designserve
03-02 06:20 PM
I have heard atleast 12-13 companies in this area have ICE audits...that may happen to any company in the near term.Let us safely assume to caution new consultants to skip this year's H1B
wallpaper The song became Janet#39;s second
telekinesis
10-20 10:40 PM
Oh shut up, you have a *beep* load of posts. :crazy:
chanduv23
10-09 03:15 PM
Fromnaija and ChanduV-
I may be moving to California in early November. So, I am sorry I am not able to offer a leading role in AZ. But, I believe it will greatly help others considering such a role, if you could explain what kind of responsibilities and commitments such a position may entail.
U can definitely lead till then :), I may also be moving out of Tri State - nature of job is like that.
Lets find more people.
We need people to come out of their closets and start getting active
I may be moving to California in early November. So, I am sorry I am not able to offer a leading role in AZ. But, I believe it will greatly help others considering such a role, if you could explain what kind of responsibilities and commitments such a position may entail.
U can definitely lead till then :), I may also be moving out of Tri State - nature of job is like that.
Lets find more people.
We need people to come out of their closets and start getting active
2011 JANET JACKSON RHYTHM NATION
msyedy
02-12 01:57 PM
People,
Yes I am guilty. I am one of those Lazy fence sitters caught in reto that peruses this forum on a daily basis looking for for some glimmer of hope.
Silently i cross my fingers and hope that IV will get something done for us but guilty of doing nothing to help. Sound familiar?
Let me start by saying that i became a member and watched this forum for over 6 months and did nothing to contribute (whether financially or physically). I'm lazy and theres nothing i can do about it - thats my personality. We all have busy lives and we all have personal agendas and unless we are affected by something directly, we choose the path of least resistance.
something changed for me last month. I dont know what it was, since it was nothing physical, personal, familial or anything tangible. I was reading the IV website posts "as normal" and while i read all the posts on funding drives, increasing members, those brillant NJ chapter folks etc I was ashamed at how little i was doing towards a cause that had a direct impact on my life and how a small group of people could be so passsionate about the same interest. I was also surprised at the number of mainly Indian professionals in the US who were caught in this mess but at the difficulty that IV was having getting people to get off their a** and do something.
COME ON PEOPLE - even if we are lazy, self centered, and busy lets at least show that the Indian "minority" in the US is at least a UNITED and PROUD lot. We cant let IV down for a few dollars. "Izzat ki Sawal Hai"
Well, i thought about it, and thought some more..... and decided i was still as lazy as i was before even after my ephiphany, but i could definitely manage a few clicks with my mouse. So i decided, If can't do anything physical (like pass flyers, meet in DC to help Core, start some fangled chapter locally, or harass my local congresman) then at least i could pass on some financial contribution so that somebody could do it for me!
So this is what i did
a) - setup a $20 recurring contribution (Yes its $20 - I'm cheap and so are a lot of you - but $20 is better than nothing - its less than a dinner at a restaurant).
b) forwarded the website info to a few of my collegues at work and told them what i did.
I have not made any earth shattering differences by my actions, but at least im doing SOMETHING. This, coming from one of the laziest members definitely should mean something to all of you.
If you cant contribute your time, at least send some money so someone else can do it for you! Also please stop harrassing IV on where the funds are going - its $20 per month for Christ's sake, not your family inheritance. Let's try and make a difference one way or another. Our national pride is at stake here.
Hari
(IZZAT KI SAWAL) ... It is IZZAT KA SAWAL.
I am lazy and may be more lazy then anyone. Good to hear from a new enthusiastic person.
Your enthu will go away soon.
Yes I am guilty. I am one of those Lazy fence sitters caught in reto that peruses this forum on a daily basis looking for for some glimmer of hope.
Silently i cross my fingers and hope that IV will get something done for us but guilty of doing nothing to help. Sound familiar?
Let me start by saying that i became a member and watched this forum for over 6 months and did nothing to contribute (whether financially or physically). I'm lazy and theres nothing i can do about it - thats my personality. We all have busy lives and we all have personal agendas and unless we are affected by something directly, we choose the path of least resistance.
something changed for me last month. I dont know what it was, since it was nothing physical, personal, familial or anything tangible. I was reading the IV website posts "as normal" and while i read all the posts on funding drives, increasing members, those brillant NJ chapter folks etc I was ashamed at how little i was doing towards a cause that had a direct impact on my life and how a small group of people could be so passsionate about the same interest. I was also surprised at the number of mainly Indian professionals in the US who were caught in this mess but at the difficulty that IV was having getting people to get off their a** and do something.
