CSPAvictim
07-09 06:30 PM
I came across this law about the departmental control of numerical limitations, and I'd appreciate it if you all could post your interpretations of the same.
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
wallpaper cute cartoon girl characters.
paskal
01-21 02:21 AM
i like the way you did this
i wonder though if it's better to adjust it for depnedents
per USCIS figures the average is 2.5 individuals in a family for each approval
The timeline is stunninh when you put that in.
I will retire or die before a GC......!
i wonder though if it's better to adjust it for depnedents
per USCIS figures the average is 2.5 individuals in a family for each approval
The timeline is stunninh when you put that in.
I will retire or die before a GC......!
pappu
12-18 09:12 AM
Just need a place to vent and share my frustration with this system.
I came to US 12 years ago for undergrad. Got a good job with a fortune 500 company, been with the same company for 8 years. Did my Masters and MBA part time.
Company filed paper work for GC under EB3 in 2002, but the system was too slow and I decided to take a new role. Had to re-file another appication since i took a new role, but this time in EB2 in '04. 4 years have passed and both applications have only cleared labor.
Not sure when this wait will end. I do hope that this wait and patience is worth it for all of us.
I do hope we see some miracle in 2007.
Welcome to the club.
everyone is in the same boat. Pls try to get more people like us in this organization. Together we can all make the miracle happen in 2007
I came to US 12 years ago for undergrad. Got a good job with a fortune 500 company, been with the same company for 8 years. Did my Masters and MBA part time.
Company filed paper work for GC under EB3 in 2002, but the system was too slow and I decided to take a new role. Had to re-file another appication since i took a new role, but this time in EB2 in '04. 4 years have passed and both applications have only cleared labor.
Not sure when this wait will end. I do hope that this wait and patience is worth it for all of us.
I do hope we see some miracle in 2007.
Welcome to the club.
everyone is in the same boat. Pls try to get more people like us in this organization. Together we can all make the miracle happen in 2007
2011 cute cartoon girl characters.
aadimanav
09-10 10:17 PM
Updates from Greg Siskind's
[Update] My report below is not correct. The initial report I received on the markup was not correct and the markup process was not competed today. I believe work is going to continue tomorrow or Friday and hopefully this will be done by the weekend. Apologies.]
[Update] My report below is not correct. The initial report I received on the markup was not correct and the markup process was not competed today. I believe work is going to continue tomorrow or Friday and hopefully this will be done by the weekend. Apologies.]
more...
Dakota Newfie
07-03 06:22 AM
...that the system is severely backlogged and needs repair but to say it is unfair to limit the number of immigrants from one country does not make sense. Removing the per country limit would allow one or two countries to dominate the EB system because their high populations allow them to produce more skilled labor. So removing the per country limit would remove the "bias" off these countries and move it to the ones with lower populations; so, in essence the discrimination would be reversed? Maybe a point-based system that incorporates a per country score would be better?
boreal
04-20 09:36 PM
Hi Puneet and Krishna, thanks for calling me. I will be joining you guys tomorrow and meet u up at Wal-mart around 3:30
more...
Legal
07-20 10:38 PM
I'm having less and less faith in the claims made by members that USCIS is inefficient and clueless. ok, they have been and continue to be in many areas:):). However, they have a game plan this time. In retrospect, we know they had a game plan in June 07 also.
There are several unknown variables (repeatedly and extensively discussed here)which make accurate prediction impossible for us. However, USCIS has the numbers of RIPE CASES. And they moved the dates based on the availability of remaining GC numbers for this fiscal AND the ripe cases.
They could have moved it to just Dec 2005, instead they moved it all the way to June 2006.
Best\ optimistic scenario- Most EB-2-I cases upto June 2006 will be adjudicated before Oct 1st.
Conservative scenario-Upto at least Dec 2005 PD all cases will be adjudicated , and a few CP cases into early 2006 will be adjudicated. With spillovers happening in each quarter, the PD should continue to move.
There are several unknown variables (repeatedly and extensively discussed here)which make accurate prediction impossible for us. However, USCIS has the numbers of RIPE CASES. And they moved the dates based on the availability of remaining GC numbers for this fiscal AND the ripe cases.
They could have moved it to just Dec 2005, instead they moved it all the way to June 2006.
Best\ optimistic scenario- Most EB-2-I cases upto June 2006 will be adjudicated before Oct 1st.
Conservative scenario-Upto at least Dec 2005 PD all cases will be adjudicated , and a few CP cases into early 2006 will be adjudicated. With spillovers happening in each quarter, the PD should continue to move.
