remain at its current cutoff dates for nationals of India and China. These dates have been stagnant at April 22, 2005 for China and January 8, 2003 for India for a few months.
Employment-Based Third Preference / EB3
No forward movement is expected for the employment-based third preference (EB3) category. In fact, as predicted in the March Visa Bulletin and confirmed by Mr. Oppenheim, there is a strong possibility that the EB3 numbers that are not in the "worldwide" chargeability will further retrogress, or move backward. This is expected to occur in the summer of 2007. This backward movement is based upon excessive demand for the limited supply of visa numbers. This will adversely affect nationals of India and China.
Double Dipping
Another problem important to note is one of �doubling dipping� for visa numbers by some individuals. As explained by Mr. Oppenheim, if an employment-based beneficiary filed for adjustment of status in the U.S. and for consular processing overseas, that individual could acquire two visa numbers if both cases are approved. This would result in a wasted immigrant visa number. As a result of this scenario, the DOS and the USCIS are planning a system that would coordinate their visa number allocation, so that each will be aware if the other has already issued a visa number for a particular individual, to prevent waste of this kind.
CONCLUSION
We appreciate Mr. Oppenheim's continued willingness to address matters related to visa numbers and the Visa Bulletin. The lack of employment-based visa numbers is a source of great frustration for many and Mr. Oppenheim's predictions do not assuage that feeling. It is better to have an understanding of the reality of the situation, however, than to operate in ignorance or with unrealistic expectations. The shortage of visa numbers, once again, underscores the need for legislation in this area, to increase the numbers, change the counting of the numbers (from one per person to one per family), or to revamp the system entirely.
This trickling effect was already discussed. It is from murthy.com .
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF RETROGRESSION
Mr. Oppenheim discussed the historical background that has led to the current retrogression situation. Retrogression is not something new or unfamiliar in immigration law, as long-time MurthyDotCom and MurthyBulletin readers may recall. For many, however, who may have become involved in the green card process since 2001, it is new and, of course, highly problematic. Employment-based (or EB) numbers were current from 2001 through 2005 due to a legislative "fix." This legislation authorized prior, unused immigrant visa numbers from several earlier years to be recaptured and put back into the immigration system. That quota of recaptured numbers was exhausted during Fiscal Year (FY) 2005. As a result, in FYs 2005, 2006 and 2007 we have witnessed severe backlogs in the EB3 categories for all countries and, starting in FY2006, in the EB2 categories for China and India.
PREDICTIONS FOR EB IMMIGRANT VISA NUMBERS
Employment-Based First Preference / EB1
Mr. Oppenheim stated that the employment-based first preference (EB1) category is expected to remain current for all countries of chargeability, including India and China. This is likely throughout the remainder of FY2007 (ending September 30, 2007).
Mr. Oppenheim explained what he referred to as the �trickling effect� of unused visa numbers between EB categories. This trickling effect has resulted in the EB1 category's having remained current. The numbers in the employment-based fourth preference (EB4) and employment-based fifth preference (EB5) categories that are unused are transferred up to the EB1 category. Without this trickling affect, the EB1 category would not remain current for India and China.
This also has an impact on EB2, as unused EB1 numbers trickle down to EB2. There are not enough numbers for India and China, however, to allow the EB2 for these two countries to become current. But it has helped to move EB2 forward for these two countries, to some extent.
Employment-Based Second Preference / EB2
The employment-based second preference (EB2) category is expected to remain at its current cutoff dates for nationals of India and China. These dates have been stagnant at April 22, 2005 for China and January 8, 2003 for India for a few months.
Employment-Based Third Preference / EB3
No forward movement is expected for the employment-based third preference (EB3) category. In fact, as predicted in the March Visa Bulletin and confirmed by Mr. Oppenheim, there is a strong possibility that the EB3 numbers that are not in the "worldwide" chargeability will further retrogress, or move backward. This is expected to occur in the summer of 2007. This backward movement is based upon excessive demand for the limited supply of visa numbers. This will adversely affect nationals of India and China.
Double Dipping
Another problem important to note is one of �doubling dipping� for visa numbers by some individuals. As explained by Mr. Oppenheim, if an employment-based beneficiary filed for adjustment of status in the U.S. and for consular processing overseas, that individual could acquire two visa numbers if both cases are approved. This would result in a wasted immigrant visa number. As a result of this scenario, the DOS and the USCIS are planning a system that would coordinate their visa number allocation, so that each will be aware if the other has already issued a visa number for a particular individual, to prevent waste of this kind.
CONCLUSION
We appreciate Mr. Oppenheim's continued willingness to address matters related to visa numbers and the Visa Bulletin. The lack of employment-based visa numbers is a source of great frustration for many and Mr. Oppenheim's predictions do not assuage that feeling. It is better to have an understanding of the reality of the situation, however, than to operate in ignorance or with unrealistic expectations. The shortage of visa numbers, once again, underscores the need for legislation in this area, to increase the numbers, change the counting of the numbers (from one per person to one per family), or to revamp the system entirely.
This trickling effect was already discussed. It is from murthy.com .
more...