COME ON PEOPLE - even if we are lazy, self centered, and busy lets at least show that the Indian "minority" in the US is at least a UNITED and PROUD lot. We cant let IV down for a few dollars. "Izzat ki Sawal Hai"
Well, i thought about it, and thought some more..... and decided i was still as lazy as i was before even after my ephiphany, but i could definitely manage a few clicks with my mouse. So i decided, If can't do anything physical (like pass flyers, meet in DC to help Core, start some fangled chapter locally, or harass my local congresman) then at least i could pass on some financial contribution so that somebody could do it for me!
So this is what i did
a) - setup a $20 recurring contribution (Yes its $20 - I'm cheap and so are a lot of you - but $20 is better than nothing - its less than a dinner at a restaurant).
b) forwarded the website info to a few of my collegues at work and told them what i did.
I have not made any earth shattering differences by my actions, but at least im doing SOMETHING. This, coming from one of the laziest members definitely should mean something to all of you.
If you cant contribute your time, at least send some money so someone else can do it for you! Also please stop harrassing IV on where the funds are going - its $20 per month for Christ's sake, not your family inheritance. Let's try and make a difference one way or another. Our national pride is at stake here.
Hari
(IZZAT KI SAWAL) ... It is IZZAT KA SAWAL.
I am lazy and may be more lazy then anyone. Good to hear from a new enthusiastic person.
Your enthu will go away soon.
more...
xbohdpukc
03-27 10:12 PM
I think the main point (and the most expensive one) is how you advertised your position and what requirements you put in printed ads. You can refile PERM and get a decision quite easily if you can find a wiggling room in your ad to squeeze your MBA degree in those reqs.
Good luck to you!
Good luck to you!
WaitingForMyGC
01-09 02:30 PM
It would definately move..but movement would be backward. :-)
more...
Blog Feeds
07-08 11:30 AM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
2010 Janet Jackson
gsc999
06-29 11:12 AM
My friend
What else we lose if we stand up the plate to express some legitimate concerns?
Most of the members of this forum (and so many more) have already lost the prime time of their lives because we just followed the path of playing by rules.
Unless some compelling personal reasons, i do not see any thing wrong to raise the voice
---
satyasaich,
I am sorry for the misunderstanding. It seems my attempt at sarcasm didn't work.
CIR is not amnesty. It is a solution to a problem. People who label CIR as "amnesty" are narrowly viewing the legal definition rather than taking the broader view of trying to solve the problem of immigration. The issue here is not what is the legal definition of amnesty but a comprehensive solution to immigration.
What else we lose if we stand up the plate to express some legitimate concerns?
Most of the members of this forum (and so many more) have already lost the prime time of their lives because we just followed the path of playing by rules.
Unless some compelling personal reasons, i do not see any thing wrong to raise the voice
---
satyasaich,
I am sorry for the misunderstanding. It seems my attempt at sarcasm didn't work.
CIR is not amnesty. It is a solution to a problem. People who label CIR as "amnesty" are narrowly viewing the legal definition rather than taking the broader view of trying to solve the problem of immigration. The issue here is not what is the legal definition of amnesty but a comprehensive solution to immigration.
more...
lazycis
12-21 01:31 PM
Here is a shortened version:
1151
d) Worldwide level of employment-based immigrants
(1) The worldwide level of employment-based immigrants under this subsection for a fiscal year is equal to—
(A) 140,000, plus
(B) the number computed under paragraph (2). (i.e. unused family-based visas from the previous year)
1153
(b) Preference allocation for employment-based immigrants
Aliens subject to the worldwide level specified in section 1151 (d) of this title for employment-based immigrants in a fiscal year shall be allotted visas as follows:
(EB-1) Priority workers
Visas shall first be made available in a number not to exceed 28.6 percent of such worldwide level, plus any visas not required for the classes specified in paragraphs (4) and (5)
(EB-2) Aliens who are members of the professions holding advanced degrees or aliens of exceptional ability
(A) In general
Visas shall be made available, in a number not to exceed 28.6 percent of such worldwide level, plus any visas not required for the classes specified in paragraph (1), to qualified immigrants who are members of the professions holding advanced degrees or their equivalent or who because of their exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business, will substantially benefit prospectively the national economy, cultural or educational interests, or welfare of the United States, and whose services in the sciences, arts, professions, or business are sought by an employer in the United States.
