vbkris77
04-10 12:28 PM
What you said is absolutely true. EB1 Last year and the year before saw lot more approvals than usual. My reasoning is that even though EB1 was current for all along, they never really approved I140s to give them GC. So In the overall clearing of I140s, CIS cleared lot more EB1 cases and became approved during last 2 years. If you look at the I140 completion in the dash board, it will be very much clear that the completions came down to 4 digits for each month from 5 digits. Receipts continued to be less than 5K per month.
This year, we may see a big dip in EB1 cases and larger EB2 spillover. EB4 spillover is ruled out after this bulletin.
Here are the details for last year and years before:
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
This year, we may see a big dip in EB1 cases and larger EB2 spillover. EB4 spillover is ruled out after this bulletin.
Here are the details for last year and years before:
(Thanks to user "sangiano" on : link: FY2009 Visa Data, Spillover to EB2 - Will it be Similar FY2010 (http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i485-eb/498198953/fy2009-visa-data-spillover-to-eb2-will-it-be-similar-fy2010))
Employment Visas 2009
Total Employment Visas for FY2009 = 141,020
Theoretical values without spillover
EB1 28.6% = 40,332
EB2 28.6% = 40,332
EB3 28.6% = 40,332
EB4 7.1% = 10,012
EB5 7.1% = 10,012
Actual values with spillover
EB1 40,978 = 29.1% received c.650 spillup visa used
EB2 46,034 = 32.6% received c.5,700 spillover visas used
EB3 39,791 = 28.2% received c.550 less visas than quota
EB4 9,999 = 7.1% Zero spillup visas to give
EB5 4,218 = 3.0% c. 5,800 spillup visas to give
What is noteworthy is the fact that spillup/spillover visas were only available from EB5.
In addition, EB1 actually consumed spillup visas and did not contribute any spillover visas as a result.
This implies that the total spillover visas available to the 7% limited countries was only c.7,500. Since 5,800 came from EB5, less 650 used by EB1, this gives a subtotal of 5,150. In turn, this implies that there were only 7,500 - 5,150 = 2,350 as spillover from EB2-ROW. In the worst case the difference is entirely from EB5.
I think it gives food for thought and shows the difficulty of trying to second guess visa consumption in Categories that are always current. I accept it might be easier to get a handle on non-NIW EB2 because of the PERM data available for ROW.
I'm not sure why FY2010 would be much different, at least for EB1 spillover.
Additional notes from subsequent posts:
There was significant spillover in FY2007 because (based on 154,497 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 26,806 out of a possible 44,186 available visas.
EB4 only used 4,794 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
EB5 only used 793 out of a possible 10,969 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 33,731 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2007 that mostly went vertically to EB3.
There was significant spillover in FY2008 because (based on 162,949 total EB visas) :
EB1 only used 36,590 out of a possible 46,603 available visas.
EB4 only used 7,648 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
EB5 only used 1,443 out of a possible 11,569 available visas.
That gives a potential spillover of 24,060 visas to categories below EB1. In FY2008 that all went to EB2.
The amount *was* smaller in FY2009 because (based on 141,020 total EB visas)
EB1 used 40,978 which was more than the available visas of 40,332 (i.e. it used some of the spillup from EB4/EB5).
EB4 used 9,999 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e it pretty much maxed out)
EB5 only used 4,218 out of a possible 10,012 available visas. (i.e. much higher than previous years)
That gives a potential spillover to EB2 of 5,161 visas, which is substantially lower than previous years.
This is all his analysis based entirely on historic data (no predictions here; just what has already happened). All credit of analysis goes to him. I never crunched a single number; I am just an "integrater" of the info. Please also note that now we have found out that the word "spillover" should actually be "fall across and down"
Hope this was the info you were asking for.
wallpaper eatles lyrics john lennon
needhelp!
09-18 11:47 PM
I agree,I was a bit annoyed when the congressman started talking about the illegals.. it was totally not related to us.
actaccord
03-15 07:04 PM
/\/\/\/\
2011 lil wayne lyrics quotes. lil
mayhemt
09-10 08:06 AM
I get this question every day, what are the hopes for EB3-I, or rather are there any hopes for EB3-I? Are we fighting a lost battle?
