GotGC??
03-09 12:36 PM
No surprises here...from Murthy Bulletin:
2. Employment-Based Visa Number Predictions
We are often asked by our clients at the Murthy Law Firm to predict the movement of immigrant visa numbers. We have some useful information for MurthyDotCom and MurthyBulletin readers in this regard. 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), which was attended by several attorneys from our firm. 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 most recent Visa Bulletin chart is always available to our readers on MurthyDotCom.] 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.
2. Employment-Based Visa Number Predictions
We are often asked by our clients at the Murthy Law Firm to predict the movement of immigrant visa numbers. We have some useful information for MurthyDotCom and MurthyBulletin readers in this regard. 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), which was attended by several attorneys from our firm. 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 most recent Visa Bulletin chart is always available to our readers on MurthyDotCom.] 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.
wallpaper chocolate brown hair color
maxy
04-28 09:53 AM
when you say new fees, i assuem it is $340 . Correct ??
correct.
but i am not sure renewal will be for 1 yr or 3 yrs ?
anyone here knows..?
correct.
but i am not sure renewal will be for 1 yr or 3 yrs ?
anyone here knows..?
RandyK
01-03 04:12 PM
I am waiting to sign up for the monthly.
I don't think it is a good idea to restrict members by the amount they contribute. As we already know we only have around 200 members that actually contribute financially out of the 7K membership.
We are a grassroots organization we need all the foot solders we can get (remember how effective it was in December, when we mobilized together). Restricting users would turn members away and when we loose them, we loose them for good. There will not be any references from those who leave.
Remember Howard Dean's fund raising campaign mostly they collected $10 and $20 not just big amounts for his presidential campaign. We must take what we can and encourage members to participate. When members see what we do they will volunteer.
A first time visitor to our website is not going to trust us to give money with out knowing what we are all about. When we restrict them they will never know what we are doing.
Just think about it. Would you do it?
I don't think it is a good idea to restrict members by the amount they contribute. As we already know we only have around 200 members that actually contribute financially out of the 7K membership.
We are a grassroots organization we need all the foot solders we can get (remember how effective it was in December, when we mobilized together). Restricting users would turn members away and when we loose them, we loose them for good. There will not be any references from those who leave.
Remember Howard Dean's fund raising campaign mostly they collected $10 and $20 not just big amounts for his presidential campaign. We must take what we can and encourage members to participate. When members see what we do they will volunteer.
A first time visitor to our website is not going to trust us to give money with out knowing what we are all about. When we restrict them they will never know what we are doing.
Just think about it. Would you do it?
2011 Chocolate Brown Hair Color
lostinbeta
10-03 01:13 PM
:::whistling:::
SPAM*INFINITY!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:::runs away again::::::
:::evil chuckle in background:evil: :::
SPAM*INFINITY!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:::runs away again::::::
:::evil chuckle in background:evil: :::
more...
clif
06-07 10:03 AM
You can change jobs. Make sure you (or your attorney) send the AC21 letter to USCIS before your employer revokes the approved I-140. If you do that, the revokation won't have much effect, otherwise you may get NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny).
wandmaker
04-04 11:47 AM
The work location in LCA was company headquarter in Houston. H1 petition was submitted with LCA from Houston.
I have worked in Colorado from 2005 onwards. Company obtained LCA for Colorado, but did not file amendment with USCIS. They paid wages as per Colorado LCA, also filed CO state tax, etc. This was the scenario for both 2005 and 2007 h1 petitions.
Violation of visa terms. One can not predict the success rate of h4 stamping, it is upto the consular officer. Getting a H4 just gives you an option to make a lawfull entry and live in the US, does not eliminate the risk of 485 denial because one should have maintained the proper status until the filing of 485.
I have worked in Colorado from 2005 onwards. Company obtained LCA for Colorado, but did not file amendment with USCIS. They paid wages as per Colorado LCA, also filed CO state tax, etc. This was the scenario for both 2005 and 2007 h1 petitions.
Violation of visa terms. One can not predict the success rate of h4 stamping, it is upto the consular officer. Getting a H4 just gives you an option to make a lawfull entry and live in the US, does not eliminate the risk of 485 denial because one should have maintained the proper status until the filing of 485.
more...
abhijitp
01-18 01:35 AM
> ***If you don't sign, that means no snacks
LOL:-) Thanks for making my day!
