sanju
02-16 08:50 AM
1.) The total pay in LCA is most likely for the entire year. If you worked for 6 months, simply divide the LCA per year pay by half and use that as a basis to decide. Since you said that your month-wise wage was higher than the LCA wage, I think you are in safe zone. Did you mean to say that you pay was less than the 1/2 (i.e. for 6 months) of the pay specified in LCA? Please clarify.
2.) You can have an H1 with an employer, but not work with that employer. As long as you were on legal status, maybe on another employer and maintained your legal status, say you were 2nd H1 that was valid, it means your employer doesn't owe you anything as you were not working for him. It doesn't mean that there is any back wage, it just means that you still have valid H1 with him but did not work for him for a duration during which you were maintaining your legal status. As you your employer doesn't owe you back wages.
And since you left your past employer (which could possibly be your future employer), its always good to document that you resigned. You can create a back dated resignation for yourself for your own records, and maybe give a copy of that to your employer. It will help your employer to cover him, and it will complete your records. That should do it for you.
Hope this is helpful.
Hi Everyone,
I will be laid off from an american company by the end of Feb 2009. I spoke to my previous desi employee as my H1b with his company is still valid and he din't revoked it until now
But he agrees to let me join his company but at the same time he worried about few things
Q1) I was with him for 6 months of 2008 and moved to an American Company so the total pay in the W2 for year 2008 is less than LCA amount.
Would that be a problem as i din't work with him for an entire year in which case it is bound to be less than LCA amount..
Mind you i'm looking at the Yearly wage if you look at month wise it is much higher than mentioned in LCA.
Would that be of any problem to both me and employeer.
Q2) He also said that when somebody re hires any one , the employeer is liable to pay back wages for the period of time he was out.
It sounds illogical atleast to me because he didn't terminate me from the job it was me who quit the job and transferred my H1b on a good note , but there is no official document saying i quit the job or he terminated me ....
I would appreciate if some could throw some light on this ....
My future is relied on these issues
Thanks
David
2.) You can have an H1 with an employer, but not work with that employer. As long as you were on legal status, maybe on another employer and maintained your legal status, say you were 2nd H1 that was valid, it means your employer doesn't owe you anything as you were not working for him. It doesn't mean that there is any back wage, it just means that you still have valid H1 with him but did not work for him for a duration during which you were maintaining your legal status. As you your employer doesn't owe you back wages.
And since you left your past employer (which could possibly be your future employer), its always good to document that you resigned. You can create a back dated resignation for yourself for your own records, and maybe give a copy of that to your employer. It will help your employer to cover him, and it will complete your records. That should do it for you.
Hope this is helpful.
Hi Everyone,
I will be laid off from an american company by the end of Feb 2009. I spoke to my previous desi employee as my H1b with his company is still valid and he din't revoked it until now
But he agrees to let me join his company but at the same time he worried about few things
Q1) I was with him for 6 months of 2008 and moved to an American Company so the total pay in the W2 for year 2008 is less than LCA amount.
Would that be a problem as i din't work with him for an entire year in which case it is bound to be less than LCA amount..
Mind you i'm looking at the Yearly wage if you look at month wise it is much higher than mentioned in LCA.
Would that be of any problem to both me and employeer.
Q2) He also said that when somebody re hires any one , the employeer is liable to pay back wages for the period of time he was out.
It sounds illogical atleast to me because he didn't terminate me from the job it was me who quit the job and transferred my H1b on a good note , but there is no official document saying i quit the job or he terminated me ....
I would appreciate if some could throw some light on this ....
My future is relied on these issues
Thanks
David
wallpaper beach girl wallpaper
vishwak
08-13 10:51 AM
History:
Question for fellow IV members :
By merely renewing my wife's H4, while she was still working on EAD, did she automatically get switched to H4?
Can someone shed some light on this: Am I right or wrong?
Does this affect her or mine, pending 485/AOS ?
Hmmm.....I think she is not supposed to work when on H4. As always status in US is taken by 2 ways.