2010 Girl character, cartoon
masouds
02-15 04:24 PM
Are you sure this is the reason why they have per country limits :confused:
Or you dont want that way :D
Well, I do have a vested interest in maintaining status quo, at least with regard to the per country caps. :)
But, working in one of the Valley companies, I see a lot of people from India and China who just don't mix with rest of the people, say, from Poland or Germany or France or Iran. US (the whole government, including USCIS) likes the idea of 'Melting pot' when it comes to immigration. When you melt a lot of metals with each other, you don't end up with a fragmented alloy, since you've capped the amount of each metal in your pot. That is how you get 'Little Italy's and 'China Town's and the latest one in San Jose, CA: 'Saigon Business district'
Or you dont want that way :D
Well, I do have a vested interest in maintaining status quo, at least with regard to the per country caps. :)
But, working in one of the Valley companies, I see a lot of people from India and China who just don't mix with rest of the people, say, from Poland or Germany or France or Iran. US (the whole government, including USCIS) likes the idea of 'Melting pot' when it comes to immigration. When you melt a lot of metals with each other, you don't end up with a fragmented alloy, since you've capped the amount of each metal in your pot. That is how you get 'Little Italy's and 'China Town's and the latest one in San Jose, CA: 'Saigon Business district'
more...
anilsal
12-12 09:37 AM
Nobody knows whether congressional action is needed to allow I-485 to be filed during retrogression?
hair cute cartoon girl characters.
javadeveloper
05-15 02:07 AM
Any Idea about the following MBA Distance Leaning Courses from India
1.SCDL-Symbiosis center for distance learning
2.IGNOU - ndira Gandhi National Open University
3.ICFA
4.NMIMS - Narsee Monjee Institute of Management Studies
Or any other institutes from India with reasonable fee structure.
1.SCDL-Symbiosis center for distance learning
2.IGNOU - ndira Gandhi National Open University
3.ICFA
4.NMIMS - Narsee Monjee Institute of Management Studies
Or any other institutes from India with reasonable fee structure.
more...
RNGC
09-18 09:19 PM
All I want to stress are these keywords in all our prints "Legal - Highly Skilled"
hot stock photo : A cute cartoon
like_watching_paint_dry
01-19 04:26 PM
Of course. Judges are the ones who interpret the laws. Officers just do what they are instructed to do. My point was just out of curiosity, how I think this law is being interpreted.
But of course. My opinion is not only not to argue with officers, but don't even talk to them. When I feel that officer wants some "conversation" with me, my favorite response is "sorry officer, me no understand, no speak english". period. Smile to his face, keep saying "sorry". Don't show any extra document - just only what is required, nothing extra. Officer can be asking any questions, just hand him business card of your lawyer, say "my lawyer, talk him". as worse English you will use, as better it will be for you. My experience.
When I first entered United States I was kept at secondary check for 4 hours (1999, IAD, Virginia). They kept asking me all kinda questions, it was no end. Finally I got pissed, I said "Sorry, I don't speak English good" and started playing with them. I took my dictionary and starting looking up every word. My next answer took 5 minutes. In next 5 minutes a woman walked to me, handed my documents and said "Welcome to America".
LOL. That's an interesting approach. I've heard of a story where a hispanic dude who had a beer breath actually get out of a breathalyzer test and eventually get off a potential DUI conviction because of lack of evidence. His excuse was he could not understand the instructions the officer was giving...
"no comprende..."
"put your mouth here and phoo phoo ..."
"no comprende..."
But of course. My opinion is not only not to argue with officers, but don't even talk to them. When I feel that officer wants some "conversation" with me, my favorite response is "sorry officer, me no understand, no speak english". period. Smile to his face, keep saying "sorry". Don't show any extra document - just only what is required, nothing extra. Officer can be asking any questions, just hand him business card of your lawyer, say "my lawyer, talk him". as worse English you will use, as better it will be for you. My experience.
When I first entered United States I was kept at secondary check for 4 hours (1999, IAD, Virginia). They kept asking me all kinda questions, it was no end. Finally I got pissed, I said "Sorry, I don't speak English good" and started playing with them. I took my dictionary and starting looking up every word. My next answer took 5 minutes. In next 5 minutes a woman walked to me, handed my documents and said "Welcome to America".
LOL. That's an interesting approach. I've heard of a story where a hispanic dude who had a beer breath actually get out of a breathalyzer test and eventually get off a potential DUI conviction because of lack of evidence. His excuse was he could not understand the instructions the officer was giving...
"no comprende..."
"put your mouth here and phoo phoo ..."