NORCAL, see you there on Sunday!
LOL:-) Thanks for making my day!
NORCAL, see you there on Sunday!
2010 chocolate brown hair dye.
santb1975
03-28 11:47 PM
We have a potential opportunity to get featured in LA times. We are looking for examples from our student community who has missed the H1B lotto last year and pursued an opportunity in another country or for students who are anxiously waiting this year's Lotto. We have been asking in Southern California for examples from yesterday but no one came forward yet
Many thanks for IV to get this fixed for students. I am student member of IV since 2007.
I have posted this message in other forums and urged the student community to join IV.
IV rocks!
Balan
Many thanks for IV to get this fixed for students. I am student member of IV since 2007.
I have posted this message in other forums and urged the student community to join IV.
IV rocks!
Balan
more...
speddi
10-05 07:06 PM
Speddi
which serivce center are your applications pending with?
mine is at Texas Service Center
which serivce center are your applications pending with?
mine is at Texas Service Center
hair chocolate brown hair color
inthehole
07-25 03:50 PM
I am trying to send AC21 letter to USCIS through my attorney. My attorney want the LC filing papers from my previous employer.(so that he can prove that my current job is same or similar)
So if we change our job using EAD, do we need to have LC filing paper from our ex employer for invoking AC21?.
So if we change our job using EAD, do we need to have LC filing paper from our ex employer for invoking AC21?.
more...
whiteStallion
10-13 02:26 PM
I got the 140 denial notice.
The USCIS did not mentioned any reason like my valid labour is expired.Not sure is the denial is because of 180 day rule or not.
Here is the reason...
The petitioner did not submit an individual labour certification for the beneficiary or evidence of schedule A designation.As such, the beneficiary is ineligible for classification as a member of the preofessions holding an advanced degree or an alien of exceptional ability.
I think the first line "The petitioner did not submit an individual labour certification for the beneficiary..." is relevant to your suspicion of an expired labor. It effectively says that there are no valid labor certification against your I140 application, which means that the Labor certification you filed your I140 against, is not valid anymore.
Please restart your Labor again, ASAP.
The USCIS did not mentioned any reason like my valid labour is expired.Not sure is the denial is because of 180 day rule or not.
Here is the reason...
The petitioner did not submit an individual labour certification for the beneficiary or evidence of schedule A designation.As such, the beneficiary is ineligible for classification as a member of the preofessions holding an advanced degree or an alien of exceptional ability.
I think the first line "The petitioner did not submit an individual labour certification for the beneficiary..." is relevant to your suspicion of an expired labor. It effectively says that there are no valid labor certification against your I140 application, which means that the Labor certification you filed your I140 against, is not valid anymore.
Please restart your Labor again, ASAP.
hot chocolate brown hair color
prem_goel
01-13 06:56 PM
I have the following visa stampings F1(1998 Chennai), H1B(2002 Chennai), F1(2006 Matamaros) and am currently on H1B (not the 2002 company). Am I eligible for stamping in one of the border posts?
thanks
arun
yes i think so since you have one previous h1b stamping from home country. BUT, you should always check the consulate website for latest rules and info.
thanks
arun
yes i think so since you have one previous h1b stamping from home country. BUT, you should always check the consulate website for latest rules and info.
more...
house Eye color. Chocolate brown
vxb2004
11-24 08:09 PM
Hello,
I joined company B in April and prior to that I was working for company A. Fragoman was company A's attorney. Through company A I had my labor certified, I-140 approved and my 485 was pending for more than 180 days and hence I was able to switch my job using AC21. My job was in the same and similar job classification. The AC21 documents were sent to USCIS in early April by company B's attorney.
Last week of October, I received my finger printing notice as part of my I-485 process. When I contacted company B's attorney, they never received any courtesy copy for my finger printing notice. Today I called up USCIS customer service to find out the attorney on record for my file. They mentioned that it was still company A's and the courtesy copy was sent to them. I mentioned to the officer that AC21 was filed which had the change in attorney information. She said that they do not have any records of it. She advised me to send a copy of the AC21 forms again along with the G28 documents.