Either Change of Status in US or Status when you enter/re-enter to US.
As your wife recent was change of Status in US which was H4. She is not supposed to work. But I believe lot of people work and there might not be an impact on your AOS.
Lets wait until Experts speak.......
Question for fellow IV members :
By merely renewing my wife's H4, while she was still working on EAD, did she automatically get switched to H4?
Can someone shed some light on this: Am I right or wrong?
Does this affect her or mine, pending 485/AOS ?
Hmmm.....I think she is not supposed to work when on H4. As always status in US is taken by 2 ways.
Either Change of Status in US or Status when you enter/re-enter to US.
As your wife recent was change of Status in US which was H4. She is not supposed to work. But I believe lot of people work and there might not be an impact on your AOS.
Lets wait until Experts speak.......
krishmunn
04-07 02:18 PM
The problem is most of the visas are taken by indian bodyshops such as infosys, TCS, LT to bring underskilled computer operators to the US. Intel, MS and other good companies that hire from reputed US universities have hard time getting the visas due to the cap. The cap should work the other way round. 20K for bodyshops and 65K for people from US universities.
You mean those passing from the likes of TVU and ITU or those from Harvard/MIT ?? How do you define "reputed" US University ? And why do you think clients engage "underskilled" operators and not "skilled" US graduates ? Lower rate ? But then we see so many US graduates languishing in EB 3 ???
BTW, why are you still having a hard time getting visa --- the quota was wide open till January at least .
There is no point blaming on non-US students when US students are making a beeline to desi consultants for H1. May be the law should be -- no consulting job for US graduates.
You mean those passing from the likes of TVU and ITU or those from Harvard/MIT ?? How do you define "reputed" US University ? And why do you think clients engage "underskilled" operators and not "skilled" US graduates ? Lower rate ? But then we see so many US graduates languishing in EB 3 ???
BTW, why are you still having a hard time getting visa --- the quota was wide open till January at least .
There is no point blaming on non-US students when US students are making a beeline to desi consultants for H1. May be the law should be -- no consulting job for US graduates.
2011 BOY Wallpaper
Prashanthi
06-26 01:57 PM
the above scenario applies only if their is a signed contract between him and the employer, does not apply to an agreement that was made between the recruiter and his employer as he is not a party to the contract.
more...
shirish
10-11 11:07 AM
Don't worry abt the receipt date on the transfer notice. It is the date on which yor app was entered in the system, Your RN for 485 (which you have not received yet) will have the july 26th as RD and would have sept 26th as ND
Hi Friends,
We had sent our apps to Nebraska on July 26 but we received a transfer notice for 485 from vermont with a receipt date of Sept 26 and notice date of Oct 3.
I always thought the receipt date of my application is the day when our application reached the center.
Can someone help explaining this....
Thanks,
Hi Friends,
We had sent our apps to Nebraska on July 26 but we received a transfer notice for 485 from vermont with a receipt date of Sept 26 and notice date of Oct 3.
I always thought the receipt date of my application is the day when our application reached the center.
Can someone help explaining this....
Thanks,
terpcurt
January 6th, 2005, 09:00 PM
of the technique....
on the back layer, use gaussian blur, then erase, getting a sharper than background coloured bit.
add some saturation....
whadddya think?
Robhttp://images8.fotki.com/v146/photos/1/173093/1080432/2flower-vi.jpg
I see what your getting at...... yep... I do like that too.... still have a lot to learn :D
on the back layer, use gaussian blur, then erase, getting a sharper than background coloured bit.
add some saturation....
whadddya think?
Robhttp://images8.fotki.com/v146/photos/1/173093/1080432/2flower-vi.jpg
I see what your getting at...... yep... I do like that too.... still have a lot to learn :D
more...
GCard_Dream
07-10 02:37 PM
Appu:
What do you mean by "Both TB Test"? Did you mean skin test and X-ray? If so, is X-ray mandatory? I thought X-ray was optional depending on what the test result of the skin test. In other words, you don't have to have a X-ray if the skin test was negative. Would you please clarify.