(EB-3) Skilled workers, professionals, and other workers
(A) In general
Visas shall be made available, in a number not to exceed 28.6 percent of such worldwide level, plus any visas not required for the classes specified in paragraphs (1) and (2), to the following classes of aliens who are not described in paragraph (2):
(4) Certain special immigrants
Visas shall be made available, in a number not to exceed 7.1 percent of such worldwide level, to qualified special immigrants described in section 1101 (a)(27) of this title (other than those described in subparagraph (A) or (B) thereof), of which not more than 5,000 may be made available in any fiscal year to special immigrants described in subclause (II) or (III) of section 1101 (a)(27)(C)(ii) of this title, and not more than 100 may be made available in any fiscal year to special immigrants, excluding spouses and children, who are described in section 1101 (a)(27)(M) of this title.
(5) Employment creation
(A) In general
Visas shall be made available, in a number not to exceed 7.1 percent of such worldwide level, to qualified immigrants seeking to enter the United States for the purpose of engaging in a new commercial enterprise (including a limited partnership)—
i.e. for each country EB1 gets (140,000 + number of unused FB visas from the previous year) * 0.07 * 0.286 = 2802 + something insignificant, same for EB2 and EB3.
If there are unused visas, they go from EB1 to EB2 to EB3, but they are lost at the end of the fiscal year. Unused visas from 4th and 5th category can be added to that number as well (usually in the 4th quarter of the fiscal year). Please note that at the end of the fiscal year per country limits may be lifted if there are unused visas left.
1151
d) Worldwide level of employment-based immigrants
(1) The worldwide level of employment-based immigrants under this subsection for a fiscal year is equal to—
(A) 140,000, plus
(B) the number computed under paragraph (2). (i.e. unused family-based visas from the previous year)
1153
(b) Preference allocation for employment-based immigrants
Aliens subject to the worldwide level specified in section 1151 (d) of this title for employment-based immigrants in a fiscal year shall be allotted visas as follows:
(EB-1) Priority workers
Visas shall first be made available in a number not to exceed 28.6 percent of such worldwide level, plus any visas not required for the classes specified in paragraphs (4) and (5)
(EB-2) Aliens who are members of the professions holding advanced degrees or aliens of exceptional ability
(A) In general
Visas shall be made available, in a number not to exceed 28.6 percent of such worldwide level, plus any visas not required for the classes specified in paragraph (1), to qualified immigrants who are members of the professions holding advanced degrees or their equivalent or who because of their exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business, will substantially benefit prospectively the national economy, cultural or educational interests, or welfare of the United States, and whose services in the sciences, arts, professions, or business are sought by an employer in the United States.
(EB-3) Skilled workers, professionals, and other workers
(A) In general
Visas shall be made available, in a number not to exceed 28.6 percent of such worldwide level, plus any visas not required for the classes specified in paragraphs (1) and (2), to the following classes of aliens who are not described in paragraph (2):
(4) Certain special immigrants
Visas shall be made available, in a number not to exceed 7.1 percent of such worldwide level, to qualified special immigrants described in section 1101 (a)(27) of this title (other than those described in subparagraph (A) or (B) thereof), of which not more than 5,000 may be made available in any fiscal year to special immigrants described in subclause (II) or (III) of section 1101 (a)(27)(C)(ii) of this title, and not more than 100 may be made available in any fiscal year to special immigrants, excluding spouses and children, who are described in section 1101 (a)(27)(M) of this title.
(5) Employment creation
(A) In general
Visas shall be made available, in a number not to exceed 7.1 percent of such worldwide level, to qualified immigrants seeking to enter the United States for the purpose of engaging in a new commercial enterprise (including a limited partnership)—
i.e. for each country EB1 gets (140,000 + number of unused FB visas from the previous year) * 0.07 * 0.286 = 2802 + something insignificant, same for EB2 and EB3.