Munna Bhai
01-09 12:44 PM
I have filed I-140 in May 2007 and it is still pending. Is there anyone in this same situation??Please let me know to whom to contact.
-M
-M
nashim
04-07 02:35 PM
gcisadawg,
I am unable to answer your question since I do not know, anyway I am also planning to invite my mother-in-law, what are documents required for B-2 visa? Do I need to send original birth certificate? Thanks
I am unable to answer your question since I do not know, anyway I am also planning to invite my mother-in-law, what are documents required for B-2 visa? Do I need to send original birth certificate? Thanks
more...
singhsa3
11-15 09:56 AM
As I've said earlier. IV is you, you are IV. If you are in the similar situation as we are and by expressing your desire to do something about it, you automatically become a member of IV.
But we do use this yahoo group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/immigrationvoiceny/
to communicate with our members. So please sign up...
Hello IV members : I am mad about discrimination agst Indian and China born applicants for GC processing times. I have read many posts in here and it states to join tri-state chapters .. What does it mean? How can we be part of this.. Pls. elaborate.
Thanks
But we do use this yahoo group http://groups.yahoo.com/group/immigrationvoiceny/
to communicate with our members. So please sign up...
Hello IV members : I am mad about discrimination agst Indian and China born applicants for GC processing times. I have read many posts in here and it states to join tri-state chapters .. What does it mean? How can we be part of this.. Pls. elaborate.
Thanks
reachinus
12-26 08:34 AM
Hi There,
In the substitute you have to report only the pay that you have received and you have to report to DOL if your Employer doesn't pay you atleast for the time that he got paid from the client. But logically speaking he has to pay you from the date you are on his H1.
In the substitute you have to report only the pay that you have received and you have to report to DOL if your Employer doesn't pay you atleast for the time that he got paid from the client. But logically speaking he has to pay you from the date you are on his H1.
ravi.shah
02-07 11:01 AM
link??
Live Video - C-SPAN2 | C-SPAN (http://www.c-span.org/Live-Video/C-SPAN2/)
Live Video - C-SPAN2 | C-SPAN (http://www.c-span.org/Live-Video/C-SPAN2/)
gcphul
12-14 03:14 PM
Hi Sam,Munnabhai
Yes i am planning to start fresh GC and h1-extensio, The reason i am expecting to reject bcoz mine LC-sub and on top of 1,2,3 Mentioned RFE's. Case me Dham Nahi hai.
Yes i am planning to start fresh GC and h1-extensio, The reason i am expecting to reject bcoz mine LC-sub and on top of 1,2,3 Mentioned RFE's. Case me Dham Nahi hai.
Blog Feeds
12-18 09:50 AM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
Last month I blogged about my convoluted math--trying to figure out the wait times for various countries, in various categories for Employment Based visas. The January Visa Bulletin was (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4597.html) just issued, with this explanation:
D. EXPLANATION OF THE NUMERICAL CONTROL SYSTEM AND CUT-DATE PROJECTIONS WHAT CAUSES THE ESTABLISHMENT OF CUT-OFF DATES?
The Visa Office (VO)subdivides the annual preference and foreign state limitations specified in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) into twelve monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily qualified applicants that have been reported to VO are compared each month with the numbers available for the next regular allotment 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 Employment Third preference monthly target is 3,000 and there are only 1,000 applicants, the category is considered "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 Employment Third preference monthly target is 3,000 and there are 8,000 applicants, a cut-off date would be established so that only 3,000 numbers would be used, and the cut-off date would be the priority date of the 3,001st applicant.
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become qualified at their own initiative and convenience and upon the completion of various processing requirements. Therefore, it is extremely important to remember that 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 qualified each month, and consideration of other variables. Demand for visa numbers can fluctuate from one month to another, with an inevitable impact on cut-off dates.
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.
WILL THERE BE ANY ADDITIONAL CUT-OFF DATES FOR FOREIGN STATES IN THE EMPLOYMENT FIRST OR SECOND PREFERENCE CATEGORIES?
At this time it is unlikely that there will be any cut-off dates in the Employment First preferences. It also appears unlikely that it will be necessary to establish a cut-off date other than those already in effect for the Second preference category. Cut-off dates apply to the China and India Second preference categories due to heavy demand, and each has the potential to become "unavailable" should demand cause the annual limit for that category to be reached.
INA Section 202(a)(5) provides that if total demand will be insufficient to use all available numbers in a particular employment preference category in a calendar quarter, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limits. For example, if it is determined that based on the level of demand being received at that time there would be otherwise unused numbers in the Employment Second preference category, then numbers could be provided to oversubscribed countries without regard to per-country limitations. Should that occur, the same cut-off date would be applied to each country, since numbers must be provided strictly in priority date order regardless of chargeability. In this instance, greater number use by one country would indicate a higher rate of demand by applicants from that country with earlier priority dates.
Should Section 202(a)(5) be applied, the rate of number use in the Employment preference category would continue to be monitored to determine whether subsequent adjustments are needed in visa availability for oversubscribed countries. This action provides the best possible assurance that all available Employment preference numbers will be used, while still ensuring that numbers remain available for applicants from all other countries that have not yet reached their per-country limit.