1) Did you both get TB tested? The rules have changed. This is the most common cause for an RFE on medical exam.
2) Is she on any medication? Sometimes this requires a certificate from the prescribing physician. No big deal
Overall, there is probably no cause to worry about this. In fact, this could mean you are close to being approved. Same thing happened to me (see my history in my sig line).
What do you mean by "Both TB Test"? Did you mean skin test and X-ray? If so, is X-ray mandatory? I thought X-ray was optional depending on what the test result of the skin test. In other words, you don't have to have a X-ray if the skin test was negative. Would you please clarify.
1) Did you both get TB tested? The rules have changed. This is the most common cause for an RFE on medical exam.
2) Is she on any medication? Sometimes this requires a certificate from the prescribing physician. No big deal
Overall, there is probably no cause to worry about this. In fact, this could mean you are close to being approved. Same thing happened to me (see my history in my sig line).
2010 tattoo Perfect girls wallpaper
immi2006
05-04 12:59 PM
Hi,
I spent 2 weeks just looking at all immigration.com posts and analysing the data patterns posted on the BEC, permtracker, calif 140 stage and so on... no one has published a report for a ready reckoner. I wanted to see the data sample to see where we stand today on the status as a snapshot, the data could be off the mark, because there could be folks who filed multiple LCs, and not withdrawn when one of them is approved !..or there could be employers who may have filed Eb2 and Eb3 for same person, cannot gurantee... so, the data is based on all postings of immigration.com, I would encourage u to read some of the posts to get a first hand feeling of the trends.
I spent 2 weeks just looking at all immigration.com posts and analysing the data patterns posted on the BEC, permtracker, calif 140 stage and so on... no one has published a report for a ready reckoner. I wanted to see the data sample to see where we stand today on the status as a snapshot, the data could be off the mark, because there could be folks who filed multiple LCs, and not withdrawn when one of them is approved !..or there could be employers who may have filed Eb2 and Eb3 for same person, cannot gurantee... so, the data is based on all postings of immigration.com, I would encourage u to read some of the posts to get a first hand feeling of the trends.
more...
TomPlate
02-03 05:04 PM
Can you please let me know anyone. I had this doubt because one of my friend is saying,
During PORT OF ENTRY AP can only be used with EAD. Expired EAD will be an issue here.
Even if you do not use EAD and in H1.
PLEASE LET ME KNOW:confused:
During PORT OF ENTRY AP can only be used with EAD. Expired EAD will be an issue here.
Even if you do not use EAD and in H1.
PLEASE LET ME KNOW:confused:
hair wallpaper girl for mobile.
ivy55
07-17 09:26 PM
How did you open Expedite SR, I opened SR nearly five times, took two InfoPass, yet not FP ?
more...
wandmaker
04-03 06:59 PM
Have had unfortunate turn of events and need your guidance.
I had a valid approved h1 petition and i-94 for 2005 through company A.
Company filed for extension of h1 in 2007 and received approved h1 and i-94 valid till 2010. Did not travel out of the country at that time.
Filed for AOS 485, EAD, AP in 2007. Traveled and entered US using AP in 2008.
USCIS did inquiry and has revoked 2005 h1 because of incorrect LCA filing by the company. They have also said that because of incorrect LCA filing, I am in violation of h1 status. Attorneys have advised that USCIS will retroactive hold me as 'out-of-status' but not unlawful present as I was working in good faith based on an approved petition and unexpired i-94s.
The 2007 h1 was also filed in similar fashion as the 2005 h1.
Although USCIS has not revoked current 2007-2010 h1, there is a possibility of that happening. The 485 might be denied in that case.
The only option is to get on h4 by applying from consulate in India.
Since I will be now answering yes to question 38 (have you violated terms of US visa, or unlawful present..?) I have also shown as intent to immigrate based on my 485 filing.
I want to know my chances of getting an h4 approved.