What do people here really think?
1. There are X % chance that there would be some immigration bill that would help us and we will have GC in next couple of years?
2. Keep going on with life as is, till the time we can renew EAD every 2 years, and AP every year.
3. Wait for another X years, and then go back.
4. Hopefully my son/daughter will be 21 by 2020, and will sponsor my GC.
--- Hoping family based GC would still be allowed by then
5. Don't know, confused?
6. Look for entrepreneurial options & file in EB5. You get freedom from daily-job-rat-race and visa/GC hassles.
What do people here really think?
1. There are X % chance that there would be some immigration bill that would help us and we will have GC in next couple of years?
2. Keep going on with life as is, till the time we can renew EAD every 2 years, and AP every year.
3. Wait for another X years, and then go back.
4. Hopefully my son/daughter will be 21 by 2020, and will sponsor my GC.
--- Hoping family based GC would still be allowed by then
5. Don't know, confused?
6. Look for entrepreneurial options & file in EB5. You get freedom from daily-job-rat-race and visa/GC hassles.
more...
gc28262
03-11 07:49 AM
For me, I am like everyone else on the forum. I want my GC now :D
The point I am making is we are all enthusiastic members willing to do whatever is needed to achieve our goals. However if our actions cause more hardship for us, I am against it.
We need to pursue our interests at the right time. IV core has counsel to advise them regarding strategy and timing. We should make use of that resources for deciding the right timing.
I believe whoever opposes immigration in this country are racists. This country being made up of immigrants, nobody has the moral right to oppose immigration. unfortunately we have a populist, immature president in the office. Anti-immigrants are taking advantage of that. Mr Change is interested in millions of prospective votes from illegal immigrants only. Despite being Harvard educated, he doesn't have any sympathy for us.
The point I am making is we are all enthusiastic members willing to do whatever is needed to achieve our goals. However if our actions cause more hardship for us, I am against it.
We need to pursue our interests at the right time. IV core has counsel to advise them regarding strategy and timing. We should make use of that resources for deciding the right timing.
I believe whoever opposes immigration in this country are racists. This country being made up of immigrants, nobody has the moral right to oppose immigration. unfortunately we have a populist, immature president in the office. Anti-immigrants are taking advantage of that. Mr Change is interested in millions of prospective votes from illegal immigrants only. Despite being Harvard educated, he doesn't have any sympathy for us.
pappu
12-18 09:27 AM
Hello Everyone,
Can we have the conference call again on Wednesday, 12/20/2006 at 9.00 PM EDT. Also, let me know if you think its a good idea to create an NJ yahoo group so we can all get notified instead of checking back in here every now and then.
Thanks,
Varsha
Hello Varsha,
Pls organize the conf call and PM everyone in the group. If you like you can start a thread on the main forum to announce this call so that memebers can attend. We need members to actively participate in state chapters. It is very easy to feel frustrated with retrogression and complain but in order to fix the problem we all need to work on it.
Can we have the conference call again on Wednesday, 12/20/2006 at 9.00 PM EDT. Also, let me know if you think its a good idea to create an NJ yahoo group so we can all get notified instead of checking back in here every now and then.
Thanks,
Varsha
Hello Varsha,
Pls organize the conf call and PM everyone in the group. If you like you can start a thread on the main forum to announce this call so that memebers can attend. We need members to actively participate in state chapters. It is very easy to feel frustrated with retrogression and complain but in order to fix the problem we all need to work on it.
more...
StarSun
02-23 08:52 AM
Poster to spread the word.. (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/images/a/a7/Myposter.pdf)
2010 i love you eatles lyrics
bestia
01-19 01:28 PM
...
I did argue about the scenario if I ended up losing my passport and vital documents, which is why I had made copies. He shook his head and repeated the same - NO PHOTOCOPIES OF OFFICIAL US IMMIGRATION DOCUMENTS FOR PERSONAL USE.
....