WHAT ARE THE PROJECTIONS FOR CUT-OFF DATE MOVEMENT IN THE EMPLOYMENT PREFERENCES FOR THE REMAINDER OF FY-2010?
Based on current indications of demand, the best case scenarios for cut-off dates which will be reached by the end of FY-2010 are as follows:
Employment Second:
China: July through October 2005
India: February through early March 2005
If Section 202(a)(5)were to
apply: China and India: October through December 2005
Employment Third:
Worldwide: April through August 2005
China: June through September 2003
India: January through February 2002
Mexico: January through June 2004
Philippines: April through August 2005
Please be advised that the above date ranges are only estimates which
are subject to fluctuations in demand during the coming months. The actual
future cut-off dates cannot be guaranteed, and it is possible that some annual
limits could be reached prior to the end of the fiscal year.
So, there you have it. The "official" guesses for FY 2010! It would be terrific, however, if the Visa Bulletin would tell us, based upon its knowledge of pending cases, and estimates on time, how long a case would take in the given categories, if started today. When the Department of State releases THAT information, then perhaps Congress will sit up and take notice that we are facing a literal crisis in our employment based immigration program, and hurting ourselves as a result.https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-2329407886555470879?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/12/from-department-of-state-with-love-visa.html)
Last month I blogged about my convoluted math--trying to figure out the wait times for various countries, in various categories for Employment Based visas. The January Visa Bulletin was (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4597.html) just issued, with this explanation:
D. EXPLANATION OF THE NUMERICAL CONTROL SYSTEM AND CUT-DATE PROJECTIONS WHAT CAUSES THE ESTABLISHMENT OF CUT-OFF DATES?
The Visa Office (VO)subdivides the annual preference and foreign state limitations specified in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) into twelve monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily qualified applicants that have been reported to VO are compared each month with the numbers available for the next regular allotment 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 Employment Third preference monthly target is 3,000 and there are only 1,000 applicants, the category is considered "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 Employment Third preference monthly target is 3,000 and there are 8,000 applicants, a cut-off date would be established so that only 3,000 numbers would be used, and the cut-off date would be the priority date of the 3,001st applicant.
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become qualified at their own initiative and convenience and upon the completion of various processing requirements. Therefore, it is extremely important to remember that 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 qualified each month, and consideration of other variables. Demand for visa numbers can fluctuate from one month to another, with an inevitable impact on cut-off dates.
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.
WILL THERE BE ANY ADDITIONAL CUT-OFF DATES FOR FOREIGN STATES IN THE EMPLOYMENT FIRST OR SECOND PREFERENCE CATEGORIES?
At this time it is unlikely that there will be any cut-off dates in the Employment First preferences. It also appears unlikely that it will be necessary to establish a cut-off date other than those already in effect for the Second preference category. Cut-off dates apply to the China and India Second preference categories due to heavy demand, and each has the potential to become "unavailable" should demand cause the annual limit for that category to be reached.
INA Section 202(a)(5) provides that if total demand will be insufficient to use all available numbers in a particular employment preference category in a calendar quarter, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limits. For example, if it is determined that based on the level of demand being received at that time there would be otherwise unused numbers in the Employment Second preference category, then numbers could be provided to oversubscribed countries without regard to per-country limitations. Should that occur, the same cut-off date would be applied to each country, since numbers must be provided strictly in priority date order regardless of chargeability. In this instance, greater number use by one country would indicate a higher rate of demand by applicants from that country with earlier priority dates.
Should Section 202(a)(5) be applied, the rate of number use in the Employment preference category would continue to be monitored to determine whether subsequent adjustments are needed in visa availability for oversubscribed countries. This action provides the best possible assurance that all available Employment preference numbers will be used, while still ensuring that numbers remain available for applicants from all other countries that have not yet reached their per-country limit.
WHAT ARE THE PROJECTIONS FOR CUT-OFF DATE MOVEMENT IN THE EMPLOYMENT PREFERENCES FOR THE REMAINDER OF FY-2010?
Based on current indications of demand, the best case scenarios for cut-off dates which will be reached by the end of FY-2010 are as follows:
Employment Second:
China: July through October 2005
India: February through early March 2005
If Section 202(a)(5)were to
apply: China and India: October through December 2005
Employment Third:
Worldwide: April through August 2005
China: June through September 2003
India: January through February 2002
Mexico: January through June 2004
Philippines: April through August 2005
Please be advised that the above date ranges are only estimates which
are subject to fluctuations in demand during the coming months. The actual
future cut-off dates cannot be guaranteed, and it is possible that some annual
limits could be reached prior to the end of the fiscal year.
So, there you have it. The "official" guesses for FY 2010! It would be terrific, however, if the Visa Bulletin would tell us, based upon its knowledge of pending cases, and estimates on time, how long a case would take in the given categories, if started today. When the Department of State releases THAT information, then perhaps Congress will sit up and take notice that we are facing a literal crisis in our employment based immigration program, and hurting ourselves as a result.https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-2329407886555470879?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/12/from-department-of-state-with-love-visa.html)
No comments:
Post a Comment