You need to add more clarity to bold words... For instance, if your work location in LCA was New York and you worked in San Francisco - Man you are in trouble..... Please post what was incorrect on the LCA and also fill in the profile, if you want the folks to consider responding to your query. My 2 cents.
I had a valid approved h1 petition and i-94 for 2005 through company A.
Company filed for extension of h1 in 2007 and received approved h1 and i-94 valid till 2010. Did not travel out of the country at that time.
Filed for AOS 485, EAD, AP in 2007. Traveled and entered US using AP in 2008.
USCIS did inquiry and has revoked 2005 h1 because of incorrect LCA filing by the company. They have also said that because of incorrect LCA filing, I am in violation of h1 status. Attorneys have advised that USCIS will retroactive hold me as 'out-of-status' but not unlawful present as I was working in good faith based on an approved petition and unexpired i-94s.
The 2007 h1 was also filed in similar fashion as the 2005 h1.
Although USCIS has not revoked current 2007-2010 h1, there is a possibility of that happening. The 485 might be denied in that case.
The only option is to get on h4 by applying from consulate in India.
Since I will be now answering yes to question 38 (have you violated terms of US visa, or unlawful present..?) I have also shown as intent to immigrate based on my 485 filing.
I want to know my chances of getting an h4 approved.
You need to add more clarity to bold words... For instance, if your work location in LCA was New York and you worked in San Francisco - Man you are in trouble..... Please post what was incorrect on the LCA and also fill in the profile, if you want the folks to consider responding to your query. My 2 cents.
hot wallpaper of girls.
gc_on_demand
05-13 11:01 AM
Dear members
Please dont keep hope that there will be a CIR in a year. Why ? Mr President is not confident that he will bring it or not otherwise he would have sound plan and announcement. He is asking Mccain to take a lead on this and remember that news Mccain was angry on mexican delegation who went to him to argue to bring CIR.
This year they will not bring it with unemployment and other reason. Next year it will be election year.
If time is good they will attempt in 2011 so it will help in election 2012...again nothing can be done in 2012 too..
Please dont keep hope that there will be a CIR in a year. Why ? Mr President is not confident that he will bring it or not otherwise he would have sound plan and announcement. He is asking Mccain to take a lead on this and remember that news Mccain was angry on mexican delegation who went to him to argue to bring CIR.
This year they will not bring it with unemployment and other reason. Next year it will be election year.
If time is good they will attempt in 2011 so it will help in election 2012...again nothing can be done in 2012 too..
more...
house cute girl Alexis Bledel
aroranuj
11-24 10:12 PM
I am in the same boat....TSC denied my I-140. My attorney has said that you can file an appeal (in your case in the EB2 category) at the same time you can also file for a new I-140 in a different category. Your best bet is to possibly file in the EB3 Category & wait for the appeal take its time at AAO. In the end if they do deny the appeal you can still file a new I-140 in the EB2 category.
Let us know what reccomendations your attorney provides you.
Good luck!
Let us know what reccomendations your attorney provides you.
Good luck!
tattoo Download Sexy Girl wallpaper :
americandesi
08-11 05:39 PM
That is not a flaw in the system and in the USCIS manual, they know it. Since the previous I-140 is already approved and you've stayed more than 6 months in that I-140, then there's no need for the ability to pay. USCIS is treating your case as if you already have a GC, it is just that it is pending.
If one has a GC, he can transfer to another employer. It is your risk if your new employer has not the ability to pay you. The same is true with portability, USCIS doesn't care anymore if you transfer to an employer with no ability to pay you because the first I-140 is already approved and you worked for it already. They are concerned now about your I-485 (AOS) and your qualifications under it.
What you say holds good only if employer A had already paid the proffered wage during those 6 months.
Suppose employer A is currently paying 70K and the wage for the proposed GC position is 80K and if employer A is able to prove that his Net Income or Net Assets is >=80K then it’s sufficient to prove ability to pay. In such a case, he is bound to pay 80K only after I-485 approval.
Going by above, the employee wasn’t paid 80K at anytime. Even then, USCIS approves his I-485 if he is able to provide an offer letter from employer C with similar roles, responsibilities and wage as the proposed GC position with Company A, though the abilty to pay 80K by employer C is in question.