Presenting copies of your documents to government officials is not PERSONAL use. You could argue that. Personal use is if you would be playing monopoly with copies of your documents with your friends. But if you make a copy of US document for the intent to present to US official and not to misrepresent the original document, it is not "personal use" and it is not illegal. That's why lawyers are suggesting making and having copies.
I did argue about the scenario if I ended up losing my passport and vital documents, which is why I had made copies. He shook his head and repeated the same - NO PHOTOCOPIES OF OFFICIAL US IMMIGRATION DOCUMENTS FOR PERSONAL USE.
....
Presenting copies of your documents to government officials is not PERSONAL use. You could argue that. Personal use is if you would be playing monopoly with copies of your documents with your friends. But if you make a copy of US document for the intent to present to US official and not to misrepresent the original document, it is not "personal use" and it is not illegal. That's why lawyers are suggesting making and having copies.
more...
veni001
03-11 10:38 PM
No change for EB2..... India
EB3 moved about three months
Category India Most Other Countries
F1 8 July 2004 8 July 2004
FX 1 Jan 2005 1 Jan 2005
F2A 1 June 2006 1 June 2006
F2B 1 March 2002 1 March 2002
F3 22 May 2001 22 May 2001
F4 1 March 2000 1 March 2000
E1 Current Current
E2 1 February 2005 Current
E3 8 September 2001 1 February 2003
EW 1 June 2001 1 June 2001
E4 Current Current
E4-Religious Current Current
Source
Cut Off Dates- Consulate General of the United States Mumbai, India (http://mumbai.usconsulate.gov/cut_off_dates.html)
EB3 moved about three months
Category India Most Other Countries
F1 8 July 2004 8 July 2004
FX 1 Jan 2005 1 Jan 2005
F2A 1 June 2006 1 June 2006
F2B 1 March 2002 1 March 2002
F3 22 May 2001 22 May 2001
F4 1 March 2000 1 March 2000
E1 Current Current
E2 1 February 2005 Current
E3 8 September 2001 1 February 2003
EW 1 June 2001 1 June 2001
E4 Current Current
E4-Religious Current Current
Source
Cut Off Dates- Consulate General of the United States Mumbai, India (http://mumbai.usconsulate.gov/cut_off_dates.html)
hair Beatles#39; lyrics and
we_can
12-27 12:32 PM
Posted on IndiaGrid.com
http://www.indiagrid.com/cgi-bin/viewarticle.cgi?dmmy=ok&postid=6560&stq=&cat=art
and
http://www.indiagrid.com/cgi-bin/viewpost.cgi?dmmy=ok&postid=85359&stq=&cat=ser&subcatid=seo
http://www.indiagrid.com/cgi-bin/viewarticle.cgi?dmmy=ok&postid=6560&stq=&cat=art
and
http://www.indiagrid.com/cgi-bin/viewpost.cgi?dmmy=ok&postid=85359&stq=&cat=ser&subcatid=seo
more...
kumarc123
03-12 10:43 AM
$25 a month is reasonable. What people want it GC in $25 in less than 6 months. Somehow these same guys do not mind paying lawyers $700 for EAD filing which they could do themselves. In other words they trust lawyers who are clearly have a self interest in you not getting a GC but will not trust one of your kind because these guys think their crummy $25 is being flinched.
At least the money is put to some use and results are tangible, how about the results in here?
Refer to my posts.
IV core needs to explain!
At least the money is put to some use and results are tangible, how about the results in here?
Refer to my posts.
IV core needs to explain!
hot eatles quotes character
prioritydate
06-29 05:06 PM
I am really happy for all those people who got their GC :)
more...
house eatles lyrics mirage
anu007us
07-28 04:09 PM
Never join Alphanet Corp (Alpha Net Consulting LLC (http://www.anetcorp.com))... Stay away from this fraud company... Immigration fraud..
tattoo taylor swift lyrics quotes.
sbeyyala
12-27 05:43 PM
Great Idea. I spoke to Southern CA Telugu association executive members requesting them to forward this to all there members, I will update this forum once this message is sent out to all the members.
more...
pictures The Love Quotes Encyclopedia
desi3933
01-31 07:55 AM
So does this mean that pending AOS has no meaning?