"no comprende..."
more...
house CARTOON CHARACTERS - TWO CUTE
keshtwo
08-15 05:22 PM
Well, I mean no offense to anybody but why is EB3 ROW so far back while EB2 India and China are as per June bulletin or better?
I thought for India the approved cases were 5 times the country quota for 2007? Good for those guys that were approved but I still don't get it why ROW is 2002!
yeah pretty weird. What does that mean to spillover in next June on wards? I hope its not a negative, too soon to tell though.
I thought for India the approved cases were 5 times the country quota for 2007? Good for those guys that were approved but I still don't get it why ROW is 2002!
yeah pretty weird. What does that mean to spillover in next June on wards? I hope its not a negative, too soon to tell though.
tattoo cute cartoon girl characters.
GCHPLC
10-31 03:14 PM
It is EB3 India vote, is it right? I can't place my vote if I am from another country...
more...
pictures girlfriend cute cartoon girl
BlueSunD
02-27 12:12 AM
Well this is what I�ve got so far, still a lot of things missing or to be fixed :)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v55/BlueSunD/Maya/NeWmetro02.jpg
Sorry if it looks kind of blurry, but it�s just a preview render :) I would love to see how every body else is doing........... well, great I guess, but I�m just so curious! :D
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v55/BlueSunD/Maya/NeWmetro02.jpg
Sorry if it looks kind of blurry, but it�s just a preview render :) I would love to see how every body else is doing........... well, great I guess, but I�m just so curious! :D
dresses Cute Cartoon Girl in a Dress
hemal555
02-05 07:09 PM
Varsha, I can make it for the meeting in Warren. Thanks Hemal
more...
makeup cute cartoon girl characters.
capriol
04-25 10:55 AM
Dear Googler and others:
Since there has been some confusion about the receipt date versus the notice date in terms of the centres processing the 485s for final adjudication, my query is that which date (the receipt or the notice date) actually determines processing? Kindly let me know. Thanks.
Since there has been some confusion about the receipt date versus the notice date in terms of the centres processing the 485s for final adjudication, my query is that which date (the receipt or the notice date) actually determines processing? Kindly let me know. Thanks.
girlfriend as Cute Cartoon Girls on
24fps
02-19 07:59 PM
read my lips, THIS BILL WILL NEVER PASS
its so redundant that even NumbersUSA haven't even reported.
its so redundant that even NumbersUSA haven't even reported.
hairstyles Girl Cartoon Character
deepimpact
09-10 01:53 PM
If USCIS wants to do another JULY 2007 they never learnt their lession. With the Quarterly/annual quota I dont think USCIS legally can make EB2 current. I hate another JULY 2007 for sure.
They can make a category current when Demand < Supply. So once all I-485s prior to 2007 are approved the monthly demand data they publish will show demand Prior to CY2011 = 200. So unless they use approved I-140 to determine demand , DOS will make the dates current(even if for 1 month). As long as USCIS uses pending I-485 data to determine demand, the July 2007 fiasco will keep on repeating every 3-4 years. The key here is to have USCIS provide the actual demand (people with approved I-140s). It was mentioned somewhere that the current USCIS database is not capable of sorting the I-140s by country of chargebility and hence the I-140 data can't be used to determine per country demand.
They can make a category current when Demand < Supply. So once all I-485s prior to 2007 are approved the monthly demand data they publish will show demand Prior to CY2011 = 200. So unless they use approved I-140 to determine demand , DOS will make the dates current(even if for 1 month). As long as USCIS uses pending I-485 data to determine demand, the July 2007 fiasco will keep on repeating every 3-4 years. The key here is to have USCIS provide the actual demand (people with approved I-140s). It was mentioned somewhere that the current USCIS database is not capable of sorting the I-140s by country of chargebility and hence the I-140 data can't be used to determine per country demand.
mallu
02-15 04:25 PM
What is the current % of India/China folks in USA now that threaten to affect diversity ? Also how many (% ) from Italy,Ireland,UK etc ?
Anything published ? Just curiosity ( not questioning any current laws )..
Anything published ? Just curiosity ( not questioning any current laws )..
bskrishna
07-03 01:32 PM
AFAIK, this does not work for people who are already in the US. One has to work in their native or different county to be eligible for the EB1 managerial position here. Some one might have sneaked away this way at some time. But this is definitely not happening on a large scale as EB1 is current for all countries for quite some time. If a lot of folks are getting away, EB1 cannot be current for long time.
Agree that there are not many. The companies that do them, typically do not sponsor for GC that often (comparing the H,L nos to their GC nos).
Agree that there are not many. The companies that do them, typically do not sponsor for GC that often (comparing the H,L nos to their GC nos).