My question is if company B's attorney send the AC21 documents, will USCIS question why the documents are being sent after 8 months of switching jobs?
Will this trigger an RFE?
Please advise.
I joined company B in April and prior to that I was working for company A. Fragoman was company A's attorney. Through company A I had my labor certified, I-140 approved and my 485 was pending for more than 180 days and hence I was able to switch my job using AC21. My job was in the same and similar job classification. The AC21 documents were sent to USCIS in early April by company B's attorney.
Last week of October, I received my finger printing notice as part of my I-485 process. When I contacted company B's attorney, they never received any courtesy copy for my finger printing notice. Today I called up USCIS customer service to find out the attorney on record for my file. They mentioned that it was still company A's and the courtesy copy was sent to them. I mentioned to the officer that AC21 was filed which had the change in attorney information. She said that they do not have any records of it. She advised me to send a copy of the AC21 forms again along with the G28 documents.
My question is if company B's attorney send the AC21 documents, will USCIS question why the documents are being sent after 8 months of switching jobs?
Will this trigger an RFE?
Please advise.
tattoo chocolate brown hair color
glus
05-31 09:10 AM
Thank you for contributing!!!!
:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D
:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D
more...
pictures Dark chocolate brown.
rameshk75
04-07 10:20 AM
Ron's answer for "Leavng petitioning employer after the I485 approval?"
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4764
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4764
dresses Chocolate Brown Hair
ksvreg
02-25 01:37 PM
PWD has nothing to do with you joining them. All DOL does in PWD is it assigns a salary range based on the location of the job and the minimum requirements defined for the position. BTW, it is infact taking 2-3 months to get PWD these days.
Thanks a lot for your input. So I can join after the PWD is done.
Thanks a lot for your input. So I can join after the PWD is done.
more...
makeup chocolate brown hair color
anilsal
08-03 12:49 AM
Very well said. We need legislation and for that to happen, grass roots efforts from IV to end this retrogression.
Now get back to becoming a contributing member plus supporting IV efforts by opening/joining your state chapter and meeting local law makers.
Now get back to becoming a contributing member plus supporting IV efforts by opening/joining your state chapter and meeting local law makers.
girlfriend hair color chocolate brown.
krishnam70
04-06 04:44 PM
Really? Nobody? Nothing? :( Please, any advice will do, I'm desperate, I don't want to leave in 2 weeks, I need some more time with my partner...
This is a unique situation and may be an immigration attorney will guide you better. You should try to follow the law where ever possible. It could have been much easier had you gone out when your visa expired and returned back on another visa. Anyway try to speak with an attorney and get a good advise on how to remedy this situation
- cheers
kris
This is a unique situation and may be an immigration attorney will guide you better. You should try to follow the law where ever possible. It could have been much easier had you gone out when your visa expired and returned back on another visa. Anyway try to speak with an attorney and get a good advise on how to remedy this situation
- cheers
kris
hairstyles chocolate brown hair color
Ryall
09-05 02:23 AM
hye I dunno what all of your opinions are, but I think that pixel stretching and similar effects that are so popular now - can more easily take away from a picture then add to it.... just MHO - seems like people use it 'cuz it is "in"
Peace
Peace
maverick13
04-19 07:18 PM
My H1B was filed with job title "RF Engineer" which comes under "Electrical Engineering" in 2004. My first 3-year term on H1 expires this year end and employer needs to file for renewal for next 3-year term.
My LC as well as 140 were applied and are approved for the position of "Electronics Engineer" which is my current position.
Essentially Electronics Engineer position is a superset of RF Engineer/Electrical Engineer positions, job duties are pretty much the same.
So now when I apply for my H1B renewal/extension does employer have to write the current position (Electronics engr) or the position on which H1B was filed first (RF engr)?
Any inputs appeciated...
My LC as well as 140 were applied and are approved for the position of "Electronics Engineer" which is my current position.
Essentially Electronics Engineer position is a superset of RF Engineer/Electrical Engineer positions, job duties are pretty much the same.
So now when I apply for my H1B renewal/extension does employer have to write the current position (Electronics engr) or the position on which H1B was filed first (RF engr)?
Any inputs appeciated...
maximus777
09-10 03:05 PM
Which EB category are you shooting for?
No comments:
Post a Comment