If there are unused visas, they go from EB1 to EB2 to EB3, but they are lost at the end of the fiscal year. Unused visas from 4th and 5th category can be added to that number as well (usually in the 4th quarter of the fiscal year). Please note that at the end of the fiscal year per country limits may be lifted if there are unused visas left.
hair New janet jackson videos on
kishdam
02-06 03:28 PM
Hi,
What is legally considered as "Permanent Residency approval date" - is it the approval of I485/getting greencard or is it the approval of I140. Sometimes the I140 referred to as an immigrant petition. As we know the process is once this immigrant petition (I14) is approved we apply for adjustment of status as a permanent resident thru II485 - so legally - can we consider that until I485 is not approved, our permanent residence applicaiton is pending?
This is to interpret a reimburse agreement I signed (bad thing to do - but I was naive then and signed a very vague repayment statement). But somewhat good thing is the agreement talks about staying for 2 years "after" the permanent residence is approved. If things get bad - I am hoping that this language might save me. Any thoughts?
- kd
What is legally considered as "Permanent Residency approval date" - is it the approval of I485/getting greencard or is it the approval of I140. Sometimes the I140 referred to as an immigrant petition. As we know the process is once this immigrant petition (I14) is approved we apply for adjustment of status as a permanent resident thru II485 - so legally - can we consider that until I485 is not approved, our permanent residence applicaiton is pending?
This is to interpret a reimburse agreement I signed (bad thing to do - but I was naive then and signed a very vague repayment statement). But somewhat good thing is the agreement talks about staying for 2 years "after" the permanent residence is approved. If things get bad - I am hoping that this language might save me. Any thoughts?
- kd
more...
meridiani.planum
07-30 06:24 AM
I have a unique problem with possibly getting a green card too early. Please let me know how I can make this situation better. My priority date in EB2 India is in Jan 2006, which means potentially I could get my green card in 2-3 months.
I plan to get engaged in December 2008 and married in December 2009 to an Indian born Australian citizen. As far as I can see, her chargeability would be from India.
What are my options to make my life easier and to be able to successfully bring my future wife to the US the easiest possible way. So far, I have 2 options:
1. Use the special E3 work visa for Australian citizens.
2. If I dont get my GC within the next few months, do an early court marriage and invoke the following-to-join spouse when she is ready to come to the US.
If you follow #1 while you will have your GC immediately your wife will need to maintain her E3 visa until your PD is current again.
I plan to get engaged in December 2008 and married in December 2009 to an Indian born Australian citizen. As far as I can see, her chargeability would be from India.
What are my options to make my life easier and to be able to successfully bring my future wife to the US the easiest possible way. So far, I have 2 options:
1. Use the special E3 work visa for Australian citizens.
2. If I dont get my GC within the next few months, do an early court marriage and invoke the following-to-join spouse when she is ready to come to the US.
If you follow #1 while you will have your GC immediately your wife will need to maintain her E3 visa until your PD is current again.
hot give her rhythm nation
mali03
05-26 11:42 AM
Thanks Immigration Voice Team for all ur hardwork and dedication. You guys rock, man. Appreciate QGA for working with us and hope they keep up the same spirit till this bill passes into law ;)
Thanks to IV core members, QGA, senators and their staff.
Kudos to Immigration Voice!
Thanks to IV core members, QGA, senators and their staff.
Kudos to Immigration Voice!
more...
house in Rhythm Nation outfit.
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.
tattoo janet jackson rhythm nation
ivy55
08-19 09:52 AM
I got my first FP on July 31 2008- code 2 after waiting one year. Then on Aug 16, I got another FP for Code 1. no LUD yet
Thanks
Thanks
more...
pictures janet jackson rhythm nation.
conundrum
05-25 07:44 AM
It seems the lines to the senator's (Kennedy's) immigration council/staffer is busy, asked me to call them after 5 mins... second time that is happening!!! Very fustrating..........
dresses Janet Jackson certainly made
immi_grant
06-25 06:47 AM
Hi Gurus / Attorneys,
I have come to this country in 1999 and have worked for company A and after 7 years , I transferred my H1B to company B based company A's approved I-140 in 2007 before July fiasco. Hence missed the July 2007.
Now I have been working for company B for the last 3 years and got my I-140 approved again and applied for H1B extension. Received RFE asking for client letter.
Client was reluctant to give the letter and my H1B got denied.
Asking client for the letter : Client says that they can't give a letter, it's against their company policy :confused:
My Options :
1. MTR : I am not sure if I can get the client letter to open MTR and also file a new H1 in parallel.
2. Go back to my home country : My employer said that they will apply for a new H1B for consular processing (does this come under quota ?)