How about EAD.......if she switches to EAD in Feb with same employer and does not work from Mrach onward then?
My (mis)understanding was that as long as one has a pending AOS one can be in US without a job and paystub as long as one has a pending AOS.
Thanks for your help.
Well, you did not disclose before that she has pending I-485. That changes the whole scenario and provides lot more options.
She should change her status to AOS only by filing a new I-9 (provide EAD details) with her employer ASAP. This will cover her any period of unpaid leave (or benching). She can get back to H1 status by re-entering on H1 visa.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
How about EAD.......if she switches to EAD in Feb with same employer and does not work from Mrach onward then?
My (mis)understanding was that as long as one has a pending AOS one can be in US without a job and paystub as long as one has a pending AOS.
Thanks for your help.
Well, you did not disclose before that she has pending I-485. That changes the whole scenario and provides lot more options.
She should change her status to AOS only by filing a new I-9 (provide EAD details) with her employer ASAP. This will cover her any period of unpaid leave (or benching). She can get back to H1 status by re-entering on H1 visa.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
dresses eatles lyrics
leo2606
08-15 09:44 PM
That is true any bodys priority date before that date and cleared FBI name check, finger printing they will be given GC
What do these dates mean? If they are dates for who can apply in Sept, then all (those who could) have filed their AOS in July/August. Do they mean that in Sept 07 USCIS will be approving GC for those within these dates?
What do these dates mean? If they are dates for who can apply in Sept, then all (those who could) have filed their AOS in July/August. Do they mean that in Sept 07 USCIS will be approving GC for those within these dates?
more...
makeup john lennon eatles lyrics
xlr8r
06-11 08:55 AM
Done.
girlfriend by The Beatles
nomi
12-13 01:24 PM
All , this subject has been raised very often and every time new members join in they start a thread and start questioning it.
- IV has indepth explored and studied this option and have found that this change is not possible administratively.
- we have not just met a lawyer. we have met few lawyers. we also have communicated with USCIS in the past.
- In the past some administrative changes have been done by USCIS, but this change cannot be done by them. All, we already had this idea long long ago and we also thought that why dont we do it if it so simple and then we dont have to go through all the legislative hurdles. But NO it cannot be done by USCIS.
- Faxing USCIS will not work. USCIS does not take policy decisions. We need to approach policy makers to get it done and that is what we are doing. By coming up with ideas, endlessly discussing despite explaination by IV and not working with IV action items we will all go in divergent directions and lose focus on the main action items we want each every member should focus. If you really feel for some idea and want to help, instead of asking IV to give explanation to every question on the forum, contact any of the active IV core members on the forum and bounce ideas. We need people with ideas and also same people willing to work on them too.
- If it was possible to get it done administratively, then in the current Skil bill push we would have/ and lawmakers would also have just asked USCIS to implement it.
Hope this explains this topic. Thanks
Thanks Pappu for explaination. Look like this door is already close. Well let me know if I can do anything to help.
- IV has indepth explored and studied this option and have found that this change is not possible administratively.
- we have not just met a lawyer. we have met few lawyers. we also have communicated with USCIS in the past.
- In the past some administrative changes have been done by USCIS, but this change cannot be done by them. All, we already had this idea long long ago and we also thought that why dont we do it if it so simple and then we dont have to go through all the legislative hurdles. But NO it cannot be done by USCIS.
- Faxing USCIS will not work. USCIS does not take policy decisions. We need to approach policy makers to get it done and that is what we are doing. By coming up with ideas, endlessly discussing despite explaination by IV and not working with IV action items we will all go in divergent directions and lose focus on the main action items we want each every member should focus. If you really feel for some idea and want to help, instead of asking IV to give explanation to every question on the forum, contact any of the active IV core members on the forum and bounce ideas. We need people with ideas and also same people willing to work on them too.
- If it was possible to get it done administratively, then in the current Skil bill push we would have/ and lawmakers would also have just asked USCIS to implement it.