If one has a GC, he can transfer to another employer. It is your risk if your new employer has not the ability to pay you. The same is true with portability, USCIS doesn't care anymore if you transfer to an employer with no ability to pay you because the first I-140 is already approved and you worked for it already. They are concerned now about your I-485 (AOS) and your qualifications under it.
What you say holds good only if employer A had already paid the proffered wage during those 6 months.
Suppose employer A is currently paying 70K and the wage for the proposed GC position is 80K and if employer A is able to prove that his Net Income or Net Assets is >=80K then it’s sufficient to prove ability to pay. In such a case, he is bound to pay 80K only after I-485 approval.
Going by above, the employee wasn’t paid 80K at anytime. Even then, USCIS approves his I-485 if he is able to provide an offer letter from employer C with similar roles, responsibilities and wage as the proposed GC position with Company A, though the abilty to pay 80K by employer C is in question.
more...
pictures wallpaper girl x. wallpaper
LayoffBlog
01-27 01:32 PM
Caterpillar, seeing sales for its bulldozers and other heavy equipment sinking in a worldwide economic mire, said Monday that its business was �whipsawed� during the fourth quarter and that it would eliminate 20,000 jobs in the face of a �very tough� 2009.Caterpillar announced the staff reductions as part of its fourth quarter earnings report, released [...]http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=layoffblog.com&blog=5255291&post=1235&subd=layoffblog&ref=&feed=1
More... (http://layoffblog.com/2009/01/26/caterpillar-to-lay-off-20000/)
More... (http://layoffblog.com/2009/01/26/caterpillar-to-lay-off-20000/)
dresses wallpapers of cute babies.
GCMan007
03-13 01:02 PM
Congratulations !!
Looks like TSC abandoned online status updates and emails. My case has been assigned to an officer (again) and enroute to I-485 manager as of Feb 3rd 2008 ( senator feedback ). So far no LUD's or emails.. Looks like instead of checking for emails every other minute , I have to wait for regular mail now.. unfortunately I can do that only once per day !! :( ..
That exactly happened in my case. I was looking at my online status almost everyday. Not even a soft LUD..the regular mail finally arrived last week with approval status..Online staus still not updated
Looks like TSC abandoned online status updates and emails. My case has been assigned to an officer (again) and enroute to I-485 manager as of Feb 3rd 2008 ( senator feedback ). So far no LUD's or emails.. Looks like instead of checking for emails every other minute , I have to wait for regular mail now.. unfortunately I can do that only once per day !! :( ..
That exactly happened in my case. I was looking at my online status almost everyday. Not even a soft LUD..the regular mail finally arrived last week with approval status..Online staus still not updated
more...
makeup 3d abstract wallpaper, 3d girl
WeShallOvercome
07-27 02:13 PM
Thanks.
I wish I should I have acted against the USCIS notice on july 2nd saying they will reject. I should have listened to Rajiv khanna website who was saying that the app should be filed even if it was sent back.
But my attorney said its no use to beat the system and I should wait till october.
I listened and kept quite for few days and later decided on July 16th that What the heck !!!. Let us submit even if it is returned and went ahead.
Every day matters as the counter is 180 days. It is like a time bomb clock.
I think now we can just mark on our calendars the 180 days which includes some months of 31 days and mark exactly the date and time and plan to celeberate it to fulliest.
When you mark your calendar, mark it for 182 days to be safe. You never know USCIS and these employers.. Keep yourself safe from all the complications that might arise if you leave on 180th or 181st day (whether first day is included or not, can I leave on 180th day or do i have to wait for 180 days to complete blah blah.. ) :)
I wish I should I have acted against the USCIS notice on july 2nd saying they will reject. I should have listened to Rajiv khanna website who was saying that the app should be filed even if it was sent back.
But my attorney said its no use to beat the system and I should wait till october.
I listened and kept quite for few days and later decided on July 16th that What the heck !!!. Let us submit even if it is returned and went ahead.