I own a home here and now leaving everything in a week is making me worried.
Also my priority date is Nov 2002 under EB3 and I am not sure how I can pursue this from my home country, if needed.
Thanks in advance for all your help and suggestions !!
I have come to this country in 1999 and have worked for company A and after 7 years , I transferred my H1B to company B based company A's approved I-140 in 2007 before July fiasco. Hence missed the July 2007.
Now I have been working for company B for the last 3 years and got my I-140 approved again and applied for H1B extension. Received RFE asking for client letter.
Client was reluctant to give the letter and my H1B got denied.
Asking client for the letter : Client says that they can't give a letter, it's against their company policy :confused:
My Options :
1. MTR : I am not sure if I can get the client letter to open MTR and also file a new H1 in parallel.
2. Go back to my home country : My employer said that they will apply for a new H1B for consular processing (does this come under quota ?)
I own a home here and now leaving everything in a week is making me worried.
Also my priority date is Nov 2002 under EB3 and I am not sure how I can pursue this from my home country, if needed.
Thanks in advance for all your help and suggestions !!
more...
makeup Janet Jackson#39;s Rhythm Nation
GCOP
08-22 01:21 PM
EAD Renewal RD: 6/24/08 at TSC
Still Waiting for EAD Renewal Approval
Still Waiting for EAD Renewal Approval
girlfriend Jackson, janet - Rhythm Nation Compilation 9trk
g_singh
06-22 04:33 PM
Please let us know what happened? We (H1Bs) are in the same boat. Did you become a member of brokerage firm (LLC).
Thanks
Thanks
hairstyles Concerts Janet Jackson Rhythm
sixburgh
08-13 06:05 PM
I saw some information somewhere, but don't have the link right away to post here.
But here is the crux of it.
Basically the guy said that : assuming that the wife is working on EAD, and the moment she gets an H4 extension approval, she automatically comes on H4 status, but the very next day if she goes back to work on EAD, the H4 status gets invalidated and person comes on AOS status instantly.
Now should she force the company to update the I-9 on that date, is the question.
The bottom line I think is : there is nothing called as a STATUS field in any USCIS or DOS computer system. Its what you do that determines your status. I believe USCIS allows dual intent.
Does anyone think that I am wrong?
But here is the crux of it.
Basically the guy said that : assuming that the wife is working on EAD, and the moment she gets an H4 extension approval, she automatically comes on H4 status, but the very next day if she goes back to work on EAD, the H4 status gets invalidated and person comes on AOS status instantly.
Now should she force the company to update the I-9 on that date, is the question.
The bottom line I think is : there is nothing called as a STATUS field in any USCIS or DOS computer system. Its what you do that determines your status. I believe USCIS allows dual intent.
Does anyone think that I am wrong?
desi3933
03-03 12:42 PM
LC approved in 2006, can I still apply for I-140?
No.
No.
Munna Bhai
12-14 03:49 PM
I got I-140 RFE (EB2) for education as mentioned above I have 3 yrs education and 60+ months of experience and labour says BS or Equivalent Foreign degree with 60 months of experience.
However, the RFE says submit the evidence that it is equvalent to US 4 years degree 3 year Bachelor degree + if any other degrees. They also mentioned we do not want a simple evalutaion that has been done by private evaluators says it is equvalent to BS 4 years degrees. They want detailed explanation each degree and other diploma that is equivalent to US 10th grade, 4 years Degree by acceptable evaluator also include evalutor details.
I am in 6th year of H1B, donno what will happen. My company said it is simple RFE. Looking for other alternatives.......
get your own evaluation from http://www.wes.org/ or any other source, don't depend on company/attorney etc.
However, the RFE says submit the evidence that it is equvalent to US 4 years degree 3 year Bachelor degree + if any other degrees. They also mentioned we do not want a simple evalutaion that has been done by private evaluators says it is equvalent to BS 4 years degrees. They want detailed explanation each degree and other diploma that is equivalent to US 10th grade, 4 years Degree by acceptable evaluator also include evalutor details.
I am in 6th year of H1B, donno what will happen. My company said it is simple RFE. Looking for other alternatives.......
get your own evaluation from http://www.wes.org/ or any other source, don't depend on company/attorney etc.
Walang komento:
Mag-post ng isang Komento