Hope this explains this topic. Thanks
Thanks Pappu for explaination. Look like this door is already close. Well let me know if I can do anything to help.
hairstyles Those Were Beatles Lyrics Btw
prioritydate
12-20 07:42 PM
<If anything like out of status or unauthorized employed happened before your last legal entry into USA (whether is more than 180 days or less than 180 days) IT DOES NOT MATTER and you can adjust status. You are fine. What's important is that "out of status" and "unauthorized stay" periods must not happen after you last entered USA and after you filed your 485 - and if it does happen, then it should be less than 180 days.>
So, logiclife, going with your above statement, I don't have any problem with my adustment of status? My last legal entry to the U.S was Mar, 2006. I applied for AOS in July, 2007. Can you point to any USCIS memo/documents stating the above facts? I was out of status in the year 2001 (more than 180 days).
So, logiclife, going with your above statement, I don't have any problem with my adustment of status? My last legal entry to the U.S was Mar, 2006. I applied for AOS in July, 2007. Can you point to any USCIS memo/documents stating the above facts? I was out of status in the year 2001 (more than 180 days).
gunabcd
07-13 10:57 PM
http://www.murthy.com/chertoff_murthy.html
July 12, 2007
VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS
Michael Chertoff, Esq.
Secretary
Department of Homeland Security
RE: USCIS Decision to Reject I-485 Filings
Dear Mr. Chertoff:
continue
Looks like "Jbpvisa" wanted to win the race of posting this article first, and he/she mis-spelled "Murthy" as Murphy. recently somebody came up with a "Secret News.." which was actually his own far fetched fantasy. I don't understand why some people are so thrilled about throwing around sensational sounding posts ? Isn't that similar to creating a chain email hoax?
July 12, 2007
VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS
Michael Chertoff, Esq.
Secretary
Department of Homeland Security
RE: USCIS Decision to Reject I-485 Filings
Dear Mr. Chertoff:
continue
Looks like "Jbpvisa" wanted to win the race of posting this article first, and he/she mis-spelled "Murthy" as Murphy. recently somebody came up with a "Secret News.." which was actually his own far fetched fantasy. I don't understand why some people are so thrilled about throwing around sensational sounding posts ? Isn't that similar to creating a chain email hoax?
pappu
04-06 07:39 PM
Sure I will give the link..
I know its not fake..because I have 3 people on our floor who came from a visit..who saw these kind of things happening right in front of them (and my friends were GCs so I guess they themselves were left alone).
Now coming to point of posting their experiences themselves..especially in a situation where they were not allowed to enter US, I dont think they have any incentive left to post and seek help from fellow IV..once they are out they are out..
Nothing can bring them back unless they file a new petition and go for stamping..
I can imagine how much pain they might be going through, touchwood if I was to be one ofthem, I dont see myself posting my experience for 3 months or so..
its a different case where someone is inside US and they face a problem, yeah..why not they post straight away, but this is a different territory..we can only expect them to post, its not going to happen or may be rare case.
If we come across a few cases we can explore options. Is there an appeal process? This can be in media and can help future cases. With few case examples, a legal opinion can also be sought if this is legal at POE.
In the absence of real cases, there is no way any action can be taken and it will stay as a forum rumor.
I know its not fake..because I have 3 people on our floor who came from a visit..who saw these kind of things happening right in front of them (and my friends were GCs so I guess they themselves were left alone).
Now coming to point of posting their experiences themselves..especially in a situation where they were not allowed to enter US, I dont think they have any incentive left to post and seek help from fellow IV..once they are out they are out..
Nothing can bring them back unless they file a new petition and go for stamping..
I can imagine how much pain they might be going through, touchwood if I was to be one ofthem, I dont see myself posting my experience for 3 months or so..
its a different case where someone is inside US and they face a problem, yeah..why not they post straight away, but this is a different territory..we can only expect them to post, its not going to happen or may be rare case.
If we come across a few cases we can explore options. Is there an appeal process? This can be in media and can help future cases. With few case examples, a legal opinion can also be sought if this is legal at POE.
In the absence of real cases, there is no way any action can be taken and it will stay as a forum rumor.
0 comments:
Post a Comment