Every day matters as the counter is 180 days. It is like a time bomb clock.
I think now we can just mark on our calendars the 180 days which includes some months of 31 days and mark exactly the date and time and plan to celeberate it to fulliest.
When you mark your calendar, mark it for 182 days to be safe. You never know USCIS and these employers.. Keep yourself safe from all the complications that might arise if you leave on 180th or 181st day (whether first day is included or not, can I leave on 180th day or do i have to wait for 180 days to complete blah blah.. ) :)
girlfriend desktop wallpapers for girls
factoryman
06-19 04:33 PM
Start worrying about LC approval notice and start working about AOS.
Aaj kal nav jawanoku, ye kya ho raha hi?
please post your comments
Aaj kal nav jawanoku, ye kya ho raha hi?
please post your comments
hairstyles Girls Wallpapers 1680 X
leonqiu
03-14 12:06 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.
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.
chanduv23
11-06 10:09 AM
Jet airways resumed new service to US recently. That's why you couldn't find many people traveling by Jet airways. I heard the flights are new, service is good and the travel is quite comfortable. I am travelling to chennai from EWR end of november and am looking forward to the trip.
Great to know, now I feel comfortable :)
Great to know, now I feel comfortable :)
freddy22
07-20 07:34 AM
The outcome in a case like this depends on the specific State's criminal code, and the individual's specific record. I cannot tell you for sure that USCIS will seek to remove your son, but I would strongly advise your son and his criminal lawyer to consult with an experienced immigration lawyer before going further.
Some states have special
courts, processes and/or dispositions for certain juveniles that are different than for those in adult court. Some such dispositions are not considered �convictions� for immigration purposes
(although they may still become a problem for discretionary forms of relief or where �admitting to a crime� is enough). For example, in New York:
- A �Youthful Offender� disposition for people under the age of 19 at time of conduct is not a �conviction� for immigration purposes. In fact, a Y.O. for a more serious offense is
sometimes better than a straight conviction for a lesser offense.
- A �Juvenile Delinquency� disposition in Family Court for people under age 16 at time of
conduct is not a �conviction� for immigration purposes.
- However, a �Juvenile Offender� disposition is considered a conviction for immigration
purposes and does not have the same benefits.
Note: The federal government and every state has its own system for treating juveniles in the criminal justice system � some will be safer for immigrant youth, and some will not. Every state also has its own rules for the maximum age at which a young person may qualify for this treatment � for example, one state may place a 15-year-old in adult court with no special dispositions, while another state may place a 17-year old in the juvenile justice system.
Consider going to trial instead of pleading guilty. This is not always the best option, but you may want to consider it if, for example, the evidence against you is weak and/or the benefits of the plea offer are not worth the immigration consequences to you.
Some states have special
courts, processes and/or dispositions for certain juveniles that are different than for those in adult court. Some such dispositions are not considered �convictions� for immigration purposes
(although they may still become a problem for discretionary forms of relief or where �admitting to a crime� is enough). For example, in New York:
- A �Youthful Offender� disposition for people under the age of 19 at time of conduct is not a �conviction� for immigration purposes. In fact, a Y.O. for a more serious offense is
sometimes better than a straight conviction for a lesser offense.
- A �Juvenile Delinquency� disposition in Family Court for people under age 16 at time of
conduct is not a �conviction� for immigration purposes.
- However, a �Juvenile Offender� disposition is considered a conviction for immigration
purposes and does not have the same benefits.
Note: The federal government and every state has its own system for treating juveniles in the criminal justice system � some will be safer for immigrant youth, and some will not. Every state also has its own rules for the maximum age at which a young person may qualify for this treatment � for example, one state may place a 15-year-old in adult court with no special dispositions, while another state may place a 17-year old in the juvenile justice system.
Consider going to trial instead of pleading guilty. This is not always the best option, but you may want to consider it if, for example, the evidence against you is weak and/or the benefits of the plea offer are not worth the immigration consequences to you.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий