Kama Of Kingstone

All,

Opened my email this morning to see the card production ordered email (time stamp in my inbox reads 2:15 am PST 4/23/08); the approval date was 4/23/08.

Been in meetings all day so not even a chance to call anyone about it.

Yay!

Good luck to all my fellow sufferers!

Googler

Congrats! Please continue to provide valuable info on the forum. You have been great. Thanks!

American lawmakers have created a law that needs only top talent. By law it go from top to bottom. So they go from EB1, EB2, EB3 and so on. If we disagree, then get the law changed.

EB3 I is screwed big time and they are ignorant about this .EB3 are responsible for their own loss. I see them tracking LUDs and laugh at their ignorance of wasting their time.

They should be doing hunger strikes and do a rally in DC every month.

Else they can forget Green card coming any time soon.

....

Owned.

--

Nice 3D render ;P 3rdworldmang.

This article is totally messed up.

Hi All,

Employer A - original sponsoring employer. Got laidoff and joined B (large corporate). Before dates got current got offer from C and C applied for H1 transfer. Now received RFE on I-485 to provide EVL from current employer along with paystubs and W2.

My problem here is that I consulted Murthy and they are saying that I need to make a choice between my current employer B and my potential new employer C whom I have not started working yet but they have filed for H-1 transfer. If I respond to the RFE using my current employer information then it is more straightforward but then I will need to stay with them if I get my GC right away after responding to the RFE. But if I use my new employer's letter then I don't have paystubs to show until I join them which won't be until the H-1 transfer goes through and I go through one payroll cycle. But that will be too late to respond to the RFE.


If I don't join C then I need to pay for the H1 transfer that they filed and attorneys fees. At the same time I am also not happy with my current employers HR and attorney.

I would go for employer B, as my misery would be short. You are current and it's just few weeks (unless something goes wrong) + 6 months of misery working with current employer (max 9 months :cool: ) . You can work part time with C to cover up your H1B fees.

ajthakur,

You should have wait for at least 6 months before switching jobs.

You can talk to the attorney who can give you some advice on AC-21.

Per Ac-21 provisions you r very safe if you switch jobs after 180 days, even without letting USCIS know about it. Yours is a different situation as you switched job just 1 month after filing I-485, and it could be difficult for any attorney to make AC-21 arguments in your favour.

Your best bet if USCIS let you do the AC-21 switching and use the employment letter from the new EMployer who is sponsoring your H1B visa, if u dont respond to this RFE they may very well deny your I-485, remember the I-485 is dependent for at least 180 days on the underlying I-140 petition filed by the GC sponsoring employer, after 180 days you are free to take new job position in the similar field with same salary mentioned in your approved LC or salary greater than the one on aprroved LC.

Please cosult with a competent immigration attorney and try to make argument using the AC-21...thats your last hope to save your PD.

USCIS will know about your job switching as they have all the information when you transfer your H1B visa and received 3 yr extention. Be truthful here and state that you intent to be employed with the original sponsor, but due to circumstances you were forced to switch the job and your new employer is willing to sponsor your employment and you are in legal status while I-485 is pending since July 2007.

Hope this helps...I am not an attorney, but thought my few cents might help you.

Hi, I am working for Company ABC on L1 B, I-94 valid till mid2008.
I will get married in Feb08 and bring my spouse on L2 visa here.
She intends to work in the US. I understand that I can get her EAD.
If her employer processes her GC . Am I eligible to be added on that.
Basically, if her GC processing starts, is it possible for me to work here irrespective of my visa status.
Kindly advise on this scenario. We both want to work in the US and I want to switch job provided she is able to continue to work also.

So, basically anyone laid off on I485 pending without a job is accumulating "out of status" days.That's your opinion?

If you are I-485 pending, you are not out of status regardless of whether you have a job or not.

The problem with this guy is he has got his GC and now he doesn't want anybody to have it. Basically he enjoys when people are having of pain. That's the reason he doesn't want any progress in PD's. Dude, if you don't like if people are talking about positve things such as "PD becomes Current" then my humble request to you is just stay-out of any converstations.


See here this guy is also saying the same thing what my lawyer has predicted.
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?p=28881#post28881



>> Once they (USCIS) reached last quarter then they(DOS) will make EB2-I/C current and distribute those spill-over visas across EB.

Thanks MDix.

You have no idea. Have a good day, sir!

______________________
US citizen of Indian origin

Thats a slight good news (in the current bad news or no news era regarding legal immigration) - hopefully there are are enough EB1 spillover visas to move EB2 by a few months each quarter.

I am in...
What next ?

First someone from IV core has to confirm that this rule change does not need congress action. I am sure the core has explored this option before.

Until then, there is no point in having any discussion on this.

Pls post your schedule and location on the the IV agenda thread so that it is visible on the homepage. Urge more NJ members to come to the temple to help you distribute flyers and talk to interested people.They will also have a chance to and meet other NJ chapter members. At least one core member will also come for this and everyone will have a chance to meet and ask any questions.

bump

A very useful piece of information has been brought to our attention by shiankuraaf.
Thank you very much!

http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/LPR08.shtm

Table 6 Persons Obtaining Legal Permanent Resident Status by Type and Major Class of Admission: Fiscal Years 1999 to 2008

http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/statistics/publications/YrBk04Im.shtm
Table 4 Immigrants admitted by type and selected class of admission: fiscal years 1986-2004

Employment-based preferences (Total Number)

Year QUOTA ISSUED Unused/Excessively used
1986 140000 56617 83383
1987 140000 57519 82481
1988 140000 58727 81273
1989 140000 57741 82259
1990 140000 58192 81808
1991 140000 59525 80475
1992 140000 116198 23802
1993 140000 147012 -7012
1994 140000 123291 16709
1995 140000 85336 54664
1996 140000 117499 22501
1997 140000 90607 49393
1998 140000 77517 62483
1999 140000 56678 83322
2000 140000 106642 33358
2001 140000 178702 -38702
2002 140000 173814 -33814
2003 140000 81727 58273
2004 140000 155330 -15330
2005 140000 246877 -106877
2006 140000 159081 -19081
2007 140000 162176 -22176
2008 140000 166511 -26511

Sum total of the differences from 1986 to 2008: 626,681. Vow!!!

So when looked between the period of 1986 and 2008,
there were a total of 626,681 un-used visa numbers that can be re-captured.

This is based on the BIG assumption that the yearly quota for EB categories is 140,000 from 1986 to 2008.
Does anybody know how to verify this important assumption online --a link to a gov website perhaps?

It would be good to verify when the law specifying 140,000 visa numbers per year was passed and
what were the criteria for visa number usage prior to the existence of the law.
It is clearly a well prepared format and nobody has brought this kind of helpful information to our group. We would need people like you and I am sure I will also support this if we are aggressively pursuing it. But again as somebody here said in this discussion that we should be careful about the seriousness of the situation being counted by the lawmakers.
Kudos to you.

fyi
http://judiciary.house.gov/media/pdfs/Oppenheim070606.pdf

Testimony of Charles Oppenheim, Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division, Visa Services Office, U.S. Department of State, June 6, 2007.

Any indepth on what is the bigger picture here? Something is happening in the background on the immigration side.

Looks like lot of politics and blame game among agencies.

I think immigration lawyers or AILA etc.. may also not have any say here though they all put up on their website that we will file lawsuit etc.....

Thanks jungalee43...

Bumping up this thread.
BTW, this is the best we have got so far. If anyone can improve on this, please let me know. I will look into this in detail later. An online tool that shows a person how screwed up they are (or are not) due to retrogression should also be helpful.


I had posted this statistics last year on IV. I had done good research to arrive at these figures. I hope the figures will open eyes of people who are bestowed with 'blissful ignorance'.

http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=1265#post1265

I came with 4 other people and NONE are IV members and nor did we approach any - infact the white shirt dude was surprised to know we were not part of IV and offended. As I said passive movements dont make a difference.

technically you are an IV member because you have an ID, that you created on your own. You probably went to the meeting with the IV crowd then branched out..good for you. Wonder why the Stanfords and Harvards are dying to admit you:D
Obviously you seem to be in a very unique situation, and you are taking steps to solve your issues in your own way, nothing wrong with that. good luck, to each his own.

some you of have offered accomodation. i sent private messages, but i am unable to reach these individuals. people offering accomodation please email me directly with address/phone#/details of accomodation offered directly to 2011carpool@gmail.com

time is short and i need to accomodate visiting members.

Thank you for contacting me to share your views about Senate Amendment 4319 to the American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act (H.R. 4213). I appreciate the time you have taken to correspond with me.



In my position as a United States Senator, I benefit greatly by hearing a wide spectrum of opinions expressed by Oregonians. I listen carefully to these views as I study each issue and decide how to vote on legislation which comes before the Senate. On any issue, I value your thoughts and ideas.



Again, I appreciate your feedback. I have made note of your concerns, and I will certainly keep them in mind. Please keep in touch.



All my best,

You guys are really making me laugh by having this less than and longer than 5 years arguing. If you've been on this forum long enough, you'll know the chance of this bill passes will be next to nothing.